At least it’ll be Webscale.

I’m convinced it’s more about your sales pitch going in.

Given this guy's job will be selling Muse to corporations, sounds like the best way to hire for that position.

And I'm pretty sure this "29-30 year old who was merely acquihired" probably knows more than these veteran/boomer execs about how to execute a consumer AI product strategy.

"Chief AI officer" does not mean he leads AI research efforts, its just a title. He just takes care of hiring and product direction, both of which I'd say hes done well in. They obviously have actual researchers working on models.

I'd go as far as to say Alexandr Wang can do this better than most other leaders. Young people should be in charge of products, they generally have a better sense of what resonates with consumers, and Meta is a consumer company at the end of the day.

Not just that, they're also kinda similar value proposition, in that it's "holy crap look how fast you can develop code if you just ignore all of the longer-term risks you're creating".

Both AI and Mongo can be used for good and quality code but that's not how they get sales.

I've run out of fingers for the amount of people in my network that are now leading/head of AI xyz at their employers yet have little to no understanding of AI beyond asking ChatGPT simple questions.

Facebook going to be selling Muse into your company as your AI coworker

thought it was million monkeys consistency, so `/dev/urandom`

in case anyone who doesn't get the reference: https://youtu.be/b2F-DItXtZs?si=gxrqufTAy-YQ88wW

I've always wanted model sharding.

A contractor CEO? I know it is extremely common for directors to be contractors for tax reasons.

Yes, CEOs pay taxes on income. The only way around that is to structure the compensation so it's not income, and the IRS probably has tried to prevent that as much as possible. I'm not a tax or HR expert but I'd think unrealized gains on stock compensation might not be. Deferred compensation might not be, until it's actually paid.

I have never heard of this. Do you mind sharing some examples?

I'd never heard of this. It turns out it is very rare for publicly traded companies [1]. In these cases, I would guess it comes down to contract terms. But again, it's not as though the law would compel an individual to continue working at a company. It would just come down to what the contracts say, and, potentially, how the courts interpret those contracts in the event of a lawsuit.

[1] Examples I found: Worksport Ltd., Exicure, Inc., Rainmaker Worldwide Inc., and Acorn Energy, Inc.

In the US, there is only one labor law that is different for execs and high paid employees and that is overtime rules. Fiduciary duty does govern how a director or officer behaves while in the role, loyalty, no self-dealing, no stealing corporate opportunities etc. It doesn't oblige them to stay or dictate how they must leave.

In US and English law, "specific performance", so a court ordering you to do what you promised, isn't available for personal service contracts. In the US that's reinforced by the 13th Amendment's ban on involuntary servitude. So even if a CEO signed a contract promising 6 months notice and a smooth handover, the company can't make them do it, they can only enforce any financial penalties that are contracted.

The only thing that might give me pause is that there's no conciliatory language coming from Mongodb to indicate that it was a negotiated exit, not even a bland "by mutual agreement".

In fact, they seem to have gone out of their way to minimise any mention of him which, to me, suggests that it might have been worded that way based on legal advice rather than for PR reasons.

We don't have to guess, his offer letter is public record:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1441816/000162828025...

As far as I can tell, there is no notice period.

By "try", I mean there's a difference between applying and getting accepted, and getting an offer out of the blue. They've sent out some unsolicited offers before, and poached some executives that way, so that's why I ask.

You're right though that the process in practice can be more fuzzy (e.g., you weren't looking, but heard of an attractive opportunity and then applied that way).

there are mountains of evidence that postgres does indeed scale if thoughfully designed.

People do hate on it but MySQL is what I would reach for when needing tons of scale. Its correctness issues about type conversions are super well documented at this point and Innodb is really good at ingesting tons of data. There's also a lot of talent you can hire if you need exotic setup.

Migrate to yugabyte? It's a multi-raft fork of postgres.

Please elaborate more instead of just "trust me" it would be nice to understand where this comes from. I'm sure back some years people would have said the same about MySQL, yet YouTube used the heck out of MySQL, they made an entire Go based runtime on top of it to scale MySQL.

You can scale nearly anything if you know what you're doing.

It would be nice if you could substantiate this a bit.

Like, what kind of measurement is "largest"? Most bytes on disk?

It's not that it does not scale but it does not scale out of the box.

Yeah, I wouldnt recommend doing MongoDB for EVERYTHING, but when you're using it for very specific things, you dont have to throw away everything you're already familiar with is all I was saying.

Their biggest weakness was that their marketing promised way, way more than they could deliver.

Aphyr's original examination [0] took them to task so much so that I always think of it as the start of the "end", at least of the "web scale" obsession.

[0] https://aphyr.com/posts/284-jepsen-mongodb

poor souls stuck maintaining brownfield webshit developed during the height of mongo's marketing campaign 10 years ago.

MongoDB has been a good database for years.

IIRC (from my time there) Stripe still uses MongoDB for it's main datastore.

https://stripe.dev/blog/how-stripes-document-databases-suppo...

MongoDB is a great db for agentic workloads to be honest. Thats probably why they are still seeing growth. They also have some very good embedding models. They should really make those available over their own API though.

They probably should look into JEV style models as well might make sense for automatic classification of data.

MongoDB is a natural choice if you are working with denormalized deeply hierarchical data structure like JSON. It is also natural to JavaScript devs since the shell itself is JavaScript. This makes it super effective on modern web framework although I recently switched to Drizzle

Desai led product and engineering at Cloudflare

Well, this could end meta :) Once I get the Cloudflare prompt I bail assuming the site does not what me to read their content.

Yes, the number of sites I go to is decreasing daily, but gopher, gemini and USENET is still around and seems to be slowly growing.

I mean, Mongo is to be a $600 dollar stock imho. You see, the amount logs AI creates or intermediary text storage it creates is just stunning. Nice entry for leaps. Plus, Mongo swiftly added their vector db too. It’s a obvious play.

I wonder if they’ll pair him with another acquisition like Porcupine. META has now realized how much money there is in selling a picks and shovels (as we see with Muse Spark).

So turns out nosql is no place for "structured" role like ceo.

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career.

Maybe he had enough.

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career.

I wish I had your belief in sensible logic like that.

But I suspect you're wrong, even though you shouldn't be.

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career

I'd eat my shorts if this was true. But even then he is likely set for life with his wealth, pre Meta offer.

The halo effect of being in the orbit of a product on the way up (as Muse appears to be) can offset almost any wrong. If Muse succeeds, he could get a CEO job anywhere he likes.

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career.

just need to spin the departure as being decisive and able to make tough decisions and he'll be back in the ceo seat in no time. especially if muse does well.

Not sure why he'd want to take the pay cut with being a CEO

or "resigned to spend more time with the family" aka was fired

Agreed an enterprise guy is not the next CEO but I doubt Zuck has any near term succession plan.

Mosseri is basically the same age as Zuck, and Zuck still seems extremely hands on.

Check back in 10 years to see how things are going, maybe its Wang or a currently unknown 20 something.

Thanks! Always amazing that people don't know this stuff. Oh and the current CFO of Cerebras was the CFO of Bird, another giant failure.

In my eyes, success is a profitable company.

Cerebras is an 11 year old unprofitable company with a stock that is down 30% since the IPO, in the hottest market ever.

They've pivoted many times over the years trying to make "wafer scale" work in a variety of use cases, and they still haven't gotten it right.

By the way, the CTO is dumping stock left and right and the stock is down nearly 5% today alone...

https://www.marketbeat.com/instant-alerts/insider-cerebras-s...

It might be, but ... there are a lot of us who've seen this happen time and time again.

You have some startup, the founder is either young or doesn't want to do the CEO stuff. Things kind of eek along until the founder either steps aside or is removed by the board because a) it's time for a "grown-up" CEO; b) the CEO needs real sales experience; c) the founder overpromised and under-delivered; d) board/VC politics make it helpful to install a buddy as CEO; e) etc.

Then the CEO clock starts, typically they have 18 months to get lucky and hit their metrics. They do a lot of glad-handing. They hire "their team" of sales/marketing/etc people. They spend A LOT of money. And I mean A LOT. They talk about OKRs or SMRTs and KPIs. Out of nowhere a small army of project managers show up and try to tell you how to do your job and why you can't just talk to the <thing X> team directly but have to go through them for "efficiency" and "visibility."

In 3-6 months, senior engineering and R&D staff starts to leave. Whatever culture you had slips away. HR has "culture" meetings to "find the right company culture."

Sales/product can't sell and points the finger at R&D, maybe even for the right reasons. You OKR/KPI harder, but it doesn't matter because nothing addresses whatever the underlying problem is. Multiple senior people have pointed loudly to the problem and are ignored; they're often not managers so it's unclear if they were even heard.

At some point there are one or more rounds of layoffs; sometimes these are announced, sometimes it's just a gradual attrition.

Eventually the CEO clock runs out. They don't get lucky. Nothing they did helped, and some of it hurt. They collect their $1M severance, get to keep their stock, get 9-12 months of health insurance, and move on. In a year or two we hear about them joining a new company as CEO.

In the meantime, you've either moved on or have a new CEO with a new 18-month clock.

Some would call this a valuable skill.

It's common for VCs to do the same as "entrepreneur in residence"

There's multiple of these for executives. We tried using one at my last company to find a Sales exec (I think they would have been c-level). I was part of the interviewing process and what we found out was that we absolutely needed the ideas and practices these candidates had and simultaneously couldn't afford them at even half their asking price. It was a real conundrum and the company more or less failed 18 months later after management decided "doing nothing" was the right decision.

One reason might be the share price has collapsed and he has no confidence in it coming back (pretty scandalous if he's the CEO!), or Meta has offered him inducements > what he's walking away from.

Or there's something else scandalous happening and he wants to halt a bad look ASAP? I don't get why he or Meta couldn't have waited a couple weeks otherwise.

You sound frustrated. He'll be fine.

One reason might be the share price has collapsed and he has no confidence in it coming back (pretty scandalous if he's the CEO!)

Is it?

Scandals require consequence. He's getting a new job at Meta. It'll take lawsuits to suss all of this out and those take years.

Worth noting: CJ wasn't just the CEO, he was also board member and president.

This is what happens when you don't have effective corporate governance.

Oh man, he'll probably just have to eke out a living on $300m or something to last him the rest of his life. It will be tough.

Where do you see that information?

the share price dropping was due to him leaving, not the cause of him leaving (but this is very bearish for mongo)

Isn't it also a possibility that he gave notice and it wasn't announced to the world until his last day?

No way. CEOs with significant experience are not easy to find so he’s going to do just fine.

its a small club, and you ain't in it friend. No matter how many boots you lick.

There are very practical reasons to not hire someone who abruptly dips after less than a year on the job that have nothing to do with being punitive.

People get fired effective immediately.

Or he told the board he’s resigning and they told him it’s immediate. It’s unlikely he resigned with zero notice so he could go the Meta the very next day.

Interim is always an inverse one though, and the fact it was the previous feels to me at least like them saying "Hey we need a favour" but I have no insight.

He don't need to be CEO with the money he already have.

One reason might be the share price has collapsed and he has no confidence in it coming back (pretty scandalous if he's the CEO!)

From looking at the historical prices, it was down from $450 to $410 from a month ago, but still quite a bit from $235 six months ago, which is not anything close to what I'd consider "collapsed". Of course, he might have expected to continue going down, but that's going to be hard to measure in the short term given that announcements like this tend to affect the price directly in the short term (so far down to $338 today, close to double the loss of the entire previous month, although it seems far too soon to draw any conclusions).

Not that I think I'm saying anything that has any sort of bias, but it's probably reasonable in case anyone happens to read this and be suspicious: I did work at MongoDB for around five years (but haven't worked there for nearly as long), and from that stint I did have a sizable amount of shares, although as of last year I no longer hold any (for reasons completely unrelated to any personal opinions of the company; I had procrastinated way too much on making any sort of decision about how much to hold onto and for how long, so when my wife and I were buying a house, I decided it was time to just liquidate it and put it towards that instead).

I think the most instructive example of this is Stephen Elop. He had ONE (1) successful business venture in the 90's and has done a horrible, laughably destructive job at everything he has ever touched since, and is still a CEO.

high functioning sociopaths are still sociopaths. The domination and power are the point, not just something they are doing to make some cash.

I don’t think these people can sit around and enjoy nature. Nobody rewards you for enjoying nature. All their life they have learned to climb the social ladder and have become good at it, they keep getting rewarded and praised for it, so that’s what they do and keep doing.

I think they’re missing some internal loop. Only external rewards satisfy them and they maximise for that. Stopping is not an option, because then the rewards stop coming and they have no idea how to exist when that happens.

Also, instead of enjoying life they choose to report to Zuck, eww

Reminds me the Bill Gates and the fisherman joke/story (which is based on an older/similar story): https://sampatpatnaik.blogspot.com/2008/10/bill-gates-fisher...

He is 60 years old per wikipedia, this is likely his last rodeo. He has held board positions at Datadog, Athena Health, App Dynamics and other places in addition to his job at Mongo per LinkedIn. He was also at Mongo for 11 years.

It seems he is deeply connected, and probably approaching centimillionaire wealth.

Even if he is burning some bridges, its not going to affect his career at this point.

Edit: I looked at the current interim CEO's profile, not the outgoings, but its almost the same story- he is 55, been on other boards, has experience at director+ level since 1995 listed... this isn't going to hurt his career.

If he makes Meta a shit ton of money then nobody will care and he’ll easily find more jobs.

Maybe this is a silly assumption, but, he reached the title, he’s got the ladder-climbing experience to understand his choice.

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career.

You must be new to the corporate world or incredibly naive.

I have been in a CEO replacement at my previous job. The owners were not happy with how things were going and replaced him. It was a decision only two or three people on the board participated in, even most of the board had no idea. In public, however, the only information that came out was that the CEO decided that his mission had been accomplished and it was time to look for new opportunities. These people never publicly tell the truth, what you hear on the news is what they want you to hear. The truth is almost certainly something completely different.

he got fired

He's never going to be hired as CEO by anybody for the rest of his career.

This is a great example of saying how things should work, which is almost the exact opposite of how they actually work.

Do you think he needs to make any more money in his life, or can he retire tomorrow and live comfortably long past his death?

One reason might be the share price has collapsed and he has no confidence in it coming back

Not sure how you made that assessment!

52 Week Range: 215.68 - 473.10

Yesterday, it closed at 410.44. Clearly, very far away from collapse. In fact, it made a solid comeback (almost doubled from lows).

https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/MDB/

[delayed]

Probably just because it reminded everybody that MongoDB exists as a corporate entity and everybody is re-evaluating investment in "Open Core" products where the paid value-add is consultancy because learning to us the product is so difficult, since LLMs for all their faults are good at "how do I use this hard-to-learn tool?"

"Hey the MongoDB guy left, is MongoDB okay?.... wait, no, of course it isn't. It's in that space that is completely screwed."

Stock prices have nothing to do with business performance anymore

It doesn't even need a couple days. I got Opus 5.5 to do it in like three or four hours, just out of curiosity.

Git can clone mongodb in far less than that. I think you might be misunderstanding where the revenue comes from.

crazy we're cheering on theft.

I had to google to see if this is correct. Completely absurd. At that rate MongoDB better pull out a cure for cancer out of their DB

Might have interpreted it as captain heading for lifeboat.

How much closer can you get to “actual value” than a long standing publicly trades business with deep liquidity?

30m unvested at what price? If you think it’s going to 2x, then it’s worth 60m. Maybe zuck paid an unrealistic multiple - 20x, but out side of that still a bearish signal

departure could also mean, private information about MongoDB problems that is not public, so I would not invest in MongoDB

You made the assumption that it was fairly valued before and the loss was a "true" loss.

But possible it could have been over-valued before, unbeknownst to low-information external investors. After all, right now it as a PE of 450+. (Google PE is 17, Meta PE is 27, Tesla PE is 330)

The stock dropping on CEO departure had nothing to do with his personal performance, and everything to do with the information that he revealed on the way out. Why would the CEO leave a rising and successful company on the verge of innovation?

And thus tying it back to pay - people should be paid based on their output and their personal performance, not based on simply serving as a signal which any warm body can do. That said, I don't think truly amazing CEOs are overpaid, e.g. steve jobs of old.

Is there any other way to interpret this?

Sure: Destructive actions have a lower bar than constructive ones.

My company doesn't pay me millions, but I were motivated to do so, I could probably cost my company millions. Similar principle here: regardless of whether the CEO is any good, simply by virtue of their position they can tank the stock by making wild moves that undermine confidence.

Imagine a generic human blob CEO with minimal VORP[0], you could swap him out with anyone else in the organisation and get the same results. But if he gets on twitter and announces, "This company is trash and I'm leaving this trash fire," he's going to cost them millions.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_over_replacement_player

However I imagine those that are upset about CEO pay will find this unconvincing. Is there any other way to interpret this?

I would argue that at most he's a signal about company value that people reacted to. Maybe the company lost 6 billion dollars in underlying value, but it wasn't from the CEO change itself.

His departure causing a drop does not mean he was worth that drop. Investors think his departure signals internal issues and are trading based off that.

You just can't admit what's obvious because you likely think it's morally icky to suggest someone can be worth that much.

you keep saying this, but you have literally no idea who i am or what my morals are. perhaps you should not speak so confidently about things you know nothing about.

i dont find anything "icky", i just disagree with you.

Also you have to consider that Zuck is probably paying him 9 figures to leave. So another person validating that he really is worth that much

you can't make up a random number then use that made up number as "validation" for your point.

Dude if you bought this morning on the news you would have made well over 10% back today. This smells more of a massive algorithmic sell off

if "CEO Resignes" SELL SELL SELL

Somehow missed this until now. Interesting read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burger_King_foot_lettuce

Anyone can burn/bomb a company and cause millions in damages. Doesn't mean they are worth that much

yes, that's my point.

and it absolutely extends to unexpectedly leaving. there have been plenty of times in my career that simply leaving without notice would have cost my company many times my salary.

mongodb ceo is not worth 6 billion dollars.

Another reading is this: CEOs don't quit without notice [1], it's bad form and bad for both the company and for the reputation of the person leaving. Regardless of the value he as an individual was providing it speaks to substantial disfunction in the overall leadership of the company and a major lack of confidence from the person who presumably had the best idea of how the company was doing on the whole. The market suddenly learning those things resulted in a substantial market correction. It doesn't really matter whether he was a particularly good or bad CEO; the situation would indicate something is majorly wrong in either case.

1: Obviously exceptions will exist for unexpected major life events, etc.

Is there any other way to interpret this?

One would be "the market processing the new information that MongoDB's legal department doesn't know how to draft contracts".

However I imagine those that are upset about CEO pay will find this unconvincing. Is there any other way to interpret this?

Judging by your recent comments, you seem to have an axe to grind with people who are "upset about CEO pay" and I don't think it's possible to convince you to look any things from any other angle.

A CEO abruptly resigning is read by the market as a signal. Unless you think this person is ~$6.5B more valuable than any potential replacement, the full quantity of the loss cannot be ascribed to the value he provides as an employee.

Trading algorithms at big shops read headline "CEO of company leaves for greener AI pastures"

Make adjustments based on ML

Actual analysis of this person's value to company not weighted as highly

Er, I'm not sure what exactly you're getting at, but the stop market drop was not because of his value-add to the company, it was because of the signal it sends by the CEO quitting.

So… I guess you could make an argument that that merits higher pay, but it'd be saying it's due to his blackmail power.

Ah, I miss the days of NoSQL vs. SQL debates.

Speaking of xtranormal, around the same time there was a great treatment of the lean startup (you have to iterate!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J9KhpgYVB0

I worked at IMVU [1] so it was extra funny.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMVU

thats an excellent question

Web scale is old hat. We're now on planet scale.

needs more sharding.

I think so too.

Just now in 2026 we start to see glimpses of AI supremacy, e.g. navier stokes.

It’s similar to the deep blue moment. It took a while before consumer hardware could beat Kasparov, but the watershed moment was deep blue.

I reckon some private demos using far more compute than is available to us peasants convinced the tech oligarchs 3 years ago to pursue their seemingly coordinated AI push.

Yeah, it's definitely this and not that Meta probably offered him a salary package that ensures generational wealth measured in centuries. Definitely the science fiction scenario, that is totally the realistic one and not a greedy wealthy CEO doing something that enables their greed.

MongoDB is aggressively hiring in Dublin, though.

Oracle seems to be doing their best to expedite their own crushing.

Ehhhhhh maybe https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/ORCL

As much as I'd like to believe this, they have their ways of making money.

I was thinking maybe investigations and prison time should crush Oracle's business model.

They bought Cerner early in the decade and have whittled it down to absolutely nothing. This is a problem when the software that Cerner sold was EMRs and I have people who used to work there telling me that the perioperative and anesthesia suites now have one person working on them, and no one's fixing issues.

your database is probably the hardest part of your application to migrate off of

Oracle has understood this for a long time. RDMBS have seen many generations of application tech stacks rise and fall. Other than C and unix they have outlasted almost everything.

$322 to $130. ouch

This is mostly an artifact of their bonkers hyperscaler build up. The growth in their RDBMS has got to be 0 or negative, but existing customers are locked in tight imo.

Don’t look at oracle’s debts

They changed licensing.

Isn't this the default in Cassandra?

Citus on Postgres used to have similar feature; Dead after Microsoft acquisition

MongoDB has been proprietary since 2018.

If your access patterns are fixed and not going to change, if your schema is pretty much solidified, then yes, I don't doubt that at all. But few things I've worked on have had such stable access patterns or schemas that they would benefit.

I enjoyed solving the challenges around using DynamoDB way more than I enjoyed using it on an ongoing basis.

DocumentDB more or less is MongoDB though

DynamoDB is very expensive.

I worked there from around a year before the IPO until around three and a half years after. The IPO price was around $24 if I remember correctly, but it's been floating in the $300-450 range for a while now. I have no clue what the future holds for it, but the IPO clearly did what it was intended to do.

i think infra software will be just fine. ai isnt going to implement a saas-database. and why would anybody migrate of mongodb, just to put their business data elsewhere?

it's end user software that's absolutely getting crushed.

Mongo’s biggest sell was it increases developer productivity so backlogs were burned down faster and managers all benefited.

AI greatly removes that differentiator. AI doesn’t care if it needs schemas or if there’s an idiomatic driver for Python or Node. Even schema changes aren’t an issue and most databases support complex data anyways.

I think its Zuck's new hiring strat,

He hired cred CEO to be whatsapp CEO.

Scale CEO to be AI leader

Now Mongo ceo to lead the AI enterprise sales.

You missed the point. The reason behind the job hops is worth looking at closely. In retrospect, his time at MDB appears to launder a reputation that was shattered. Ending up at meta, therefore, seems to suit him well.

Wow, TIL servicenow was his second run-in with the US government. I believe this is what you were referring to:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/united-states-intervenes-...

I was surprised Facebook Workplace lasted as long as it did. But, hey, it took Google a few tries to get GCP (anyone remember the Search Appliance?) to a solid place so I wouldn't count Meta out of being able to make an enterprise splash just yet.

Not to mention it is a painful database to work with... Doc DBs were simple 15+ years ago, but turns out most data is relational and it's just simpler to use postgres.

MongoDB and its hype burned many, many people back in the day. It's hard to overstate how much it used to suck ass. At one point MongoDB client libraries would report that writes succeeded even if your box had no internet connection, that's how bad it was.

The Mongo fans claim "no really, it's good now", but I was one of the people burned so badly that I'll never touch it with a ten-foot pole again for as long as I live. I assume this toxic reputation is a big part of the problem.

People still use MongoDB?

This is insane

He doesn't believe in Mongodb anymore. That is how I read it.

It looks like that phrase was removed from the article, but that is standard for C-level jobs.

Isn't the standard they get a made up advisor role for some months? Though usually that involves the ex-C-level to understand the implicit expectation of not starting immediately at the next place.

Zuck is front row at a lot of fights and sometimes holds towels etc for fighters during walkons. Meta Threads is the official social media sponsor.

There's been a rightward shift in tech and culture (eg, children identify much less as transger and bisexual than a few years ago), it's likely Facebook is aligning with that.

And Zuck’s sudden interest in MMA/boxing/Jiu Jitsu as part of his “alpha male” rebranding.

I'm not sure that this was the deciding factor

There’s some weirdness with the UFC’s struggle at the time.

The Fertitta brothers are who actually bought it. Before owning the UFC, Lorenzo Fertitta was on (maybe the head?) of the Nevada State Athletic Commission- the very body who were refusing to sanction UFC events at the time, and the most important governing body in the combat sports world.

Obviously the UFC was hurting bad at that time since they couldn’t be sanctioned, were getting booted from arenas they booked, and were getting dropped by Pay Per View carriers. This decimated their value and the Fertittas scooped up the company for a song.

All of a sudden, now that they owned it, the sanctioning bodies agreed on a set of unified MMA rules, the UFC was re-sanctioned, and they started selling PPVs again.

It was actually quite a success from the very beginning. Their troubles were likely imposed on them by their prospective buyers in order to get the sale done, and all they and Dana White did really were take their foot off the company’s neck.

It is a scummy company run by scumbags, of course he would be.

It doesn't mean Meta is burning down, but it does mean the market is not convinced the Meta Enterprise Platform is going to be some exciting new business direction.

what is this nonsense? if you hear "they are foreign" you don't think its multiple people? if you're going to be snide and rude at least have the courtesy not to be an imbecile at the same time that is just degenerate behavior on your part.

I recently took my app off of Mongo Atlas because I was tired of dealing with charges that caught me off guard. I was tired of feeling like I was getting nickel and dimed over every little thing.

I ended up migrating everything to DigitalOcean's managed database for 1/3 the price. Less headache, better performance, and less panic and anger.

I'll never, ever use Mongo Atlas again.

lol