

Amicus (YC S12) Cofounder's Thoughts on New Republic Article - tobowers
http://blog.toppingdesign.com/2014/09/08/new-republic-article-on-amicus/

======
hendzen
Interesting to see that the (scathing) TNR article didn't make it to the front
page, while the founder's blog post received 645+ upvotes.

~~~
namenotrequired
It makes sense to me. I much prefer to hear someone's honest writing about
their own mistakes than an overdramised article by someone else.

~~~
honestlyamicus
Honest would not be an appropriate word to use to characterize Seth's
portrayal of events.

Likewise, overdramatized would not be an appropriate word to describe a piece
that accurately describes a pattern of willful and deceitful behavior. Mr.
Bannon's "writing about his own mistakes" is an extension of this pattern of
deception. Indeed, rather than over dramatize, the New Republic article limits
in scope and fails to mention many other instances in which Mr. Bannon lied
and misled; abused employees to the point of quitting; and put his own ego and
interests ahead of those of his company, investors and customers.

------
tobowers
Link to previous discussion of this topic (pre New Republic):
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8080442](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8080442)

------
tobowers
link to original article HN:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8283583](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8283583)

------
nraynaud
So much for meritocracy and merit, it's simply a new nobility being built from
the ground up.

~~~
HillRat
Most startup founders are less "new nobility" and more "2007 housing crisis
straw buyers" \-- they're necessary grease for the cogwheels of questionable
investment. Nothing new here; it's the same thing we lived through in the late
1990s, just with fewer Super Bowl ads.

It is interesting to see further anecdotal confirmation of what we already
knew: a lot of _soi disant_ "smart money" still basically consists of low-
information investors who are easily suckered in by stories that superficially
conform to a few outlier successes. The fact is that everyone who invested,
from angels to institutions, thought that a hoodie and a purported Ivy League
acceptance letter trumped industry experience and a pro forma based on market
analysis. (To be fair to West Coast investors, it does appear that most of
Amicus' money came from NYC, which -- to be frank -- in general doesn't have a
record of desirable tech investments over the past few decades. They're
bandwagon chasers over there.)

The fact is that the vast majority of what's getting funded are, even if
successful, very short-term plays. I think we've reached peak absurdity with
"Yo" and pizza-ordering-button apps; the bro-conomy can only support so much
investment and, once it collapses, it's not clear to me where the money will
flow. Until then, tech investors seem intent on partying like it's 1999.

