Live data from Hacker News

Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

balsamiq.com

31–40 of 73 posts

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#31

To what extent did the publicity contribute to his success though?

It is obviously a large part, but he did not get that publicity automatically. It seems he worked out and implemented a very effective strategy for getting that publicity organically. So, plenty of hard work and ingenuity involved there as well.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#32
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this discussion with a (huge) US corporation, and they weren't interested in escrow, saying it was too complex. They wanted source code; and I had the impression that with appropriate license restrictions (i.e. they couldn't sell/distribute it) it wouldn't be a problem (actually, having source would help them give me bug reports). A secondary reason (or perhaps the true one?) was a sense of reassurance that the…

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

One note about Id and their open source: they "only" release the source for their old engines, the most recent one is closed and licensed.

Giving something away -after- it has earned you a billion is less risky than doing it -before- you've earned the money.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#33
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this discussion with a (huge) US corporation, and they weren't interested in escrow, saying it was too complex. They wanted source code; and I had the impression that with appropriate license restrictions (i.e. they couldn't sell/distribute it) it wouldn't be a problem (actually, having source would help them give me bug reports). A secondary reason (or perhaps the true one?) was a sense of reassurance that the…

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

Great food for thought. But I would not so lightly consider suing as the answer to anything. It's really really expensive, it distracts you from what you really want to be doing and it grinds your nerves to a pulp.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#34
post #33
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

Great food for thought. But I would not so lightly consider suing as the answer to anything. It's really really expensive, it distracts you from what you really want to be doing and it grinds your nerves to a pulp.

Yeah, that's a great point. I'm just saying that if someone clones your product and it actually harms you, then you do have a way of putting a stop to that, even if it's an expensive fight.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#35
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this discussion with a (huge) US corporation, and they weren't interested in escrow, saying it was too complex. They wanted source code; and I had the impression that with appropriate license restrictions (i.e. they couldn't sell/distribute it) it wouldn't be a problem (actually, having source would help them give me bug reports). A secondary reason (or perhaps the true one?) was a sense of reassurance that the…

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

I don't think open-sourcing an entire product is a good idea (at least on launch). However, open-sourcing components (such as your internal tools, file specs, libraries, etc) can add as much value to the open source ecosystem while preserving your competitive advantages.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#36
post #35
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

I don't think open-sourcing an entire product is a good idea (at least on launch). However, open-sourcing components (such as your internal tools, file specs, libraries, etc) can add as much value to the open source ecosystem while preserving your competitive advantages.

In the case of crypto/security, open sourcing your algorithms and protocols can be a big win. You get free vetting of the security of your system. If you use LGPL or another suitable license, then you can still keep other parts of your product closed. Those are the parts that actually give your product "polish" and add the most value.

(I am considering doing this for a password vault app.)

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#37
post #18

Single founder + non-startup hub + non-web2.0-buzzworthy product == everything you're told not to do. I've said this before, but the biggest takeaway from the balsamiq story seems to be: put your head down and focus on making a great product, everything else will follow.

put your head down and focus on making a great product, everything else will follow

And market the hell out of it.

The Balsamiq approach to marketing (market the success story) is quite similar to that of 37Signals, actually, and both essential and very effective.

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#38
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this discussion with a (huge) US corporation, and they weren't interested in escrow, saying it was too complex. They wanted source code; and I had the impression that with appropriate license restrictions (i.e. they couldn't sell/distribute it) it wouldn't be a problem (actually, having source would help them give me bug reports). A secondary reason (or perhaps the true one?) was a sense of reassurance that the…

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

While you mention that many of the benefits of keeping the source closed are either false or unimportant to you, you don't really give any compelling reason to open the source.

Your argument for open sourcing your product is simply "why not?" rather than "why" :)

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#39
post #20
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had this discussion with a (huge) US corporation, and they weren't interested in escrow, saying it was too complex. They wanted source code; and I had the impression that with appropriate license restrictions (i.e. they couldn't sell/distribute it) it wouldn't be a problem (actually, having source would help them give me bug reports). A secondary reason (or perhaps the true one?) was a sense of reassurance that the…

Personally, I feel that we worry way too much about keeping our source code top-secret. One reason people think source code is valuable is because "the resulting product is valuable, so therefore the source code is even more valuable, right?" ... well, no. The product is valuable because of the thousands of small decisions you made as you were developing the product. The source code is just the manifestation of those…

Some other options: You could open source the engine, but not code that is specific to the game (then people couldn't run the game). For a legal distinction, you can also make source available, without making it open source. e.g. "look, modify but don't redistribute." See the creative commons licenses. Or make it available only to buyers of the software.

A benefit to open sourcing the engine: it would make it possible to become a platform, with other games built on it - and the publicity etc could help you. (Of course, open-sourcing isn't enough to automatically have your platform adopted - you'd have to promote it and work at it. More work!)

BTW: your art assets are copyrighted automatically. You don't have to do anything (in the past this was necessary in some jurisdictions).

The vast majority of companies choose not to open source their products. It's therefore hard to draw conclusions from what happens to those that do. Please forgive me for this parody, it's for illustration purposes only: can you find just one example of a company that failed or was harmed because they exploded a hydrogen bomb in their head office?

balsamiq on piracy: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=337821

esr discusses id's decision (near the end) in the section "when to be open, when to be closed": http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/magic-cau...

Re: Balsamiq hits $100,000 in revenue

#40
post #16

It's been excellent to follow Balsamiq's progress and I'm stunned by the progress he's made. Congrats and here's hoping for the best for you. Just remember, don't overdo it. $100,000 isn't much in the grand scheme of things, so keep pinching those pennies!

yeah I think he is starting to miss the point, since he is starting to think of himself as a small business and not a start up. $100K on the startup scale is nothing

$100k of return on investment is more than most start-ups ever see.

If you raise $50m, you don't have $50m - you have negative $50m, because that's $50m of value that you're going to have to create before you've even just returned their base investment to your investors.

Post reply on HN