Hacker News Reader

Comment by wallabe | Hacker News Reader

backstory is simple: Rob was brought in as adult supervision in case Andrew Mason couldn't handle his shit. Everyone was worried about this with Andrew early on (this is why so many VCs passed on Groupon in '09). Now Andrew has consolidated his position and at least proven he can handle rapid growth. No need for Rob. Therefore, Rob (who doesn't like Chicago anyway) has no reason to stay because he's not going to be CEO.

That's all the backstory you need.

View on HN

Well, that settles it then. Nothing to see here, folks. Absolutely no chance that Rob was pushed. Wallabe (HN'er for 1 day) says so.

I've interviewed Rob. He's awesome. But he doesn't strike me as someone who voluntarily passes on a wild IPO ride, just because "he doesn't like Chicago anyway."

I never said he wasn't pushed, but I wouldn't make it sound like he was fired. The role didn't evolve as expected and so there's no reason for him to stay. Pretty simple.

Oh he was 'made redundant', not fired. Gotcha.

That's all the backstory you need.

And this comes from who...?

If this was a planned exit all along and he was only meant to be on short term then Groupon would have prepared a better statement. I assume that whatever equity he has he'll keep as he was looking for a big pay day and I don't know why he would pass that up.

No reason other than, oh, on the order of $100MM in unvested shares?

Makes sense. Rob was never a bus driver, that I could tell. Andrew and Eric are, and have been, at the reins.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com