Fred Wilson picks up on a post by Michael Mace on Blackberry maker RIM. The debate on the future of RIM is great but the approach Mike uses would be a great teaching tool and applies to lots of other companies and industries. I wonder if he were able to obtain the exact figures from RIM if it would make any difference.
Picking up a point made at Leweb Paris 2010, I wonder what percentage of the wealth of the two founders of RIM is still in RIM stock? That might concentrate their minds. But from a learning perspective, is it better that they have 100% or 0%? Somewhere in the middle but where? What would you do as the founder? As an investor?
The lesson is that technology keeps moving along and you cannot blame the academics behind most start-ups in the Cambridge Cluster for selling out early. The only critics are the people who have never started anything. But if the significant shareholders of a company, as in the Cambridge Cluster, are academics, their main drive it to climb the academic pole and a few million made on the side gives them cudos and something to talk about at the High Table!
It is better not to be the rabbit caught in the headlights, but if you are, which way do you jump and how far? Or just turn tail and keep running?