applfanboysbgon 22 minutes ago

> BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand.

--Nate Silver (538 founder)

ABC seem pretty petty here.

  • rurp 19 minutes ago

    Wow. I have a low opinion of ABC as I said in another post, but this level of pettiness is still surprising to me.

    • brookst 16 minutes ago

      It’s basically a fuck you to the shareholders. Hey we’ve got this dead asset someone will pay for but we won’t sell because they were mean to us.

      Any exec who operates that way should be shown the door ASAP as they are likely doing similar emotional management of other aspects of the business.

  • eugenekolo 10 minutes ago

    WOuldn't proof of that be some grounds for breach of fiduciary duty?

rurp 21 minutes ago

It's wild to me how often I see corporate America both: 1. Spend immense amounts trying to build and improve a brand. 2. Toss well known brands aside as if they are useless.

Not that it's always the same company doing both at the same time, but it's crazy 538 was just left to die. It was a very recognizable brand among wonky professionals, a very desirable customer base. It's not as if politics and sports have gotten less relevant in the world over the past decade. ABC's decision to toss this aside is baffling.

Much of the 538 alumni seem to be doing well, either independently or as part of a major organization, so I don't think much was lost overall. But I sure empathize with the folks who lost their dream job and ABC looks pretty bad for frittering away a successful business for seemingly no reason. Taking down these articles is nonsensical.

  • keeganpoppen 12 minutes ago

    this is what the salesforces of the world do to startups every day. it is so painful to watch. billions upon billions wasted for just the stupidest possible reasons.

spprashant 18 minutes ago

538 was fun while it lasted. The podcasts were also a good listen.

Things got worse after Disney had their first round of layoffs. Their problem was they weren't profitable outside the presidential election years when interest peaked in the general public. 3 out of 4 years only diehard election polling wonks tuned in.

robtaylor 31 minutes ago

If you sell out don't expect to control future events.

deanebarker 59 minutes ago

But why?

  • cmsparks 49 minutes ago

    No idea. ABC bought it and slowly has been shutting down the parts of it. They got rid of the projects page, then laid off all the folks working on it after the election, and now have gotten rid of all of the articles.

    Fortunately the Github is still up: https://github.com/fivethirtyeight

    • fn-mote 42 minutes ago

      > Fortunately the Github is still up

      I need to mirror everything to keep it accessible when they decide to shut this down, too?

      I loved that site, and referred people to it frequently.

  • BeetleB 32 minutes ago

    I'm surprised this is news - or perhaps just surprised that there was still some of 538 around ...?

    ABC officially sunset 538 over a year ago (and laid off most/all of the staff).

woodydesign 37 minutes ago

Oh NO, that's probably the best infographic news sites I was keep visiting and learn

  • BeetleB 35 minutes ago

    538 was sunset over a year ago.

Shalomboy 42 minutes ago

ABC has opted to step on Thucydides Trap.

jimbob45 23 minutes ago

538 had a really accessible portal that evaluated the quality of pollsters. It made it very easy to know which polls were low-quality and therefore ignorable. It being an election year, it’s possible someone didn’t like their pollster rating. Thankfully, we still have Internet Archive.

Edit: nm it was definitely the burrito battle royale bracket. Big burrito couldn’t handle the truth being revealed about their restaurants.

jmclnx 33 minutes ago

The old school press people before the 80s would be horrified at this.

All this proves is when the press was deregulated to allow one person to own all the media they can afford brought us were we are now.

  • lotsofpulp 19 minutes ago

    I feel like it proves the opposite. A small entity was able to become a valued source of information, a big entity bought it, but then was unable to do anything with it, since being a “big” media seller does not matter due to the accessibility of the internet.

  • flomo 15 minutes ago

    No. The 'old school' hated 538 and polling wonks in general. Back in the 2000s there was a huge push back because this blog guy had numbers going against whatever narrative they were trying spin.

sparrish 41 minutes ago

This makes no sense. Sure, he got nearly every prediction wrong but so have their meteorologists. Why just pick on poor ol' Nate?

  • cmsparks 36 minutes ago

    538 was actually pretty accurate!

    They had a good article about how their predictions were much better than you'd expect, but obviously I can't link it anymore because ABC removed it.

  • BeetleB 34 minutes ago

    This isn't about Nate's articles (although perhaps those are gone as well).

  • fabian2k 25 minutes ago

    The 70:30 prediction against Trump was far better than most. I did see models back then that considered the state polls mostly or entirely uncorrelated, and those produced obviously garbage with 90% or even 99% in favor of Clinton.

    But in the end people pick on Nate because he really enjoys being an asshole on the internet. It's far more about when he acts as a pundit, not as an expert on statistics.

    • softwaredoug 22 minutes ago

      People consistently have a hard time understanding that 30% probabilities happen all the time.