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

Sortfolio lives

37signals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 75 posts

Re: Sortfolio lives

#11

Post by thaumaturgy »

aeurielesn wrote: post #6

I would like to see how this developed from [1] to this sale. It seemed improbable back then. [1]: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4087116

I'd like to see that too, just for curiosity. I expect that'll be up to the new owner though.

> It seemed improbable back then.

Naw. You have to keep in mind that the HN community has gathered around a very specific way of doing business. Where people start to make a mistake is in thinking that this is how the rest of the world works too, and that there isn't any other way to do business.

There is still a huge amount of activity in the business world that revolves around long-term, sustainable, profitable businesses, especially those coming from people with the kind of reputation that 37Signals has. It's just that all those people don't have their own little online community where they share notes.

(If 37Signals offered such a community, I'd sign up in a heartbeat and my HN activity would finally finish it's long descent to 0.)

I didn't think it was improbable. 37Signals knows what they're doing.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#12

Post by chawkins »

I was really, really skeptical that they'd be able to get full price. But sure enough, DHH responded to my comment and confirmed that they did. That's pretty amazing.

Now we'll see how the site does once it is no longer associated with 37s. Maybe we'll be surprised again. it would be great to see Sortfolio thrive in the long-term.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#13

Post by citricsquid »

dhh wrote: post #3
ForrestN wrote: post #2

Wow! From DHH in the comments, it appears it did sell for the full asking price. Very curious to know more about the new owners. Buying a business outright and then running it isn't a scenario that gets covered very often on the startup behind-the-scenes circuit. Here's hoping we get some follow-up posts about how it goes for the new owners on SVN.

Yes, despite the HN peanut gallery's perception of the world, there is actually a market for profitable businesses. It's surely less exciting than selling your no-revenue photo service for a billion dollars, but that's ok. We'll be sure to follow the life of Sortfolio after the sale.

uh, you are aware the majority of negativity and questioning about the asking price was because you did not at any point answer whether or not billing information (and subscriptions) would be kept, even when people on the Flippa auction requested this information?

If you'd said from the start this was the case you'd have got many more bids, on HN alone I saw many comments from people stating they would bid if this was the case.

Maybe I missed something big or I'm not aware of something, but this was what the negativity was about, not the fact that the site is worthless and can't sell.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#14

Post by larrys »

dhh wrote: post #7
larrys wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love a post on how the price was set at 480k and why specifically you weren't willing to sell for anything less than that figure. Why you drew that line in the sand. Must have been more going on here than meets the eye. If I had to guess I'd would say that the people who bought the site had offered 480k but you didn't want to say that you had a solid offer for a certain amount. Speculating that you told them you…

Yeah, you got us figured out. We had an offer, sat on it, invented this story to see if we could get more, and played the world for a fool. BUT YOU BUSTED US. OH NOOOOES! Or, of course, the simpler explanation: We thought the site was worth at least 2x the previous year's take. And if we didn't get that, it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction.

I have no idea what I said to get a response like that.

There is nothing wrong with what I proposed as a reason and it certainly doesn't rise to the level of "played the world for a fool." in any way.

"We thought the site was worth at least 2x the previous year's take. And if we didn't get that, it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction."

"it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction."

Your attitude is a total outlier. Enjoy your arrogance. You've got plenty of years to go to see how that works going forward.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#15

Post by jasonfried »

shazow wrote: post #10

There were so many unanswered questions in the Flippa posting and the HN "peanut gallery" that it makes me feel like 37signals was never looking for new buyers. Perhaps they already had a buyer in mind and just needed some negotiation leverage or wanted some free publicity. I imagine people who were genuinely interested in bidding for Sortfolio feel a bit cheated with this announcement coming out of the blue.

FYI, I responded to select private Flippa messages from buyers I considered to be qualified. If someone was serious about spending $480,000, they should have gotten in touch privately and demonstrated that they were serious, qualified buyers.

Everyone had an equal chance to buy Sortfolio - one party stepped up and got it done.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#16

Post by dhh »

shazow wrote: post #10

There were so many unanswered questions in the Flippa posting and the HN "peanut gallery" that it makes me feel like 37signals was never looking for new buyers. Perhaps they already had a buyer in mind and just needed some negotiation leverage or wanted some free publicity. I imagine people who were genuinely interested in bidding for Sortfolio feel a bit cheated with this announcement coming out of the blue.

Here's another wild theory: The buyers contacted us directly, got the answers to the questions they sought, and closed the deal.

Also, this is not out of the blue. We lost interest in considering all sorts of complicated deals a while back. So we told everyone that the price was $480K and that the deadline for closing a deal was July 1st: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3172-sortfolio-going-once-goi...

So there was really no "bidding" after that point. It was quite simple: Give us $480K and the site is yours. The new buyer's did just that. End of story.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#17

Post by jasonfried »

citricsquid wrote: post #13
dhh wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, despite the HN peanut gallery's perception of the world, there is actually a market for profitable businesses. It's surely less exciting than selling your no-revenue photo service for a billion dollars, but that's ok. We'll be sure to follow the life of Sortfolio after the sale.

uh, you are aware the majority of negativity and questioning about the asking price was because you did not at any point answer whether or not billing information (and subscriptions) would be kept, even when people on the Flippa auction requested this information? If you'd said from the start this was the case you'd have got many more bids, on HN alone I saw many comments from people stating they would bid if this wa…

Anyone who was a qualified buyer, and asked privately, got the answer. Lots of people asked privately. We even put serious buyers in touch with our credit card processing company so they could get additional questions answered directly.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#18

Post by mnicole »

larrys wrote: post #14
dhh wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you got us figured out. We had an offer, sat on it, invented this story to see if we could get more, and played the world for a fool. BUT YOU BUSTED US. OH NOOOOES! Or, of course, the simpler explanation: We thought the site was worth at least 2x the previous year's take. And if we didn't get that, it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction.

I have no idea what I said to get a response like that. There is nothing wrong with what I proposed as a reason and it certainly doesn't rise to the level of "played the world for a fool." in any way. "We thought the site was worth at least 2x the previous year's take. And if we didn't get that, it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction." "it wasn't worth our time to deal with the transaction." Your attit…

Don't take it too harshly, the site is the equivalent of the web design listings on CraigsList without the extra clicks.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#19

Post by shazow »

dhh wrote: post #16
shazow wrote: post #10

There were so many unanswered questions in the Flippa posting and the HN "peanut gallery" that it makes me feel like 37signals was never looking for new buyers. Perhaps they already had a buyer in mind and just needed some negotiation leverage or wanted some free publicity. I imagine people who were genuinely interested in bidding for Sortfolio feel a bit cheated with this announcement coming out of the blue.

Here's another wild theory: The buyers contacted us directly, got the answers to the questions they sought, and closed the deal. Also, this is not out of the blue. We lost interest in considering all sorts of complicated deals a while back. So we told everyone that the price was $480K and that the deadline for closing a deal was July 1st: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3172-sortfolio-going-once-goi... So there was re…

That's a nice theory.

Would be nice if it was an actual update in the original thread instead of leaving us to speculate, though.

Edit: Thanks for this update at least. Congrats on the sale.

Re: Sortfolio lives

#20

Post by richardv »

dhh wrote: post #16
shazow wrote: post #10

There were so many unanswered questions in the Flippa posting and the HN "peanut gallery" that it makes me feel like 37signals was never looking for new buyers. Perhaps they already had a buyer in mind and just needed some negotiation leverage or wanted some free publicity. I imagine people who were genuinely interested in bidding for Sortfolio feel a bit cheated with this announcement coming out of the blue.

Here's another wild theory: The buyers contacted us directly, got the answers to the questions they sought, and closed the deal. Also, this is not out of the blue. We lost interest in considering all sorts of complicated deals a while back. So we told everyone that the price was $480K and that the deadline for closing a deal was July 1st: http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3172-sortfolio-going-once-goi... So there was re…

Why are you always so bitter to people asking straight questions?

If you didn't want people to draw their own conclusions then you should have acted responsibly and made some attempt to answer and respond to the questions posted on sale page.

If you had no intention of providing this additional information because it was not worth your time, then you should have made it clear to people that no additional information would be forthcoming.

Instead, all the "chinese whispers" of people throwing ideas around seems to have really got you disgruntled, when you only have yourself to blame, and then you take your arrogance out on people asking straight and to point questions.

Do I think you got the $480k asking price? shrugs

Post reply on HN