[chimeracoder]

Rockmelt has (had) a very strong leadership team (founders were very successful in the 90s), and a number of strong engineers.

It seems clear that this is an acquisition for talent, since they're shutting the product down with less than 30 days' notice.

For <$70MM, that could be a relatively cheap acquisition of talent that has proven their ability to make things (if not necessarily proven their ability to make a product that people want to buy - which is where Yahoo's responsibility and vision come into play).

[badclient]

For <$70MM (and for a company that raised $40MM), that could be a relatively cheap acquisition

How much money Rockmelt raised says little about how good of a deal Yahoo received. The reverse may be true: Yahoo may have had to pay way more than the real value simply to ensure a return to the investors, not because it valued the company at the price paid.

[capkutay]

raising $40 million...the investors most likely just made their money back at best. Maybe 2x for the early investors?

[badclient]

The investors should have taken a loss. It was a failing business.

[photorized]

Many people were very successful in the 90s... It was way too easy, not necessarily an indication of talent or strong leadership.

[geargrinder]

Quote from 20 years in the future: "Many people were very successful in the '10s... It was way too easy, not necessarily an indication of talent or strong leadership."