Is it the best option for startups to be acquired by talent?

Intermediary transaction SEO diagnosis Taobao guest Cloud host technology Hall

Silicon Valley a period of time before a wave of talent acquisition whirlwind, Facebook,google,zynga are hungry network of talented people, usually the acquisition of talent is based on the number of people, their acquisition is generally aimed at acquiring good engineers and founders, rather than the product itself, for the start-up company, Is it good or bad to be bought by a big company?

If you're starting a business as a company, and the goal is to be bought by a big company, it's good to be acquired.

Because of the scarcity of talented people, in some areas of increased competition for talent, such as social networks, often will pay a high price to acquire talents, in their view, the real good is not many, the price at the expense of large companies also have certain benefits.

The purchase price of an engineer may be as high as 500,000 to 1 million U.S. dollars, the acquisition of funds is usually paid in the form of shares, mainly assigned to the founder, employees and investors of start-up companies. The acquired employees will get high salaries and, in most cases, get more stock options.

From then on, the entrepreneurial team can rest easy, without the hardship of the start-up company, into the big company, work life is guaranteed, less pressure.

Being bought by big companies is also a simple way to exit, 500Startup founder Dave MacClure said: "If startups are growing fast, a mediocre talent acquisition is better than no one." And while millions of of dollars in buy-out funds are nothing to their fund, it is a handsome income for engineers who have just left college campuses.

Paul Graham, founder of Y Combinator, once said, "Who are we? Why should we stop young entrepreneurs from earning their first 1 million in life?"

What else did they reap besides the material things? Reputation, when a start-up company is bought by a big company, some media will report: "Wow, see this company is bought by such a big company, the founder of how good" and so on, looks very bright, can be seen by big companies, the entrepreneurial team has its value. When Facebook bought Instagram 1 billion dollars, I do not know how many entrepreneurial team, founder Kevin Head Halo, everyone to the praise mouth.

But if your original intention was not to be acquired, it would be a bad result for a talent takeover. To backfire is a sense of failure.

Moreover, if the company is acquired, what does the investor think? If you are bought and want to start a business later, your journey may be more bumpy, at least in the investor this, you walk will be more difficult. Nick O ' Neill, the investor, made it clear that he did not like talent acquisitions at all.

Talent acquisition is a symbol of failure, many times, investors would prefer the start-up companies to continue to strive for success, even if it takes a long time does not matter. As a investor, Nick O ' Neill said he had never seen a talent takeover benefit to investors, and was a loss, as many startups did not ask for permission from investors when they were negotiating.

Although it is mentioned above that Paul Graham and Dave do not want to discourage startups from acquiring talent, it is only from an entrepreneur's point of view that they can bring a material gain rather than the benefits to investors.

If investors are not satisfied with this, want to continue to start financing, may investors will add more so-called "talent acquisition agreement" to protect their interests, then your new start-up company will lose more.

Also, being acquired means you have less chance of becoming an internet superstar.