What you miss about Adam Neumann is that from the early stage VCs perspective, he succeeded. He successfully created an exit (the IPO) for WeWork. The VCs got huge returns on their investment. Not as much as they had hoped, but everyone wants more. The early stage VCs could care less whether the company ever had a viable business plan. Neither did Adam Neumann.
They are totally willing to go another round with with him. He's proven he can create huge exit value.
You focus on people like Adam Newmann. The real question is the people who actually leased WeWorks space. I believe many of them were ridding his "We" religion. I never understood the "We" concept. But that's because I think in terms of profitable companies, not just creating exit return.
1. I don't think most VCs actually got out. I looked this up to be sure, and read in Business Insider that
"Softbank has suffered the most by far. Its Vision Fund is still the largest shareholder of WeWork with over 461.5 million shares, or about 62% of the company. Softbank has been in a world of hurt over WeWork — and other missteps — for years now.
Other venture capitalists are still holding the bag, too, with significant stakes in WeWork including Benchmark, which still holds over 20 million shares, or nearly 3% of the company, and Insight Partners, which holds almost 13 million shares, or just under 2%, according to recent regulatory filings."
2. Adam Neumann didn't want to exit, nor did he plan to exit. He was forced out, and refused to go, cutting himself a very tidy deal. He also discretely cashed out with each round, unbeknownst to his other management and colleagues.
So, I don't think he's proven anything, aside that VCs are guililbe and deluded - we need only look at a16 (Andreessen Horowitz's firm) to see that, as he keeps pumping dollars in Neumann's latest scheme.
As for the people leasing, I'm not sure that's fair. They were good working spaces, and offered good benefits at the start. It just wasn't the business model or tech company it claimed to be, and never should have got so out of control in valuation.
By "exit" I mean a startup either getting acquired or going public.
Adam Neumann was pushing for the company to go public. Initially and IPO. When that failed, it was an acquisition.
I specifically refer to "early stage VCs". Those that funded during seed phase. Softbank invested past the seed stage stage. They were the ones that created the $47 billion valuation that They early stage VCs likely never lost control. They pushed to get the exit. They pushed Newmann out because he flubbed the IPO. They still got a huge return on their investment.
Softbank is a corporate behemoth that only invests post-seed rounds. They are trying to ride the the early stage VCs and founders path to returns.
Get return for the early stage VCs is like making sausage. Its very messy. All they wanted is a return.
What you miss about Adam Neumann is that from the early stage VCs perspective, he succeeded. He successfully created an exit (the IPO) for WeWork. The VCs got huge returns on their investment. Not as much as they had hoped, but everyone wants more. The early stage VCs could care less whether the company ever had a viable business plan. Neither did Adam Neumann.
They are totally willing to go another round with with him. He's proven he can create huge exit value.
You focus on people like Adam Newmann. The real question is the people who actually leased WeWorks space. I believe many of them were ridding his "We" religion. I never understood the "We" concept. But that's because I think in terms of profitable companies, not just creating exit return.
Two things:
1. I don't think most VCs actually got out. I looked this up to be sure, and read in Business Insider that
"Softbank has suffered the most by far. Its Vision Fund is still the largest shareholder of WeWork with over 461.5 million shares, or about 62% of the company. Softbank has been in a world of hurt over WeWork — and other missteps — for years now.
Other venture capitalists are still holding the bag, too, with significant stakes in WeWork including Benchmark, which still holds over 20 million shares, or nearly 3% of the company, and Insight Partners, which holds almost 13 million shares, or just under 2%, according to recent regulatory filings."
2. Adam Neumann didn't want to exit, nor did he plan to exit. He was forced out, and refused to go, cutting himself a very tidy deal. He also discretely cashed out with each round, unbeknownst to his other management and colleagues.
So, I don't think he's proven anything, aside that VCs are guililbe and deluded - we need only look at a16 (Andreessen Horowitz's firm) to see that, as he keeps pumping dollars in Neumann's latest scheme.
As for the people leasing, I'm not sure that's fair. They were good working spaces, and offered good benefits at the start. It just wasn't the business model or tech company it claimed to be, and never should have got so out of control in valuation.
By "exit" I mean a startup either getting acquired or going public.
Adam Neumann was pushing for the company to go public. Initially and IPO. When that failed, it was an acquisition.
I specifically refer to "early stage VCs". Those that funded during seed phase. Softbank invested past the seed stage stage. They were the ones that created the $47 billion valuation that They early stage VCs likely never lost control. They pushed to get the exit. They pushed Newmann out because he flubbed the IPO. They still got a huge return on their investment.
Softbank is a corporate behemoth that only invests post-seed rounds. They are trying to ride the the early stage VCs and founders path to returns.
Get return for the early stage VCs is like making sausage. Its very messy. All they wanted is a return.