I think what this shows is in the end is who was in the position of greater leverage here (hint: it wasn’t SoftBank).<p>I bet Neumann was all “ok cool guys I’ll walk away with my $700m and you can write down We to $0 and enjoy that.”<p>Turns out, SoftBank needs We to be not-dead-yet about $1.7B more than Neumann does.
This will inspire generations of future businesspeople to do the same. Start a business, paint it like a tech firm, get snowballing investment, and don't worry too much about whether the business can ever actually work.
How is it possible that they couldn't get a better deal out of Neumann?<p>What was he not going to take a quarter of that? If softbank walked his and We's value would have dropped through the floor.<p>This is so bizarre it feels like there has to be fraud somewhere.
How is it that a trainwreck like We* slips past a major financial player? I've seen posts here that were skeptical of We from the beginning, and so many of Adam's financial moves have appeared to be self serving even to laypeople.<p>Was SoftBank blind to the issues? Was it some form of willful ignorance?
This makes me sick. This is not the type of behavior that should be rewarded.<p>This dangerous trend is growing. Value creation and true innovation are not being rewarded as they should, while corrupt thieves thrive.
If I'm clear that the 1.7B is:<p>$1B in stock purchase
$500M in a line of credit
$185M consulting fee?<p>I wonder what the valuation is for the $1B in stock purchase?
It's going to be wild in twelve months when we have the "Bad Blood"-ish book, the attendant sale of the movie rights, and the conservative-libertarian thinkpieces that vaguely defend him.<p>But also, fuck this guy.