It's been noted by you and others elsewhere in the thread, but a reading through that lens leaves the impression that the details provided were intended to have exactly that effect.
We added that recently, partly because people like transparency and partly because I got tired of typing "This post was killed by user flags."
[edit] How is "enough" measured? Is there an absolute number? Or some ratio of evaluating flagged comments/stories?
We all know the downstairs cafeteria is changing fast. Others have discussed the new panini presses and greater variety of pizza recently added to the cafeteria menu. Most of these developments have benefited diners, although I've previously written about the darker side of things in these blog posts:
* Why I Don't Love Meat-Lovers Pizza
* Ham Is A Sandwich Best Served Cold
Now, you might think that the panini presses to the downstairs cafeteria are an unmitigated good. They only increases the number of things you're able to eat, right? Hot sandwiches in addition to cold?
Wrong.
Let me give you an example from just last week.
I was at the panini machine heating up the Mark Suster Special -- an culinary invention whose ingredients, until recently, were known only to myself -- when a classmate of mine asked if he could put his sandwich into the machine at the same time. Normally I don't let other people use the panini machine at the same time as me, since it takes longer to heat the sandwiches with two in there instead of just one. But sometimes, their sandwich ingredients will infuse the Mark Suster Special with extra aromatic zest, so this time I agreed.
The sandwich turned out fine. Or so I thought at first. What I didn't know was that this individual -- who I will not name, but who sits in the front row of Mr. Boyd's 3rd period English class and the last row of Mr. Lowry's 7th period chemistry class -- would later go around claiming that he invented the Mark Suster Special and its near-perfect ratio of meat to cheese. In fact he divulged this ratio to everyone sitting in the second row of Mr. Vining's 4th period algebra class.
When I found out about this, I was flabbergasted. This classmate was trying to get all his friends to try out a sandwich that wasn't really his -- a clear violation of my intellunchual property rights. I only found out about it because this unnamed individual was bragging about the sandwich while sitting in the second row of Mrs. Roth's 2nd period history class, just to the left of my friend Ken.
I don't know how this will play out, but I've already filed a complaint with the appropriate authorities. The only reason I tell you this story is that it's becoming more and more clear to me that you can get "burned" by panini presses in more ways than one. If you absolutely must use the panini press, it's best to wrap your sandwich in tin foil first, lest unnamed individuals -- who are co-captain of the JV lacrosse team -- try to claim your sandwich idea as their own.
These days, it seems the thieves aren't just in the second-floor study area. They're in the downstairs cafeteria as well.
I'd suggest snagging Bothsidesofthesandwich.com and translating the rest of Mark's content for consumption by the rest of the world. You clearly have a knack for it.
Simple P&L statement & balance sheet: Provide it to all investors who ask. That's just basic common sense.
Would YOU invest in a company that wouldn't even tell you these basic financial metrics? Would this author invest without it?
And, I've seen far too many "startups" who don't even know what simple financial things are (balance sheet, P&L, cash-flow, margin), and that illiteracy is NOT going to end well.
So, the pain may be real, but the advice given is not IMO correct.
If you can't trust an accredited investor with your financial data then don't take their money.
And if that investor inappropriately divulges confidential information, then take it up with a lawyer as it seems the company in question is in the process of doing right now.
Asking up front is one thing, being obligated to provide to a minority shareholder ongoing is another entirely.
It seems terribly one-sided that investors demand company financials, founder profiles, go through the entire due diligence process, while the community is relatively hush-hush about openly discussing bad experiences and shitty investors.
Defamation laws are, depending on where you are, very powerful and very expensive to defend.
I respect the OP, so I assume it has to be legal for private companies, but it would be good to get confirmation.
Is it only at the beginning? Would there be some kind confidential agreement in place to guard against these kind of leak at some point?
I may be offbase here, but I read all the details provided by the author as a sort of trail to be used for an implicit identification. I'm guessing the author is smart enough to know that these details could be used, given all the work displayed for every Satoshi post on the board.
So, I read the post as the author not explicitly naming the investor, but at the same time, providing enough information for someone motivated enough to track them down. It's the mark of a clever investor, having it both ways.
