Tell HN: Amplitude (YC W12) just went public – AMA

The fees are actually the same between a traditional IPO as well as a direct listing. We ended up paying $15M or so all in between everyone. The reason some banks push you to a traditional IPO is that their real clients- public market investors like hedge funds who to repeat business with them, get a good deal on your stock.

I heard all the expected ones: not having control over your price, wanting a monotonically increasing stock price, having the price trade up on the opening for good press. It's all bullshit, if you read any of the coverage on Amplitude we were able to achieve all the goals we wanted to: https://www.google.com/search?q=amplitude&tbm=nws

My absolute favorite argument was that if you price too high, you price out people who will stick with you, and that will cause your price to be lower in the future than it would have been otherwise. Luckily, I did a year in the finance world in high frequency trading so they couldn't pull this one on me. That logic is the opposite of how pricing in a market works. High prices now are a signal that prices in the future are expected to be higher. If you want your price to be higher in the future, having it be higher in the present will increase the likelihood of that outcome. The thinking reminded me of Yogi Berra's famous quote: "Nobody goes there anymore. It's too crowded."

I know a bunch of other companies planning to go public were watching our direct listing to see if it was a viable path and I hope our results convince them. Please reach out if you're a CEO and trying to figure this out!

PS: Definitely a huge congrats on this journey and outcome.

There are 3 main reasons we decided to go public:

1) The market opportunity is massive and we believe we are entering the "inside the tornado" phase where there are increasing returns to leadership. We're seeing more mainstream adoption of Amplitude as well as more companies giving a similar sounding pitch to us and we want every advantage we can have. Being public helps contribute towards that. As an example, we've gotten more press in the last 24 hours then we have in all of Amplitude's existence.

2) Having a liquid currency for our stock allows us to be much more aggressive about acquisitions and other similar moves.

3) You really should take your company public once you reach 100M in ARR. The expectation for performance across the board goes up and good companies rise to meet the moment. You're expected to do a better job of forecasting and planning your business, telling your story, sharing your long term vision, ensuring proper financial and legal oversight, and a lot else. Companies staying private so much longer has been bad for the them and for the ecosystem IMO.

We hired Morgan Stanley as our lead investment banker. As we were meeting with different banks, they were the only ones who really understood my frustration with the traditional IPO process. They also have the most expertise by far with direct listings. I was expecting a lot of resistance to my views from everyone involved in the process but talking to them was like finding a partner who I wouldn't have to constantly fight to run the public listing process "my way". Colin Stewart at MS is also probably the single most knowledgable individual on IPO/DL capital markets in the entire world.

I'll reply to some of the other questions in another comment.

>As an example, we've gotten more press in the last 24 hours then we have in all of Amplitude's existence.

The spike is certainly welcome. Would you attribute this to the product being invisible to consumers (not something to talk about), or that the company has focused more on the product and revenue until going public, and now it will "do press" (if this is too "forward-looking", a general view on a hypothetical company). How do you measure the impact of public relations in general on the company's objectives?

Has the link between a flamboyant/controversial CEO and press been discussed?

>We hired Morgan Stanley as our lead investment banker. As we were meeting with different banks, they were the only ones who really understood my frustration with the traditional IPO process. They also have the most expertise by far with direct listings. I was expecting a lot of resistance to my views from everyone involved in the process but talking to them was like finding a partner who I wouldn't have to constantly fight to run the public listing process "my way". Colin Stewart at MS is also probably the single most knowledgable individual on IPO/DL capital markets in the entire world.

Was going with Morgan Stanley influenced by the fact Asana did the same. From what I've read, you were both with Benchmark and you're the second to do a direct listing there. Is it a "why change something that works"? If so, was there a "here's what worked, here's what didn't with Asana or Here's how to do it better next time"?

Thanks again,

Raising our seed round was brutal. It took 6 months end to end and was one of the lowest points for me personally. I was trying to scrape together $1M in $50k chunks from any angel who would give us money. We ended up having to lean on our background as founders (MIT engineers, winners of the Battlecode programming competition) to convince the first set of VCs to come in.

Once we started showing traction (0-$1M in ARR in 9 months) we went like hotcakes in our Series A and beyond.

The real test is do customers buy. If you can show that everything will follow. VCs are weak predictors of market success. There's some signal, but they get it wrong almost as often as they get it right. If you close 3-4 paying customers I guarantee you they will change their tune. The incumbency argument is pretty weak IMO, particularly in B2B. Markets are so massive these days it's easy to carve out a large niche. For example, Freshworks went public last week even though Salesforce "dominates" cloud CRM.