I also recommend the JBoss Business Case Study: "Lessons from Leaders: How JBoss did it" [1]

[1] http://www.forentrepreneurs.com/lessons-from-leaders/jboss-e...

Along those same line, here's another good read about the recent npm, Inc. investment. Feel free to skip down to 'Open Source and $$$' section. http://words.steveklabnik.com/is-npm-worth-26mm

In short, it's debatable whether an investment into npm, Inc. will directly pay off for the investors. What the investment is more likely about is creating the infrastructure for new, billion dollar companies to pop up, giving those investors an inside track to the new companies.

In the case of ElasticSearch, investing in this infrastructure project absolutely makes sense. "Big Data" is becoming huge, but it's still relatively dumb. Up until now, we've primarily been focused on tools and technologies to source, aggregate, and analyze the data. But lots of companies are now popping up who are built on the idea of making intelligent use of all this data, far beyond what humans are naturally capable of. ElasticSearch of course isn't the whole solution, but it's part of it.

(I work for one of those companies, and we use ElasticSearch)

Open-source is becoming the only way to develop (and, especially, maintain) complex software. The fact that the engineers can gain employer-independent reputations gives them an incentive that's astronomically expensive (as hedge fund compensation goes) to replicate otherwise.

The world is finally figuring out that it's impossible to employ top talent, but that it can be quite lucrative to sponsor it.

It's not impossible to employ top talent. That is a very ignorant statement.

So is, "Open-source is becoming the only way to develop (and, especially, maintain) complex software". This is hyperbole. Complex software has been developed and maintained for over half a century, in myriad ways.

Top talent has access to thousands of other well paying roles. You cannot treat them the same way companies treat regular employees (badly). If you give them pointless work, or work without career growth, they can up and leave in a heartbeat. If you try and bully them or pressure them to work long hours or place pointless restrictions (dress code, start times, vacation policy, etc) on them they will leave.

That is a statement I think most people on here would agree with. The original statement wasn't. A company can be a joy to work for. You can also make some really good cash.

Better to say it's impossible to keep top talent around for more than a couple of years. Once they start to get bored they leave.

In technical fact, not impossible but, in fact, common. In spirit, you don't really employ top talent, in the sense that subordinating it wastes it. You sponsor it and become a beneficiary of it.

Perhaps the OP meant to say it's tough to retain top talent without being on the top of your own game in terms of providing benefits and culture to them.