Hacker News Reader

Comment by dfabulich | Hacker News Reader

Are you saying that Benchmark thinks/knows this lawsuit is worse for Uber and its employees?

It's an open secret that Kalanick is trying to regain control of the company, telling people that he plans to return as CEO; that he's "Steve Jobs-ing it." [1] That's what this lawsuit is trying to prevent.

I don't think Kalanick's return would be good for Uber, its employees, or its investors. Clearly Benchmark feels the same way.

[1] https://www.recode.net/2017/7/30/16066332/uber-ceo-search-tr...

View on HN

I think most of us believe Benchmark couldn't give a fuck less about anybody but Benchmark and their personal billions (assuming they get paid 2 and 20, cashing out of Uber really could be worth a billion a partner). Given the behavior that has gone on while Benchmark has been on the board, this comes off as treacle.

(Which is not to say that Benchmark and employees' interests couldn't align in this case...)

Any examples of companies that have done significantly better after publicly ousting their founder CEO?

I've worked at more than one where it turned to shit...

But if they are ousting their CEO publicly it's probably because things are going extremely badly. I don't think ousting the founder is necessarily making it worse and thus the cause for those companies to worsen after the ousting.

Paypal? Well, things are complicated.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-ciscos-founders-were-oust...

Look up "Rich or King". Companies tend to do better when the founders give away control to people better suited to do the job they would otherwise do.

It just doesn't tend to be very public when it happens successfully.

Steve Jobs returned to Apple after 10+ yrs. I don't think that's a fair reference with Travis.

Many would agree with you, but the "Steve-jobsing it" comparison comes from Travis himself.

> Steve Jobs returned to Apple after 10+ yrs

also the Steve that returned to Apple was a complete different person.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com