Hacker News Reader

Comment by DanBlake | Hacker News Reader

Danny, one of the bootuplabs founders just posted this comment on the post.

/////////////

This is not how it went down Jamie. After everything that we did for you and Steven, I'm shocked at how you have twisted the truth for PR reasons.

- you were in our office for 2 months, not 3.

- you program is 5%-15% for $150k over 8 months

- you received $6k over that 2 months

- we received nothing in return.

- we paid your legal fees.

- we introduced you to many people who you can still call on today.

We are not out of money, we just closed a round. It was a condition of their investment that we let you go.

Yes, it wasn't an ideal situation, and we didn't plan on it working out this way. But in the end, I made sure that you got the better end the deal

/////////////

Sad to see them trying to argue over facts when these guys moved across the country and gave up everything to be there, then they act like they should be happy to have even had the chance. Wow.

View on HN

Customer, to Taxi driver: "I'll pay you $40 to take me to the airport."

[Taxi driver takes customer 4 miles, throws him out of the cab in a bad neighborhood to pick up a more profitable customer, and drives away. Customer flips off driver as he speeds away.]

Driver, yelling out of window: "What are you complaining about? I took you 4 miles and didn't even charge you!!"

Wow what a clean way to explain this crazy matter to my son.

My response which I posted:

Hey Danny.

I apologize that you feel like I'm twisting the truth.

It was the last week in January until the end of last Month. While we were there 3 months of the year, you are correct 2 months would be more accurate,

I was just getting the $100k off of the Bootup website, I understood that we got $150k, but that $50k went back to Bootup, is that not what the original terms were?

You did pay our rent and our legal fees to get incorporated. I mentioned the rent, but I didn't mention the legal fees. I apologize.

I didn't suggest that Bootup was closing down or was out of money.

I wouldn't suggest that I got the better end of the deal as it was extremely expensive to move to and live in Vancouver.

I wish you all well.

>I didn't suggest that Bootup was closing down or was out of money.

The title of this posting is "Moved to Canada to participate in a startup incubator that had no money"...

And this is why you don't embellish titles. Even when retitling your own original post.

http://i.imgur.com/cXxdv.png

Can we please not do that, at least here on HN? A direct link[1] to the comment in question would be better for a number of reasons.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1266864

why are you apologizing? Seems like it should be the other way around...

Soory you guys have had ahard time, Hope this experience doesn't scare too many other people off doing startups in vancouver or coming here to start a business

I'd like to think that most people ballsy enough to start a startup in the first place will take it as lessons learned and still see Vancouver as a great opportunity. I know I would, if given the opportunity. I'd just be a little more careful now, having read about Statusly's ups and downs.

Wow, they're really clutching at straws. The legal fees were presumably spent setting up a Canadian corporation. What use is that to the founders now? Similarly, the rent being paid - the cost of throwing all your stuff out (and presumably having to buy it again later) will be for most people way higher than a few months worth of rent.

It's often too easy to jump to the wrong conclusion... but I'm struggling to see a decent explanation for this. And anything less than a full apology is a huge red flag.

Correct me if I am reading too much into their response. But it sounds like they were at the tail end of closing a round of financing. The investors didn't like some of the startups in the current cohort so they made it a requirement that Bootup cut them from the program before the new round closed.

So instead of honoring their word they choose to take the money. Very poor business practice IMO.

I should clarify that by "decent explanation" I meant one that would make me think, "oh, that's reasonable", not merely one that fits the evidence!

seems if they didn't take the money, everyone loses

"closing a round" could be code for didn't have the money when the intake offer was made and couldn't raise the money for all the startups... so picked and kicked to stay afloat.

"After everything that we did for you and Steven..."

You know, there are any number of people in the city I live in who are quite willing and able waste a few months of my life, drain my bank balances and crush my spirit without asking me to move to another city in another country.

In the long term the introductions might be useful but they are they only upside I see in this whole situation.

Agreed with DanBlake: "Wow".

--then they act like they should be happy to have even had the chance.

This is a common tactic of a con-artist and or sociopath. They try to deflect back onto the one drawing attention for two purposes. One to discredit the one lodging complaint and two to try and strong arm the more passive party into silence.

Humans, as a general rule of thumb, dislike conflict. You can see it in Jamie's responses where he is still apologetic to these guys, when logic would dictate that he should want their head on a platter.

Sociopaths see human responses such as this, like an artist sees a completed painting on a blank canvas, and they will use it against you. When I read that line quoted above, I realized right then that Dan is most-likely a sociopath and a person to be avoided.

Out of everything said here, this sticks out like a sore thumb:

we received nothing in return.

Isn't the whole point of these programs to enable founders to do their thing in an environment they can't find anywhere else?

If you're expected to manage a project and provide deliverables over a timeline, why not just go out and find a customer? You get to keep all their money and all your equity. And you still get to advance your product.

If, on the other hand, you want to develop a game changer, uncontrained by customer demands, you save up or take investment and go to your lab. Your are no longer a developer; you are an inventor. Sure, everyone wants to show progress, but not at the expense of pursuing the breakthroughs you will need to hit the home run desired by your investor(s).

Investors, if you want a home run from your founders, you may just have to wait a while for the baby to gestate. Expecting "something in return" in the first 2 months of a 10 month program is an unreasonable expectation IMO. Just do your share and get out of the way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com