Hi @Daimon. It has been stated multiple times that we did not know about the CEO search from the beginning, and we notified the community as soon as possible that we would look for a fee if one of our candidates was successful. Would you have preferred us to not introduce Jared in those circumstances?
We demanded nothing other than the chance to ask to be paid if we were successful; we anticipated that if our candidate was successful then the Sushi community would be happy to pay. Every successful business I know of pays recruitment fees for staff. We have been transparent from day one of our involvement in the process. Unfortunately, that was not day one of the process.
I am hoping that this is the start of an ongoing relationship, where CBR can introduce candidates to Sushi when you are looking to hire and the community is aware of the cost. If we are not paid for this hire, something which we are leaving up to the community, then we will not look to continue a working relationship. The community will have spoken. We would obviously be disappointed if this is the outcome, but we are not holding anyone’s toes to the fire. We have acted in good faith the whole time.
The Head of Research at Coin Bureau introduced me to Jared a short while ago and recommended him as one of the best guys he had worked with. We were working to find Jared a new role, we had him interviewing at other places, and one place in particular were very interested in him. Before that process could get to its conclusion, the Sushi snapshot was held and Jared was successful. We had agreed a success fee of 28% for the other role and the fee would have been considerably larger than what we are asking for.
What value do you put on someone’s network? My due diligence on Jared was primarily that he was recommended to me by someone that I trust 100%, whose judgement in my eyes is unimpeachable. Without us informing Jared about the role with Sushi, he wouldn’t have known about it, and we wouldn’t be having this conversation now. Jared stated this on the AMA we took part in. Jared didn’t send his CV to CB Recruitment; we are a trusted and respected name in the space and as such, Jared was keen to work with us.
Everything is relative. $100k for Sushi to have the best possible Head Chef, and to give Sushi hodlers the best chance of seeing the token price return to its previous highs seems reasonable to me. It represents less than 0.06% of the current market cap.
I hope this answers your questions, please come back to me if you have any follow ups on this.
Hi @ChronoFury, thank you for your feedback. $100k might seem like a lot but it is a lot less than we would have received had we introduced Jared to a client in the traditional sense. We were excited to be a part of history in assisting a DAO to make a senior hire. If we are not paid for this piece of work, we will have missed out on the chance to place Jared elsewhere. If that happens, you won’t hear us crying. We are keen to build a long term relationship, helping Sushi to hire the best of the best, and giving you guys the best chance of success in the future. For us to be a part of the future growth of Sushi, of course we would like to be paid for this piece of work. We are leaving it up to the community to decide. I don’t think you can say fairer than that.
Hi @nickjrishwain, thank you for getting involved in the discussion. We are proposing a formal arrangement moving forward between CBR and Sushi, so that we don’t end up in this position again. We could have walked away from the process when we found out that the process was ongoing, placed Jared elsewhere and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
I like to think of the CEO search as a proof of concept; had we simply come along on the next hire, people might have wondered why Sushi needed a recruitment partner. Well, Jared getting 83% of the vote hopefully answers that question. If you want the best people at Sushi, having a trusted and respected recruitment partner helps!
If people see the value in our involvement, which they clearly do, then we would like the community to agree to remunerate us for this piece of work, and for us to continue our working relationship moving forward as business partners.
First, I want to be clear that no part of my position should reflect on the work that your or CB Recruitment does or has done. I’m not here to denigrate anyone’s work or effort.
Having a more solidified future agreement would be very good.
My position, for what it is worth, will not change on this issue. We need to practice some form of fiscal responsibility and best practices and post factum payments are certainly not a good practice for any business or protocol.
I hope you can respect the position. That does not mean that I would be anti any any future involvement of CB Recruitment. Future involvement would likely involve transparency from the beginning.
To that same end, I hope for whatever trouble may be caused by my adversity to making this payment might serve as at least a partial reason to future vendors to work for visibility from the beginning.
In the end I am just a community member and others can push this through. My suggestion is only that we don’t force it through.
Haha, that’s just like, your opinion, man. Always going to be an interesting experience dealing with an organisation when there isn’t a centralised decision maker. It will go to snapshot and we’ll see what the community say. Most companies are happy to pay us for finding them shit hot talent, Sushi isn’t a company though so we tried something novel in good faith.
If you want to chat and understand what we’re about then feel free to DM or reach out on Telegram. Or listen to the Sushi forum that @Web3connector and I were on. Link below:
Thanks. I’m sure there’s more we agree on than disagree, and appreciate you giving us a chance. Here’s an article Coin Bureau did on Sushi around the time Jared joined.
Will see about getting Kevin to update it at some point to cover some of the work @jaredgrey and co. have done since then.
Thank you for taking the time to understand the process and our part in it. No interest, no taxes, and even a reduction in the initial agreed fee and a permanent reduction in our terms moving forward. As we’ve said from the beginning, it was always about demonstrating value.
This is what we are proposing moving forward and was . If and when Sushi need to recruit, we will provide suitable candidates to the process, the community will be aware of the additional cost, and our fee will be hard-coded into the smart contract, so that if our candidate is selected we will be paid automatically. Full transparency and on-chain.
Water under the bridge, I was rude to you earlier too for which I also apologise. You obviously care about Sushi, and you gave me the opportunity to push back on some of your points for which I am grateful. It’s rare that someone changes their mind when discussing something these days, even more so online. Respect for that.
Also realised that there is a second Sushi forum that yours truly is on discussing our working relationship moving forward. The previous one is my colleague @Web3connector. Link below:
Rewatching the Sushi forums last few days, would like to clarify a couple of things:
We posted our proposal on 13th September. You were aware by at the latest 15th September, 11 days before voting commenced, as you were discussing it on this forum. Not going to comment on whether that is long enough for someone to make a decision, although you had made a decision by the next day as you were discussing it at length on Sushi forum 96. I would say the majority of the comments on the AMA were positive, I invite people to look through and make up their own mind.
I can’t work out how these two statements are compatible. Have you changed your mind about a future working relationship, or am I missing something?
It looks like I made the two statements several days apart.
In the first statement, I’m basically saying if we decide to pay you, we probably shouldn’t have a continuing relationship in the future due to lack of transparency.
In the second statement, I’m basically saying that I don’t think we should pay you for Jared’s referral, in which case I’d respect your flexibility, and would look favorably upon future referrals. All of which I’d definitely expect we’re made aware of well in advance of voting.
You may not have been paying attention to Sushi’s finances recently, but things are not particularly good. We have to make hard and unpopular decisions.
jared hired you to find him a job, sushi didn’t hire you to find a head chef
you weren’t asked by the dao, you didn’t have any deal with the dao.
your client is Jared, get your money from him you goons.
no deal, you never had a deal, you never had a price tag, you never had a request for work, you never provided a quote, you came after the fact asking for money.
bro you did bad business and you don’t get paid after the fact for that - also it doesn’t really reflect that well on your operation if you’re burning resources and time without even securing a request for work, that’s just poor form.
do yo have any thoughts on sucking off the world governments being the new kewl? jared built a defense system for the united states military maybe he can do the same for us a nested version that protects US CITIZENS?
nest that shit jared! GO HOGS!
sidenote - tacobells mexican pizza is shit and they need to stop shoving it in everyones face its grosser than it was 20 years ago
The "deal’ we had was that we could present our case on an AMA and get a snapshot vote if either of our candidates was successful. That will happen. You can vote. That’s how a DAO works.
It was actually 13 days before the vote started, see 5 posts above.
Maybe, maybe it’s bad business to not want to pursue a long term relationship with us. The community will decide, not you or me.
Have you watched either of the Sushi Forums we were on? If you have and you think we reflect poorly on our organisation then fair enough, you can’t please everyone. I hope that as you have gone to some effort to speak against our proposal that you have at least taken the time to understand what we are all about.
