Business Insider messaged (a few times) to take issue with my quick hit on them yesterday. They note this in this story: “OMGPop Sold Way Too Early — They Left $800 Million On The Table”, they’re actually quoting someone else. 

Fair enough.

Just insert this one instead: Here’s Why $200 Million Is Cheap For Draw Something

It’s a robust three sentences of analysis linking to other analysis. And it’s the same basic idea: OMGPOP was dumb to sell — one year after their analysis that OMGPOP was crazy to think they could compete with Zynga.

Compete they did. Forced Zynga’s hand they did. It’s a great exit for everyone involved — entrepreneurs, investors, and Zynga. No second-guessing required. 

Business Insider on January 6, 2011 after OMGPOP’s $10 million Series B:

IS HE NUTS? This Guy Thinks He Can Beat A $5.5 Billion Company With A $10 Million Funding Round

Business Insider today after OMGPOP was purchased for about $200 million by aforementioned $5.5 billion (now public) company, Zynga:

“OMGPop Sold Way Too Early — They Left $800 Million On The Table”

You literally cannot win.

If they had turned down the offer, the headline would have been:

OMG: OMGPOP Nuts To Turn Down Zynga’s $200 Million Offer

Until a year from now when the follow-up headline would have been:

NUTS: OMGPOP Takes Zynga’s Billion Dollar Offer But Should Have Held Out A Year To Buy Zynga

Being right doesn’t matter. Only saying something, anything matters.

Update: NUTS?

Matt Rosoff’s thoughts on Google becoming more like Microsoft should have been a provocative and effective article. Instead it’s a slideshow. Why? I have no clue. 

Well okay, pageviews, clearly. But it’s still weird to see this type of story formatted this way. 

Business Insider has taken a lot of shit over the past year or so for pageview pumping by way of slideshows (AND CAPS-LOCK HEADLINES). Whatever, that’s their decision and it seems to be working out for them. All I know is that as an author, I would hate this. 

Rosoff’s name is on the landing page and nowhere else. As a result, it doesn’t feel like an article he crafted. At best, it feels like a collage he made. I can’t believe any writer would appreciate this. 

3 slides (of 12) in, I have no clue who wrote this. And the whole thing lacks the flow of great writing. It’s a bunch of mini-blurbs instead of one cohesive article making a strong case.

Both the reader and the writer lose as a result of this nonsense. But Business Insider wins, I suppose.