The title is somewhat misleading (wow I hear that a lot around here.) Basically the founders raised a bunch of money (almost $2M in '99 and $3M in 2000) right before the dot com bust.
The article gives no indication how well they did, how they were able to raise so much money, what happened with it, etc. So really it's hard to judge if the founders were really put on the street like the title suggests. Like someone else mentioned, it seems as though a lot of the value was created after they were gone. Who knows if they blew the money, sucked at managing and scaling the company, etc. WE DON'T KNOW without doing more research.
It kind of sucks the article was so vague on their actual business value. That would've given more insight. If it said they put all their blood, sweat, and tears and created value for years before it was ripped out of their hands and given to the big bad VCs, then I would've had more sympathy.
The article gives no indication how well they did, how they were able to raise so much money, what happened with it, etc. So really it's hard to judge if the founders were really put on the street like the title suggests. Like someone else mentioned, it seems as though a lot of the value was created after they were gone. Who knows if they blew the money, sucked at managing and scaling the company, etc. WE DON'T KNOW without doing more research.
It kind of sucks the article was so vague on their actual business value. That would've given more insight. If it said they put all their blood, sweat, and tears and created value for years before it was ripped out of their hands and given to the big bad VCs, then I would've had more sympathy.