Github Raises $100 Million • Hacker News Board

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#91

Post by herval » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 9:59 PM UTC

anon808 wrote: post #67

herval wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why would it ruin them? Given the valuation people are talking about, they sold less than 15% of the business - they'll probably retain enough control to do whatever they want with it and probably try new things... I personally know at least one company that has been profitable from the very beginning and took 3 rounds of VC already, always on the same terms: "we don't need your money, so we'll sell you a very small…

"with minimal risk" is it possible the maximal risk they encountered when building github with their own cash helped make the great product github is today? history has shown time and time again if you give someone a long enough rope they will hang themselves, doesn't mean that's githubs fate of course, but they're certainly opening a door of influence that wasn't around through the initial building of a great produc…

I'm not sure there is a correlation between little money and making great products - that's a link people (specially incubators and accelerators) try to force-feed on everyone's throats, but I'm not convinced if having no money produces better/more companies/products than having "too much" money. Anyway, that's all unrelated to the topic here :-)

If you give someone a short enough rope, they'll never be able to get out of the hole...

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#92

Post by mpolun » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 9:59 PM UTC

tonfa wrote: post #51

cdrxndr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A small, social coding startup that hosts the Linux kernel source tree. And has a cute logo.

> that hosts the Linux kernel source tree Wasn't that temporary during the kernel.org debacle?

There's a permanent mirror of it: https://github.com/mirrors/linux

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#93

Post by yan » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:00 PM UTC

danielharan wrote: post #50

yan wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love GitHub, but anyone else felt it was a little immodest for TPW to say they'd "hire Marc" if they could? Can't put it into words, but I don't feel that Tom is in the position to make that statement.

Really, "We wish we could hire them both" irks you? Sounds to me like a great heuristic for whether a person would be a good investor.

I realize it's a statement of praise, but I think Marc is legendary in the valley and an immensely successful investor/veteran of the business. Implying that he'd be in the running to become an employee at GitHub just felt off. Again, hard to put it into words.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#94

Post by pnathan » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:04 PM UTC

siong1987 wrote: post #86

Many people do not realize that Github has an enterprise product called github:enterprise. Aside the money they raised for this round, there are also help comes together from the VC, Andreessen Horowitz in this case. I don't have any experience in enterprise sales. But, from what I know, enterprise isn't a market that the best product always wins. Yes, Github definitely has one of the best products out there. But, th…

enterprise sales are radically different than open source evangelism, b2c sales, and small biz sales.

The difference is (literally and metaphorically) there is are suits involved.

A few key thoughts which are likely to apply:

- Per-customer customizations

- $100K+ per sale per customer

- 3 month to 3 year sales cycles

- Usable on Windows XP and IE6 (most likely).

- Certifications/audits (e.g., ISO9001).

I can easily see hiring 20-30 guys to sell/consult/customize for the enterprise market.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#95

Post by wavephorm » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:12 PM UTC

Why can't a company worth nearly a billion dollars just go public? There are thousands of public companies worth less than a billion. So why sell your soul to a VC who could push you into a situation that could make you implode, rather than raise money on an open market and give up less control?

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#96

Post by shepbook » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:13 PM UTC

zalew wrote: post #73

blhack wrote: post #31

Okay, a question: I have a github ( http://github.com/blhack -- nothing too interesting there), but only use it in the "free" way; saving my javascript stuff, and keeping track of some arduino projects. "Github" and "money" in the same thought here triggered me wondering about maybe buying a monthly plan from them, and letting them host all of my code for work, play, etc. (stuff I'm too embarrassed to release, ha) Ma…

> if this was $5/mo for unlimited repos, I'd have a plan now http://bitbucket.org $0/mo for unlimited repos, you got an even better plan now

One thing most people don't mention about bitbucket is the cost of their plans.

Github: $7/mo for 5 repos, unlimited collaborators.

Bitbucket: $0/mo for unlimited repos, 5 collaborators max. Then, it starts at $10/mo for 10 collaborators and continues at a tiered rate of $1/mo per collaborator until you hit $200/month. Only then is it unlimited on collaborators.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#97

Post by melvinmt » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:16 PM UTC

wavephorm wrote: post #95

Why can't a company worth nearly a billion dollars just go public? There are thousands of public companies worth less than a billion. So why sell your soul to a VC who could push you into a situation that could make you implode, rather than raise money on an open market and give up less control?

Give up less control with a public company, really?

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#98

Post by asmithmd1 » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:17 PM UTC

JonnieCache wrote: post #41

yuvadam wrote: post #21

I hate to crash the party, but this is a very odd move for an awesome company and a service that I use and Github has always been against taking money. Actually, TPW has used some very harsh words criticizing startups that choose to take VC money. Now, Github raises 100 gazillion dollars? How the f*ck do they plan on spending that wisely? Sure, it's nice to have that sum in the bank. But, in all honesty, someone has…

The person who figures out how to get movie/music studios and the like to use version control is going to be very, very rich.

How about requiring laws to use version control. As it is now bills go into conference committee and no one knows who added what provisions.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#99

Post by harryh » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:24 PM UTC

wavephorm wrote: post #95

Why can't a company worth nearly a billion dollars just go public? There are thousands of public companies worth less than a billion. So why sell your soul to a VC who could push you into a situation that could make you implode, rather than raise money on an open market and give up less control?

regulatory issues

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#100

Post by eupharis » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:24 PM UTC

JonnieCache wrote: post #41

yuvadam wrote: post #21

I hate to crash the party, but this is a very odd move for an awesome company and a service that I use and Github has always been against taking money. Actually, TPW has used some very harsh words criticizing startups that choose to take VC money. Now, Github raises 100 gazillion dollars? How the f*ck do they plan on spending that wisely? Sure, it's nice to have that sum in the bank. But, in all honesty, someone has…

The person who figures out how to get movie/music studios and the like to use version control is going to be very, very rich.

Not just movie/music studios. Who could reap huge rewards from great distributed version control? Anyone who collaborates on some computer file regularly.

So everyone. Or at least everyone who works in an office.

My own erstwhile field of small business accounting is all about version control. An enormous amount of energy goes into keeping tabs on which file is most current and ensuring that work isn't done in a non-current file.

Same thing for anyone who regularly collaborates on documents or spreadsheets or images: lawyers, advertisers, my friend the outdoor school counselor, journalists, etc.

The state of the art here isn't very good. For all the products out there, I'd guess 90% of actual version control happens via emails. Case in point:

A journalist friend of mine is currently attempting a small intra-office coup to switch from Email/Excel to Asana for scheduling and managing the editing process. It is not going well. Email/Excel will probably win.

But the old people won't be around forever. The opportunities to improve on the state of the art are vast. The amount of energy people spend on keeping current could be dramatically reduced.

Github has plenty of potential.