Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Industry News' started by Awmusic12635, Apr 10, 2014.
Reposted from a email that was sent out to clients
That's good, you got a nice group over there.
Congratulations on the latest acquisition (which is no doubt good news for the customers because I don't think I've ever seen any complaints about CloudShards/Fliphost services) but if you want to be #winning you should keep your purchases a secret like someone else does and let us dig up the dirt on the buyouts months later.
How do you know we haven't paid purchases in secret as well? If it's secret you won't know yet.
I have been busy, so not babysitting for acquisitions
Last one I outted, happened like 4 hours after the deal though...
Doesn't Alex/Liquid have another newer brand? Is that included in this deal?
@drmike I think you should investigate why they took over the company, maybe they are secretly funded by colocrossing or something. WE NEED MORE DRAMA!!!
p.s. seriously, who the fuck cares about CC anymore?
@Mun, what's up friend?
CC isn't falling off my radar. Nor are the other usual suspects. Just not getting the same treatment and some space to roam. They trip, I'll catch it, in due time.
CloudShards/QueryFoundry is interesting.
Since we are in drama light mode, let's talk about the whole Wyoming incorporation for QF. What's up with that being a AUS company and all...?
Good kind of interesting I hope ?
Well QF was registered in AUS first and then also in Wyoming later.
Probably the same thing that's up with my US company owning companies in 3 other countries: sometimes it makes it easier to do business in Country X if you register a company (subsidiary) in that country instead of just opening a branch office. There are also reasons like liability protection (for the parent company) and taxes (ask Amazon and Google about the tax benefits) which might make a foreign subsidiary preferable to a foreign branch.
I am OK with a company incorporating in WY -- for me, I see that there is already a heavy tax burden for companies that aren't already of "google" proportion. Although there is more anonymity with a WY company in public records, they are still on record at their "agents" and can still be found, so it's not really that "anonymous".
At the end of the day, a company that corps in WY is going to have a smaller tax burden than someone who corp'd out of AZ(small biz, not Intel/Intuit/GD). That tax is going to have to be collected and passed on to the end user. For a newer company, or someone who is trying to have the lowest cost while running a new business, and can legally shield taxes, all the power to them.
If your unhappy about someone who corps/llc out of WY, NV, then you should be really pissed that Google and GE don't pay billions and billions of taxes, and we, the tax payer, are bled for it every year, cause you know, someone has to pay for those roads and police...and it ain't Google paying for it, cause they are smart, and they pay the least amount of taxes to the US government, that they have to.
Not trying to cause drama or anything but all of their brands are microscopically small (proven fact) except for their two primary brands.
I honestly don't see the point in keeping the brands independent rather than merging them, other than making Query Foundry look like RLT or something. I see right through it though, they're just gathering up a cluster of brands nobody uses in order to look bigger.
How can you determine no one uses those brands? I'm willing to put money on that those brands had plenty of client base, as well as a pretty good enough income for them to even consider purchasing it.
He's probably using the Jon B/Alex V method of determining how big a company is...its Alexa rank.
That is a suprise.
Liquid was one of the old LEB providers.
Pipe down kid. You have absolutely zero room to talk about anything remotely relating to the running of a business.
To get IPs from ARIN?
Does this include all sub companies or only the liquid-hosting brand?
FrapHost's annual revenue was $17K at the time of the acquisition. That's all that needs to be said to illustrate my point.
All you need to illustrate what point? You made a general statement that those "but all of their brands are microscopically small (proven fact)". So why say something at all, unless you knew what exactly your trying to cause was DRAMA. Did you go through those companies books? How do you know what they will make it? ASSumptions just made you look like an A$$. What brands has your company bought? Were they profitable? Why does it matter too you unless your JEALOUS because someone is doing better than you!