This app is nothing unique or new, here's another in the same space:
Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
41–50 of 139 posts
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#42Call me old-school, but I still don't buy into these "revenue multiple" nonsense. Traditional valuation metrics like PER, EV/EBITDA, DCF etc. all tie back in one way or another to the cashflow-generating potential of a company. Revenue multiples have, at best, only tenuous relationship to cashflow. If you sell $10 notes for $1, in theory you can have infinite revenue. I wish investors would just stop pretending tech…
I've done a DCF of a tech SaaS S-1 to test at the advice of a friend who is a PM in tech at a hedge fund. It still seems like magic, and even more so then, but it penciled. Sponsor got in with the last pre-IPO round (think like a Wellington/Fidelity who essentially buys their IPO allocation by entering slightly early) at $3.5B, IPO was $4.5B, and Friday night post dinner w/ redbull DCF spit out ~~$5.0B to $6.5B. Afte…
How do you explain Tesla’s 1200 PE ratio despite its COGS, working capital and CAPEX?
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#43Isn't Slackifying email just Slack?
I really do not get the fundamental pitch from slack that they will replace email. They replaced IRC . It's nothing like email and I still use both.
The times I've seen a Slack transition, email usage fell by 80% or more. With my current employer, Slack is used for almost everything in team. Email has become more about conversations with external people. Except the ones that we interact with enough that they're now in our Slack.
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#44Call me old-school, but I still don't buy into these "revenue multiple" nonsense. Traditional valuation metrics like PER, EV/EBITDA, DCF etc. all tie back in one way or another to the cashflow-generating potential of a company. Revenue multiples have, at best, only tenuous relationship to cashflow. If you sell $10 notes for $1, in theory you can have infinite revenue. I wish investors would just stop pretending tech…
A 7x revenue multiple < 15x ebitda multiple with 50+% free cash flows. That’s that most old school investors can’t seem to understand. Weird. Basic math.
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#45>$49/$79 per user billed annually. Seriously who pays for such a rudimentary product all that money. The pricing doesn't make any sense.
Customer support teams would, easily, to manage shared inboxes. Competition includes Salesforce Desk ($75/mo), HelpScout ($35/mo), Zendesk ($89), and so on.
And if Front's shooting for the broader business email market, well, you have Superhuman ($30/mo) at least closer to that price range.
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#46> Front is like Slack for your email, except instead of creating another distracting, noisy, always-on tool, Front allows users to spin up ephemeral chats within email threads themselves.
That's the exact opposite of what I'd want. Most small businesses have the same email problem that I always feel like I do. Too many requests come in via email and it's hard to track, discuss, resolve, and (at a later date) reference all that info.
This is what I wanted on MS365:
- Forward an email to a special address. Ex: ryan29@todo.example.com (the TODO address for ryan29@example.com).
- Use Power Automate to create a Teams channel for the email.
- Use Power Automate to post some cards to the channel; one to (optionally) create a Planner Task, one to resolve the topic.
- Notify @ryan29 about the new topic.
- I deal with the topic. If it's long lived or complex, I create a Task. If I need input, I @mention others that can help. If it's simple 5-15 minute thing, I do the work and click the link to resolve the topic.
- When the topic is closed (by link or by closing the related task), the Teams channel is archived and the original email thread gets a reply saying it's done with a link to the Teams channel.
That way all conversation about the task is consolidated into Teams, long lived tasks are tracked via Planner, email stays relatively clean from internal communication, and I don't waste a bunch of time dealing with some 3rd party's idea of optimal workflows or value adds.
The issues I had were that Teams, Planner, etc. have limits on the number of channels / tasks and Power Automate / Teams lacked some functionality that would make it really streamlined.
However, I was close enough after a few hours of playing around that I can't believe something like "adding Slack chat to email threads" is a $1 billion problem.
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#47Slackifying e-mail sounds like a nightmare to me. Email is about perfect for what it was designed. I check it when I want to check it, few Times a day. We (as humanity) really give up more and more of our most precious resources: attention and deep focus.
To say “slackifying” is offensive to Front. I HATE Slack. For me, it turns into a gross “pinging you” and overall is insanely annoying to be in channels and check back on information. Or, finding files or using search is Hell. Not to mention their insanely painful login experience. I am looking forward to its death at CRM. Front is the real deal. Hands down the greatest productivity software I’ve used in YEARS. If yo…
I don't get this. I looked at the Front landing page and it mentions communications with customers. Not a tool I have a use for.
I'm not a big fan of Slack, but it is the best of the chat apps, and I do see a need for team chat for collaboration.
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#48I feel talking about DAUs is a little deceptive for enterprise software given that 'users' are essentially forced to not only use their employer's software stack, but use it daily
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've done a DCF of a tech SaaS S-1 to test at the advice of a friend who is a PM in tech at a hedge fund. It still seems like magic, and even more so then, but it penciled. Sponsor got in with the last pre-IPO round (think like a Wellington/Fidelity who essentially buys their IPO allocation by entering slightly early) at $3.5B, IPO was $4.5B, and Friday night post dinner w/ redbull DCF spit out ~~$5.0B to $6.5B. Afte…
How do you explain Tesla’s 1200 PE ratio despite its COGS, working capital and CAPEX?
It wasn’t Tesla. Sorry, don’t trade. Enterprise B2B SaaS. :)
Re: Front: The $1.3B Startup Slackifying Email
#50Can people still passive-aggressively cc my boss on emails to me when they want me to drop everything to work on their special issue?
[deleted]