You misread the original comment I’m afraid. It doesn’t say that the company folded after 3 weeks due to a lack of org structure. It says that a structureless group caused the fall of a public company in 3 weeks of working on achieving that goal. Presumably the company had a structure.
You're right about the writer's intention, but I "misread" it the same way. Even after going back and checking, I still think it could be interpreted either way, and that GP's and my interpretation is the more natural one.
100%. I don’t fault anyone who would misread it. The structure of the sentence is such that it contains multiple assides within one sentence. That makes is very prone to be misread.
YMMV but the way the OP describes the entire cycle occurring in three weeks seems to preclude the founding of a public company, which does take considerably longer in general. That leaves toppling it from the outside.
