Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I continue to be baffled by this sale. Letterboxd was acquired by Tiny 3 years ago, Tiny’s entire premise is that they hold for the long term. Selling after 3 years is not long term. I don’t understand why Tiny would undermine their raison d’etre unless it’s because the founders (who retain a minority stake) are pushing for it.

Tiny just recently updated their website to emphasize how long they’ve owned each property which is especially confusing given they’re now offloading things https://tiny.com/companies/letterboxd

“Tiny's model — long-term ownership, founder autonomy, no pressure to flip the company in three to five years — fit naturally.”

…?



I imagine that in life and business there’s no such thing as a decision that is never regrettable. I guess it just didn’t work out.


Three years is long term in the tech and VC world.

At a $300M sale, the project achieved its goal and it's time to exit.


so you _believed_ them -- that is the only takeaway from this.


The much more pertinent point is that it is counter to their apparent track record.


Investment firms are apparently not immune to enshittification



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: