Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 594 posts

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#301

Post by ing33k »

Analemma_ wrote: post #52
mmastrac wrote: post #3

The thought of losing Github to the startup graveyard is kind of scary. It was bad enough to lose Google Code and when SourceForge had their "great purge" of inactive projects.

If they can't stand on their own feet, I imagine somebody would/will buy GitHub at a firesale rather than see it disappear completely. For all their missteps, they have developer mindshare that is the envy of everyone. If we're lucky it would be someone like Google or Microsoft, if we're unlucky it might be Oracle or SalesForce. Whoever it would end up being though, GitHub won't just vanish.

SalesForce bought heroku and heroku seems to be doing well.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#302

Post by Animats »

markdog12 wrote: post #251
Animats wrote: post #180

Uh oh. So much is dependent on Github. Is there a full mirror?

You can easily mirror with Gitlab: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/repository_mirroring.htm...

That's not the question. I'm not concerned about mirroring my stuff. I'm concerned about the disappearance of other people's stuff, perhaps forgotten by them but still used by others, if Github tanks.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#303

Post by bbcbasic »

__derek__ wrote: post #285
martindale wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a 5x return with no risk to them There's something strange going on here. What software do you produce?

I had the same thought. That line sounds eerily like a Ponzi scheme.

Probably works by leveraging the customers existing business. E.g. like google ads could give a dentist a 5x.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#304

Post by moritzplassnig »

I'm surprised that the author doesn't focus more on the other numbers (the burn numbers aren't surprising to me - see here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13190371). According to the author's data, GitHub had $25M in ARR in Sep'14. That's 2 years and 2 months after they announced their $100M round, so probably 28 months after they signed a term sheet.

If you calculate back from there, let's say $12M in ARR in Sep'13, $6M in Sep'12 and $4-5M in May'12 - that's insane (them raising $100M). Not sure if Bloomberg's data is correct but if we look at the other data points (probably same source data), $90M in ARR in Sep'16, it seems to be accurate.

Sep'12: $6M (assumed) -- raised $100M a couple of months earlier Sep'13: $12M (assumed) Sep'14: $25M (according to Bloomberg) Sep'15: $50M (assumed) Sep'16: $90M (according to Bloomberg)

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#305

Post by camus2 »

nine_k wrote: post #284
golergka wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping other companies from using your GPL software in their proprietary stuff without telling anyone? Not every company out there is a startup who needs to be sparkling clean to pass due diligence for the next round, acquisition or IPO. A lot of companies out there are perfectly fine with a little bit of cheating here and there — I would actually say that most of them are. Especially when you remember about…

It gives you a future market share via so many people using your software for free. They won't pay if it weren't free anyway, but would use a competing piece of software. That is, without the free (as in freedom) version, few would even consider paying for a commercial license. Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers? Maybe they want kids get…

> Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers?

Microsoft doesn't need to, AFAIK pirated copy don't get upgrades and genuine HOME copies only work on the first computer they are installed on.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#306

Post by camus2 »

sumedh wrote: post #287
inthewoods wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or is it - to me Github is just another example of the developer tools market cycle. Reminds me a bit of the image hosting market - image hosting company is created and gains momentum, then has to monetize, so they add advertising and people start to drift away when someone else then creates the next image hosting site. In the developer space, it seems pretty much the same. SourceForge was good/cool until it wasn't,…

> when someone else then creates the next image hosting site. If I am not mistaken Imgur is doing quite well for many years now.

How is Imgur making money ?

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#307

Post by camus2 »

pm wrote: post #256
nunez wrote: post #205

SIX HUNDRED EMPLOYEES?! I don't care how advanced GitHub is; that is an INSANE number of employees for this kind of business!

~4000 for Twitter (although I vaguely recall a culling recently, not sure how many they let go).

I'm curious what does these 4000 employees do at Twitter ? let's say half of them are engineers, what are these 2000 engineers working on ? Twitter is mostly CRUD and messaging.

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#308

Post by flamedoge »

tlogan wrote: post #230
yesimahuman wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well my company is paying GitHub a lot of money right now so I'm not sure this really applies to customers that are real businesses.

It is funny that mention this: "paying GitHub a lot of money right now". Believe me: you are not paying as much as you should. Ask some people who were dev managers in 1990s how much was a single ClearCase license... The software is so cheap now...

> $4125/license.

jesus wtf

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#309

Post by Nition »

heartbreak wrote: post #206
josho wrote: post #102

This is an example of how VCs distort the market for other businesses. I had a recent conversation with a prospect and they took issue with the price of our software. Our app is in a specialized industry (ie. a smaller market). We charge a per use fee of $35. This fee enables our customer to immediately earn nearly $200 (a 5x return with no risk to them). Despite the significant benefit and profitability of using the…

Now try selling a $35 mobile app in the world of $0.99 and ad-supported free apps.

TuneLab[1] is doing OK as far as I know at a $500USD price point on the App Store.

[1] https://itunes.apple.com/nz/app/tunelab-piano-tuner/id335568...

Re: GitHub lost $66M in nine months of 2016

#310

Post by sumedh »

camus2 wrote: post #306
sumedh wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when someone else then creates the next image hosting site. If I am not mistaken Imgur is doing quite well for many years now.

How is Imgur making money ?

Ads, they are making good money from the ads that they removed paid plans and gave all the features to everyone.
Post reply on HN