The reason for his termination isn't clear, but based on the report, it appears that he had difficulties with the board. As a founder I don't like this kind of events and this type of action has typically not yielded positive results for hyper-growth companies. Historical examples like Apple, Uber, and WeWork show that such moves often led to stagnation or even bankruptcy. I view it as counterproductive, potentially allowing competitors like Google to catch up, as these decisions tend to impede innovation.
The article states that he transitioned out of the company over 4 weeks, presumably the company was able to go on without him.
I don't think investors will take it badly, I don't think they really want to have a founder who's heart isn't in it anymore slaving away at half pace in the hope of making something from the business.
He's been on his way out for quite awhile, having stepped back from day to day operations in July '17. He wasn't the most professional leader and was widely blamed for promoting and perpetuating a toxic culture within Moz. This included publicly attacking people in the industry, openly mocking and punishing customers for criticizing his product(s), and politicizing honest feedback. In addition, blew a ton of money on pie in the sky ideas that led nowhere while letting the core product stagnate, only having to lay off 30% of their workforce.
Never worked there, take this with a grain of salt, just the word on the street in startup land :)
reply