Github Raises $100 Million • Hacker News Board

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#111

Post by why-el » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:49 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #30

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…

Pulling from an old blog post, I don't see any inconsistency. http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/10/18/optimize-for-happin... > The ironic thing about bootstrapping and venture capital is that once you demonstrate some success, investors will come to YOU. When this happens you will be in a much better place to make a more reasoned choice about taking on additional capital and all the complexities that come with it. T…

I don't see any inconsistency whatsoever between the post you link to and what just happened. Tom was clearly talking about early funding, essentially when you just started, and how that can affect your product and its future. The fact that they raised that much actually proves Tom's point: That you should approach VC money from a strong position, which you can't reach if you start off with VCs watching over you.

Update: This post[1] (Above for the moment) says it better.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4220725

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#112

Post by ihodes » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:49 PM UTC

rmoriz wrote: post #87

courtewing wrote: post #76

I'm a little surprised by all of the anti-VC sentiment in this thread so far, especially from this community. I'm perhaps even more surprised by the "what do they need 100 million dollars" sentiment that is being floated around. Github is an impressive company that has, so far, blown away its competition in many aspects. The fact that they have been self-bootstrapped up until this point and that they are profitable t…

I bet nobody here as anything bad to say about the exceptional skills of the github team. However such a huge investment may force them to "overscale" in order to be able to reach the expected return (by the VC). As some communities, e.g. the Ruby community, is approx. based 99% on github, I fully understand and have a strange feeling myself. Time will tell if TPW and AH can work together and make an even bigger succ…

>However such a huge investment may force them to "overscale" in order to be able to reach the expected return (by the VC).

But how can we know that's even an issue? There are a hundred hypotheticals here (both positive and negative), and focusing on the ones that would only be the case were Andreessen Horowitz & GitHub unwise companies seems unnecessarily negative.

Now, if there were reason to think any of them, that'd be one thing. But we only know there was a huge investment in an awesome company from a great VC firm.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#113

Post by zevyoura » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 10:52 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?

They sold ~13% of the company. Compared to going public, I'm pretty sure they're keeping way more control. Also, going public is extremely expensive and time consuming.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#114

Post by DigitalSea » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:00 PM UTC

So much negativity here regarding the capital announcement. Github got to where it is now from now investment and you want to know the reason why they accepted such a large amount of capital (it's rather simple), Github are wanting to infiltrate the corporate sector because that's where the money is. Lets be honest the $10 per month I pay for my Github account isn't making any difference, a corporation paying $1000 per month to exclusively use Github to manage their code? Now that's making a difference.

To expand you need cash, take this as a sign that Github is going to expand heavily in every direction. As an avid Githubber I am ecstatic about this, it's a testament to the product and a good sign Github is never going anywhere.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#115

Post by zeruch » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:00 PM UTC

"Little known..." ? Granted, Github isn't eBay, but its hardly obscure, especially within its domain space.

The article is otherwise fairly flat about why it might be valued so high. I'm not saying it's fully justified, but the writer clearly did not seem to understand what he was actually writing about.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#116

Post by nostromo » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:02 PM UTC

why-el wrote: post #111

nostromo wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulling from an old blog post, I don't see any inconsistency. http://tom.preston-werner.com/2010/10/18/optimize-for-happin... > The ironic thing about bootstrapping and venture capital is that once you demonstrate some success, investors will come to YOU. When this happens you will be in a much better place to make a more reasoned choice about taking on additional capital and all the complexities that come with it. T…

I don't see any inconsistency whatsoever between the post you link to and what just happened. Tom was clearly talking about early funding, essentially when you just started, and how that can affect your product and its future. The fact that they raised that much actually proves Tom's point: That you should approach VC money from a strong position, which you can't reach if you start off with VCs watching over you. Upd…

Perhaps you misread my comment? I specifically say, "I don't see any inconsistency."

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#117

Post by saraid216 » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:04 PM UTC

yan wrote: post #93

danielharan wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

...the entire point of that statement was that he's not in the running.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#118

Post by marcamillion » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:15 PM UTC

yan wrote: post #33

leftnode wrote: post #12

https://github.com/blog/1189-investing-in-github Straight from them. Congratulations on building such a great business.

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.

Yeh...to be honest...that kinda irked me too. It feels like he is trying to assert his "geek cred", by making sure both Marc and Github's users know who is still in charge.

But it feels a bit trite.

That being said, I wish them all the best. The truth is, if there is anyone that I think would be an awesome partner for Github it is AH. So I hope they do awesome stuff together.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#119

Post by getsat » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:18 PM UTC

base698 wrote: post #15

They certainly deserve it. They have a clear business model that makes money now and a gorgeous product. Look forward to seeing more Octocat in SOMA :)

I am looking forward to the billboard on 101. If Basho and NewRelic can have one, so can GitHub.

Re: Github Raises $100 Million

#120

Post by SethMurphy » Mon, Jul 09, 2012, 11:20 PM UTC

I am a paying customer and quite torn over what to think.

On one hand I feel like my favorite indie band just got signed by a major record label. I will lose the intimacy, or cool factor, I felt as I first enjoyed them. However, isn't it better for all to enjoy them? Especially if they have been signed by the best record company of the bunch? I really have no reason to find this analogy a bad thing.

On the other hand I think, why does every company feel the need to take over the world? Can't you be satisfied? At what point have you done enough? I already see Github as a success, and I fear for the founders that true satisfaction will never come. For the most ambitious it probably never does. I do not see this as a good sign for the future of Internet businesses in general. I would rather see more small businesses than fewer large. I think many aspiring hackers have lost a role model today, and VC's everywhere are cheering as a big game trophy has been reeled in.