Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 280 posts

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#181

Post by vxNsr »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #72
Artemis2 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Names are always available when you have some money to invest in buying rights and domains.

The name is Inbox App, not Inbox. Nothing special there. I'm willing to bet that they'll have significant problems with the name if they try to call it just "Inbox". First, they didn't even get the inbox.com domain, theirs is inboxapp.com. Second, they don't seem to have a trademark on the product name as "Inbox" and I doubt that they'd get one. Third, their company name is Inbox App, Inc., so it doesn't seem like th…

Interestingly inbox.com seems stuck in 2003.

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#182

Post by JetSpiegel »

spang wrote: post #62
mikeryan wrote: post #30

You ever see those commercial restaurant spaces which seem like a good spot on paper, but every restaurant that goes into it seems to fail? Thats kind of how I feel about all the "We fixed email" startups. A real pain point but one I'd never want to tackle since there doesn't seem to be one "I've fixed it" solution.

Hi there, Christine from Inbox here. That's why we're tackling the problem from a platform level, not building one specific product---it's obvious to us that the ways folks are using email these days are so varied that no one thing solves them all. A better toolset allows many different solutions.

What do you mean, "platform"? Where's the RFC?

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#183

Post by juliangamble »

I've heard "the future of email" before: http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/31/first-impressions-on-fluent... This seems very similar to fluent.io - an email startup by Dhanji Prasanna. http://rethrick.com/#rip-fluent http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australian-ex-googlers-ema...

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#184

Post by alexqgb »

personZ wrote: post #18
Agathos wrote: post #10

“Inbox is an email company. Google is an advertising company. This product is our focus, and will not be ‘discontinued’ unexpectedly.” Burn! Very amusing. But for all we know they will be acqui-hired, maybe even by Google, and then shifted to a different project.

Indeed, the probability of this being discontinued, if it follows normal trends, is dramatically higher than pretty much any Google product, and worse the notion that the "product is their focus" is specious: getting investment cash or a buyout is their focus, as it is with virtually all startups. Moralizing or taking shots at competitors is a dangerous tactic when you live in a glass house.

Yes. See Sparrow for details / confirmation.

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#185

Post by mkal_tsr »

izolate wrote: post #177
gwillen wrote: post #24

Your claim that your product will not be discontinued is worthless. If you're so sure of that, put your money where your mouth is, and offer an SLA with a contractual minimum duration you promise to keep the service up, and significant monetary penalties if you fail to meet it. Doesn't sound like a good idea? Then shut up.

If it's any consolation, if I were to post something to HN, I'd appreciate this kind of brutal honesty above everything else. But I suspect I'm in the minority.

Yup. And let's not forget, that's usually for Show HN, whereas this is a full-on company release/announcement ... not the typical "check out what I made over the week/weekend" where there are bound to be more flaws by virtue of short development time.

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#186

Post by pbiggar »

timdierks wrote: post #180
pbiggar wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're actually wrong about VC goals. Yes VCs look for acquisitions, but acquisitions only really move the needle when they're really big (>$100m). Anyone acquiring for those amounts aren't going to shut the product down.

It's pretty easy to name any number of >$100M acquisitions that have been shut down. Regardless, that's only a goal of VCs: there's no shortage of VC-funded companies that have been sold for far less than $100M when they couldn't raise the next round at a palatable price. No startup company can make a defensible claim that their product will be around for the long haul.

> It's pretty easy to name any number of >$100M acquisitions that have been shut down.

In the B2B space in the last decade? Please go ahead! Name 5 off the top of your head and I'll concede the point.

> that have been sold for far less than $100M when they couldn't raise the next round

Sure, but the question was about what VCs _want_.

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#187

Post by Spooky23 »

arasmussen wrote: post #133
Spooky23 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is? I've routinely used email like an IM system with folks in different companies. GMail will spool email in <30 seconds. Exchange can be near instantaneous.

My gmail email regularly doesn't make it to my inbox until more than 10 minutes after it has been sent. It fucking blows.

I'm glad we picked Office 365 over Goog

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#188

Post by pbiggar »

stephen wrote: post #81
grinich wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said this in the other thread and I know it sounds cliché, but we're not planning to "go away" or get acquired or something. We've always positioned this company as a long-term play, and made that very clear when hiring, raising money, etc. It's just not possible to go after something big if you plan to "flip" the company quickly.

> but we're not planning to "go away" or get acquired or something If you've taken VC money, haven't you already gave up that choice? Despite pretenses, the VCs are going to want: a) IPO or b) acquisition. Since you assert b) is not your plan, do you really think you can become a $100m/year company (IPO) by charging for something that Google/MS/everyone else provides for free? Perhaps I am too pessimistic (or realist…

To address the VC issue the poster and subposters are talking about:

> If you've taken VC money, haven't you already gave up that choice

> if your current VCs aren't able to change your mind, and they get angry as a result,

> Or exercise their Board powers and fire the CEO when push comes to shove.

> if your current VCs aren't able to change your mind, and they get angry as a result, just their absence alone from future funding rounds

Basically, you don't know what you're talking about. Look at the VCs involved, and try to make a case for how this could work!

Fuel Capital is a $20m fund. SVAngel doesn't take board seats. Data Collective does take board seats in A rounds, but its super unlikely they have one here. Crunchfund is a small seed fund.

All of these guys are microVCs/super angels, with <=$200m funds each. They don't take board seats in seed rounds, and I would wager a significant sum that they have basically no way to affect what Inbox wants to do. If the investors get a monthly email outlining the company's performance, they would consider themselves lucky.

Re: MIT And Dropbox Alums Launch Inbox, a Next-Generation Email Platform

#189

Post by PeterGriffin »

personZ wrote: post #18
Agathos wrote: post #10

“Inbox is an email company. Google is an advertising company. This product is our focus, and will not be ‘discontinued’ unexpectedly.” Burn! Very amusing. But for all we know they will be acqui-hired, maybe even by Google, and then shifted to a different project.

Indeed, the probability of this being discontinued, if it follows normal trends, is dramatically higher than pretty much any Google product, and worse the notion that the "product is their focus" is specious: getting investment cash or a buyout is their focus, as it is with virtually all startups. Moralizing or taking shots at competitors is a dangerous tactic when you live in a glass house.

I'm an idiot, but I'm willing to believe there are still people out there who love what they do, and would stand by it, even if Corporation X comes knocking on the door with a pot of gold.

I'd rather cheer for them and be disappointed, than dismiss them in advance and live my life perceiving the world through a cynical lens.

Huh. I didn't know I can write so dramatically. You catch my drift, though.

Post reply on HN