thebradbain

Been to a few destination weddings (Mediterranean coast, India, Montana), and I think they’re the most fun, by far.

All 3 of them being for close friends and family, I have come to understand the expectation to be:

If it’s too much, or you don’t want to travel that far, or you’re busy— no worries! If you do, great, we invited you because we want to celebrate with you too, so why not make a big trip of it?

And then usually followed by a more casual reception closer to home for those family and friends who wanted to make it but couldn’t for whatever reason.

Police will forcefully evict you from a home. They will not guard the entrance to a restaurant and refuse entry to the owners until they pay their servers stolen wages/tips.

TIL, wow. Thanks for clarifying.

Regardless, given the fact they were close / within the same order of magnitude as Figma, it's interesting that the prospect of them IPOing is apparently considered a nuclear option.

According to Harvard Business school (2017): the median market cap of a publicly traded company is $832m. Even at half its valuation, Figma is way, way, way above that.

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/18/looking-behind-th...

?

An IPO allows every employee and shareholder to be as liquid as they like, and optimize to your individual tax and risk situation.

An exit is a one time thing. At most, you get to elect how much cash and how much converted stock you want. More likely, the company decides what that breakdown is.

Yes, this sucks for employees in the short term who thought their equity was potentially worth 2x what it is (and more importantly, liquid!). But also, if their numbers are good enough to plausibly command that price, it’s probably better for everyone, employees included in the long run, to go public? And not via SPAC, but via a real IPO.

Looking back, I think this ZIRP phenomenon of PE and VC was unhealthy (remember crypto??), unrealistic, and ultimately only benefitted a few founders, some employees, and mostly VC firms making paper gains by marking up SoftBank-esque valuations that no one actually believed.

We’re forgetting that all of FAANG IPOd when they too were much less than $20 billion. Maybe it’s time for the next generation of software companies to take control of their own destiny rather than wait for a golden parachute to buy them out.

The active duty military vote is not actually a solid republican voting block, contrary to popular belief: in 2020, they swung +8 for Biden [1]. It’s the veterans who are solidly (2/3) conservative, currently, but even that’s lessening [2].

Unfortunately I don’t think a majority of either party wants to reign in military spending, considering every admin including Obama and Biden has increased it since Carter, even though likely granting such a blank check is financially irresponsible (i.e. trillions unaccounted for in budget audits [3]). Both parties just want to please that bloc of votes, because it also has ripple effects on the rest of the nation’s votes to be seen as “good on military”.

I personally think our military could be just as effective if we tightened the wallet, but I don’t think either party actually wants to.

[1] https://www.economist.com/united-states/2021/10/14/military-... and https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1245542

[2] https://news.gallup.com/poll/118684/military-veterans-ages-t... (2009, but the trend has only gotten deeper)

[3] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-fails-audit-sixth-...

Separate any discussion about the "tone" of the article, could someone who is better at reading between the lines better than I explain the changes to Out-Of App Store payments?

Is it a 10-max 20% fee to Apple, no matter the distributor, in the EU? Or are those rules only for the App Store, and anything else won't be touched by commissions to Apple?

It’s actually in LA now, which to me is a testament to its ability

That’s actually really helpful context, and absolutely swayed the needle from “no track record vaporware company salesman” to “maybe he actually has the experience to pull this off”

As an early employee at a startup from seed through a healthy Series B last year, I would have serious concerns about the company’s bookkeeping and how-up-to-date the shareholder information is if it were kept in an excel spread sheet on Google drive.

Carta and Pulley, etc. do a solve a valuable concern here for non-executives who are compensated with stock options and want to keep track of stock vesting, exercises, and shares in a transparent way, I’d say.

That's what makes them an important check on the state -- if they solely existed in a vacuum than what would speaking truth to power entail?

Lexus appears to have done something like that using superconductors –

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhCcC2smGMI

https://discoverlexus.com/stories/journeys-beyond-the-road/

I actually would argue universities should not be neutral. They're a historical check on the State. Universities should do whatever works to attract intellectual talent, and if their ideology sucks, they'll naturally lose talent and influence to other institutions who have a different pedagogy.

That's the marketplace of ideas – not platforming every single idiot who wants to speak. Is Harvard supposed to, hyperbolically, entertain the notion of a flat earth if enough people believe it? I'd argue absolutely not (that's what the internet is for). Maybe the reason that the makeup of Harvard and similar schools is so liberal is because the right hasn't offered much in the way of intellectual fodder other than "Harvard bad" ?

If you don't agree with Harvard's policies, don't go to Harvard.

Well, they clearly can’t, because one is being bolstered by politicians and the other attacked by the same set of those politicians.

I have not heard of a single Democrat politician advocate defunding religious organizations. I have often heard the GOP advocate for punishing college faculty/students/administrators and withholding accreditation/nonprofit-status.

Regardless, I actually think it’s a bad idea to go after either: both of those institutions, ultimately, are checks on the State — and historically, when a state turns to fascism, universities and religious organizations (save the “favored/officially sanctioned religion”) are the first thing to go.

Go after the churches and religious organizations first, in that case, as they’re also tax advantaged and their leaders and congregations have a profound pull upon politics and politicians.

The Mormon Church in Utah is essentially a government with real state power of its own, for example.

And the Westboro Baptist Church is still allowed to organize and shout God Hates [Gays] at funerals of private citizens by an 8-1 Supreme Court Ruling.

You’re advocating placing limits on free speech of those best situated to speak truth to power — this is straight out of the fascist playbook.

Go after the Churches and religious organizations first, in that case, as they’re also tax advantaged and their leaders and congregations have a profound pull upon politics and politicians.

Any piece of pie deemed too big for one person to eat will be split accordingly.

I don’t think NYT, or any other industry, for that matter knows AI isn’t going away: in fact, they likely prefer it doesn’t, so long as they can get a slice of that pie.

That’s what the WGA and SAG struck over, and won protections ensuring AI enhanced scripts or shows will not interfere with their royalties, for example.

“Hollywood Accounting” gets its name for a reason.

I guarantee you there is _no one_ who knows the exact ROI of a show in terms of dollars. In fact they don’t want to know (because it would be a liability). Often times studios set up entire shell companies for tv shows that they “loan” studio money to, and then set a variable interest rate slightly greater than the rate the shows bring in money, so they can declare a loss no matter how successful the show is even though they’re getting their own money back. That’s been going on for decades.

This is all a roundabout way to say, only in the highest profile disasters is something ever cancelled for “money”. Usually it’s something else, and much less rational: this exec doesn’t like this show for their personal resume, the show is successful and entering its fourth season but the showrunner wants a raise that an exec doesn’t want to sign off on lest other showrunners hear and demand a raise, an exec thinks starting a new show will demonstrate “leadership”, another exec hates another producer, the streaming service decided it doesn’t want to host one of the few-WGA animated shows (this is what happened to Bojack Horseman), etc.

https://www.languageunlimited.org/englishlessonhollywoodacco...

My prediction is Zaslav will… go ahead with all of this, since he only seems to execute ideas that everyone knows are terrible in both the short and long term.

There’s finally enough people noticing Zaslav’s wrecking ball outside of Hollywood (which has been vocal in criticizing him as ruining everything since the WB-Discovery merger first was approved), including US government officials [1].

I think the markets will refuse to reward him this time, and more importantly, I think the DOJ/FTC will refuse to allow this merger to happen, having seen the fallout from last time. I don’t even think the studios’ cozy relationship with the Democratic Party will save him this time, as I’m certain smaller studios and likely even Disney absolutely do not want this to happen either.

From there I can only hope the board of directors will fire him. In an effective government, I would hope the whole WB-Discovery merger to be broken up, but I’m not holding my breath.

[1] https://x.com/joaquincastrotx/status/1737669717223964730?s=4...

This is touched on in the article, but I never understood why billionaires think that they’ll be able to ride this out.

They’ll likely be the number one targets of armed mobs or other looters (or even sovereign nations armed with nuclear weapons themselves), since it’s no secret where most of these well-stocked self-sustaining bases are (since they won’t stop talking about how they _have_ them).

But more importantly: why would their hired security forces, farmhands, maids, etc serve them when their money and status is worthless?

Unless the Thiels, Zuckerbergs, etc. have something else of tangible value, the rest of the compound is going to define their own hierarchy real quickly, and it likely won’t end up with the billionaire sleeping in the master bedroom.

And then the WGA and SAG would’ve gone back to primarily working on network television, as they have since the 60s—as that sector of the industry has shown it actually knows how to run a sustainable business.

If Netflix can’t run a sustainable business, then it’s everyone’s best interest—workers and investors—that they shut it down. That’s just business.

Their numbers suggest otherwise, though— that they can run an extremely profitable business, and now those they depend on can better negotiate for their piece of the pie.

Nice eye — I did do remove that clause, but because the understanding in the industry is that the data shared with Guild members (for which there are 12k WGA writers and 100k+ SAG actors) can still be shared by those members. And even if they can’t, someone would likely leak them: good luck finding who broke an NDA with that many members!

I.E. They do not have to release the numbers publicly, but they’re not really bound by NDA either.

I imagine most, if not all, will go the direct route so they can spin the numbers how they want.

View-based streaming royalties (“residuals”) were also something won in the strikes. They previously didn’t exist for streaming in the same way they did for cable tv or theatrical releases— no matter how successful the show. That’s part of the reason streamers didn’t want to release numbers in the first place.

There were still a lot of other factors then and now when it came to payment—mainly due to the fact the minimums are floors, not maximums—so it isn’t exactly a “flat fee”, but there is a “minimum floor” payment schedule based on a formula of # episodes, genre, # weeks, studio budget, season #, etc. Now it includes # views, when previously it didn’t.

I imagine they’re just releasing everything at this point so they can show the total number of hours watched to investors, who I would guess will also be very interested in the numbers as a benchmark for valuing streaming services going forward.

Suits (2011) for example is not a Netflix original, yet it made it into their top 10 by hours viewed.

For anyone else wondering “why they’ve decided to do this”—

This is an outcome of the WGA strike negotiations. Now writers (and actors, and anyone else) can use this information to better negotiate their worth with studios, rather than it being 1-sided. All other streaming services should be following suit soon.

https://www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign/what-we-won

> Streaming data transparency: Companies agree to provide the Guild the total number of hours streamed, both domestically and internationally, of self-produced high budget streaming programs (e.g., a Netflix original series). Aggregated information can be shared.

This is a result of the union negotiations with the WGA, which demanded and won that all streamers disclose exactly this. Expect to see this for every other streaming service imminently.

https://www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign/what-we-won

> Streaming data transparency: Companies agree to provide the Guild the total number of hours streamed, both domestically and internationally, of self-produced high budget streaming programs (e.g., a Netflix original series). Aggregated information can be shared.

It was! Previously studios did not want to disclose streaming numbers publicly, except under NDA to certain authorized union members.

Now writers (and actors, and anyone else) can use this information to better negotiate their worth with studios, rather than it being 1-sided.

https://www.wgacontract2023.org/the-campaign/what-we-won

> Streaming data transparency: Companies agree to provide the Guild the total number of hours streamed, both domestically and internationally, of self-produced high budget streaming programs (e.g., a Netflix original series). Aggregated information can be shared.

The cynic in me, just based on how many active drilling sites exist in the middle of Los Angeles (particularly the county but also the actual city), says that getting CEQA approval for a mine/dig/drill site is… probably easier than building anything more than a 10plex in California

My experience is based in SF and Los Angeles, but I personally know many new/recent-grads who were recently hired at $150-$180k (cash) comp including bonus, to say nothing of options, from FAANGs to well-funded later-stage startups to even run-of-the-mill legacy corporate tech positions.

Even GitHub, which pre-Microsoft was more stingy with its money, is offering $160k for entry-level new-grad hires last time I checked.