These guys should have taken the 4 billion from Google. Their unfair advantage is pretty much inexistent that leave them extremely vulnerable to any competition.
I think it actually says more that Google was willing to pay that much... for what, exactly?
As for the merits of not taking the deal, I think we should be clear – the early investors and many early employees have done alright and most likely won't be losing their shirt like any of the recent investors:
A great line from the Short logic analysis: "At the moment, it’s costing them $1.43 to make $1, and it doesn’t look like it’s getting any cheaper."
This was the kind of thing that thoughtful business analysts were noticing in the weeks before the Groupon IPO: the company didn't have a sensible earnings model, even if it had "revenue" that dug it deeper and deeper into a hole.
Indeed. Where's the IP? It's not like there's anything of value in Groupon – customers? no lock in/low switching costs. Vendors? Every small business person I've heard talk about their experience with Groupon has said they'd never use it again.
