Hacker News Reader

Comment by richardjordan | Hacker News Reader

Well, I said just yesterday on a thread that I hoped someone would do a follow the money in this deal as there's a lot that's strange about it. Doesn't mean that there's necessarily anything nefarious but it does mean that of we live in an age where investigative reporting is not completely dead it makes sense for someone to at least poke around this a bit and find out all the details.

Yahoo doesn't get the technology from the transaction (summly doesn't own it). Yahoo doesn't get any particular talent on the transaction (there isn't a team of tech wizards they're buying for that 30million). They're not getting a huge number of users (tons of apps have a million users - still a drop in the ocean on Yahoo's own user numbers). So what is this deal all about?

View on HN

I guess when the son of a wealthy financier gets investment from tons of big name angels for a startup based on a licensing agreement (try getting that one funded yourselves folks) and then 18months later it gets sold for an amount that makes lots of money for all parties but the value doesn't seem to be there for the acquirer - a company with all kinds of other issues... I dunno that stimulates my BS detector and makes me at least interested in reading a more detailed account of what went on. Hopefully to read a tale of heroic entrepreneurship worthy of emulating, if not to figure out what web of interests lay behind this odd deal.

> Doesn't mean that there's necessarily anything nefarious

Some enterprising reporter should

1. Look at where the money was raised,

2. who is on the board (or in the decision process chain)

3. Find out where they are a limited partner.

I'm gonna guess there is some overlap.

Marissa isn't looking too impressive with this one.

Reporters should also ask how a 10,000 mile telecommute from London is ok, but not from the Bay Area!

Could it be that this is a move to get Yahoo more attention?

30 million is not that expensive for advertising, and pretty much every local news show covered the story of the amazing 17 year old start up founder who was acquired by Yahoo.

Wag the dog?

Give the impression that Yahoo is being loose with its money in acquisitions. Have VCs and founders pitch Yahoo first when looking for a buyer.

But in reality I don't think Yahoo is that cunning, I think they actually are just clueless.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2012/nov/01/su...

    "Publishers have been tremendously supportive, and we've already 
    signed a deal with News Corporation," says D'Aloisio.

That could be it?

Yahoo doesn't have to pay 30million to do a deal with newscorp

There's a million users, and then there are a million users...Summly isn't a flatulence emulation app for smartphones and their users are probably more valuable, e.g. they consume written news. What news they are interested in may also be valuable as business intelligence.

I suspect on a given day there are many HN readers with apps with a million or more downloads who aren't getting sniffed at... Looking at what this app does it is not clear to me that this particular user base is especially valuable...

If one ran a news portal, one's perception of the value of Summly's users might be different.

Likewise, one's perception of the value of those user's selection among news items might be valued differently than another user group's selection among flatulence noises...particularly if one's revenue was anchored in advertising as is the case with Yahoo.

To put it another way, assuming that Yahoo is run by incompetents is more likely to be an error than its converse.

I don't assume anything. I don't assume Yahoo is run by incompetents. I don't even think that incompetence is the best explanation for this.

The app doesn't have a million users, it had a million downloads. Downloads != users, especially with media push heightening curiosity. I'd guess actual users was less than a 1000 a day.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com