Let's say SF.. I'll say half a year's wage im SF is 100 - 125K. What's X? 4 to 10? So I'm guessing he got $500K to a million.

While we're guessing, I'll throw my hat in the ring at 250k. Given that it failed to monetize, I'd be surprised if it's significantly higher.

I know of a project that did have decent monetization and was impressive technically that only went for mid 6 figures. However the owner wanted to sell quickly so that might have depressed the price a little bit.

They worked out a deal in a little less time than it takes me to be disappointed with a movie choice. It was more that the seller wanted the hire part of the acquihire. Looks like it was a good deal for both.

I'm pretty skeptical the numbers are anywhere in that neighborhood. But if they are, that's a stunning success.

> What's X? 4 to 10?

And this is exactly why he didn't come out and say a number. X could be anything. Someone else in the comments was speculating 10 to 14. But it could just as easily be like 1.2 or something.

>Someone else in the comments was speculating 10 to 14

Probably my comment, but I wasn't speculating... my understanding of a normal tech acquisition formula, but I specifically acknowledge this one was likely different because it was < 6 months old and no prior funding/investments.

This is how myths are built. Less than 100,000 for 3000 emails.

No way a SEO-focused blog is paying $1M for a weekend project. That's enterprise acquisition multiplier territory

My guess is somewhere between $112.5k - 150k. With remaining equity being relative to salary of position offered.

"Engineering Salary" $150k / 2 = $75k. "Multiplied by X" Let X be between 1.5 and 2. So $75k * (1.5-2) = $112.5k-$150k

Is it really standard for SF engineers to get paid 200-250K?

Average SF non FAANG makes 250k/year?? Yes

> So why not just say the actual acquisition number?

Usually buyers don't want this information going public. Likely it was part of the deal terms. My guess is that what Josh said is as much as he's allowed to disclose per terms of the deal.

> Working where in the US?

Doesn't matter, because it's multiplied by X plus equity.

> So why not just say the actual acquisition number?

Because he didn't want to say the number, but he wanted to say that it was high enough to justify his effort.

So it's inconsequential that we don't know one of the variables, because the one it's multiplied by is likewise unknown?

It's materially different to have an X multiple of an NYC salary versus an X multiple of an average US salary, for all values of X.

> It's materially different to have an X multiple of an NYC salary versus an X multiple of an average US salary, for all values of X.

Let X = 0