Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by a-dub | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

a-dub

It's fun to read glassdoor reviews from their acquirees.

Sounds like the formula is:

1) Buy the company

2) Shut down the main office and move it to some cheaper city, accept attrition

3) Fire all employees over 30 (using the patented "IQ" test as a cover), replace them with young kids or "HPELs"

4) Install a Glengarry Glen Ross style sales regime

5) Hold on for a few quarters while numbers are improved from all the cost cutting

6) Quickly bail and sell the thing off before anyone notices it's all being held up by duct tape and bailing wire

7) Wash hands. Repeat.

View on HN

I work at a company that was acquired by Vista a few years ago and I haven't noticed much of that.

The main office is in a pretty expensive location and it is currently being expanded to close to double the size it was when the company was acquired.

There are a lot of young kids being hired, but also a lot of older people as well. Attrition has been pretty low and I think only a handful of people at the entire company have been layed off.

Cost cutting does not seem to have been particularly extreme if it has occurred. The benefits package and travel policies have gotten slightly more generous since the acquisition and annual raises have continued the trends from before the acquisition which made it possible to keep reasonably close to what you could get by changing companies.

Where does it show they are doing step 6? That seems to be critical to your thesis of this being a pump and dump.

Except the article says they haven't sold very many times.

Is this different from private equity / distressed asset investing in general, or standard activist investor asset stripping?

All that is missing is loading the company with debt to pay "management fees," to the acquirers before cutting and running, leaving the founders and remaining shareholders with the bill. Organized crime have been known to do this as well. A handbook of investment anti-patterns, common hustles, and ways to identify crappy investors would be really useful.

There seems to be a tier of capital that just needs somewhere to go. It is not allowed to take the direct risks of angel or seed rounds, but can participate in venture funds, or funds of funds that include hedge funds and alternative assets, participate in growth rounds, and some really sketchy penny stock RTOs, but it's like they are prevented from investing while exercising any specific expertise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com