One might speculate that Carlyle was the lesser of two evils. One could perhaps draw the conclusion that the other, less desirable option was perhaps something along the lines of Autodesk, and that the foundry narrowly dodged a bullet.
Speculation, can sometimes add context and this is noting more than that - pure speculation and conjecture. Regardless, every business is ultimately a business and any vc investing in tech is looking for returns. In that capacity Carlyle is no different than any other. Best, Chris Sent from my iPhone On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:45 PM, Feli <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:31 PM, Nathan Rusch wrote: > >> >> As an aside, I would add that the undertones of concern regarding Nuke now >> being owned by people with little interest in anything beyond >> return-on-investment numbers are perfectly valid as well. > > > > I agree on this point. The financial interests of the new investors are > worrisome. > One would hope that if they do not meet their expectations, that they would > quietly > go away, without wrecking the company and the product in the process. > > As far as their ethics go, I don't know what to say. I'm not thrilled with > what I heard about them, > but on the other hand all of use put gas in our cars to get to work everyday. > You got to pick > your battles, because you really can't cut your own throat to make a point. > > Cheers, > > Feli > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > [email protected] 2 + 2 = 4 > www.elanphotos.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Nuke-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________ Nuke-users mailing list [email protected] http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
