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

Gitlab S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 295 posts

Re: Gitlab S-1

#151

Post by nzealand »

Wronnay wrote: post #99

Last valuation was $6 billion, they initially wanted to go public in November of 2020 but because of COVID they delayed it. Doesn't sound cheap to me for a company who isn't profitable yet... (Microsoft payed 7,5 billion for GitHub and I think we can all agree that GitLab isn't used as much so nearly the same valuations seems a bit high too me)

Tech valuations have doubled over the last four years.

The simplest heuristic is price/sales ratios.

Money losing companies that are doubling their revenue are currently going for nosebleed ps ratios of 40-100, which equates to $5-$13b market cap.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#152

Post by eljimmy »

I wonder if this could be considered as a pseudo index fund of the general tech sector as they essentially exist to serve tech-oriented companies.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#153

Post by b9a2cab5 »

greghendershott wrote: post #88
alberth wrote: post #36

I realize plenty of tech companies IPO and aren’t profitable. But it seems scary to be losing more money than what you generated in total revenues. REVENUE: 2021: $152m (loss of $192m) 2020: $81m (loss of $130m) EDIT: reworded for clarity.

I am by no means a finance or investing whiz. But the first thing I like to do is skip ahead to the cash flow statement. In this case https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1653482/000162828021... The income statement, balance sheet, and cash flow are connected; sides of a triangle. Each of the three views alone is potentially misleading. But for an initial impression and quick gut check I like to start with cash fl…

60M cash loss in 2021, with over $100M stock based compensation expense. Maybe with Phabricator shutting down they'll see more growth but the last time I used Gitlab it was not comparable to Phabricator's (and Gerrit's) usefulness for large orgs. It's more like a Github clone in the way it functions.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#154

Post by rsync »

foolfoolz wrote: post #46
statictype wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MongoDB and Twilio have both done reasonably well haven't they? Which developer tools have not done well?

twilio is not a developer tool. twilio is a communications company that has great developer outreach

"... twilio is not a developer tool ..."

Thank you. Strongly agree.

Every day I run into something Twilio could be doing to make development and tooling and workflows better for people who are actually using twilio for telephony.

Instead, they are spending their time, energy and acquisition dollars building "customer engagement at scale" which is a fancy term for spam.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#155

Post by b9a2cab5 »

RC_ITR wrote: post #81
mason55 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t really say that without a cost breakdown. If the LTV of a customer is greater than the CAC then your losses will grow as you do until you reach a more steady state and reduce your marketing spend. It takes awhile for a SaaS customer to pass their CAC. But if they do then they should be closer to 80% margin after that.

Yeah, but burning $183 to add $71 in revenue is a tough pill to swallow. Sure, it probably will pay back eventually, but as an investor, you really have to be bullish on retention/expansion. to get a reasonable LTV out of that. Most bulls have been right in the past, but eventually the music stops (look at the tenuous position Slack was in before acquisition).

You just need to be confident the LTV estimate is correct. That being said I'm pretty bearish on dev tooling in general as it seems like companies don't want to pay for it (but they will pay for expensive AWS services!)

Re: Gitlab S-1

#156

Post by joering2 »

alberth wrote: post #52
dfee wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t your second sentence just a truism on the first sentence? profit = revenue - costs

Maybe a better way of saying what I meant is, gitlab is losing more than 2x their total generated. That’s what seems scary.

It is also somewhat easy to enter the market. You do not need a hundred million dollars upfront investment to build a competitor, at least in terms of functionality of provided services. A good example in my opinion is how BitMart is eating up Coinbase US market with many of my friends moving on to safe money on the fees since "crypto is crypto". From their IPO coinbase is 25% down as of today, and I don't see any compelling reasons for the stock to rebounce.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#157

Post by gigatexal »

gigatexal wrote: post #56
alberth wrote: post #36

I realize plenty of tech companies IPO and aren’t profitable. But it seems scary to be losing more money than what you generated in total revenues. REVENUE: 2021: $152m (loss of $192m) 2020: $81m (loss of $130m) EDIT: reworded for clarity.

Income of 152 with total expenses of 344 in 2021 and income of 81 and total expenses of 211 means expenses grow at 1.61x of revenue (344/211) whereas revenues are growing at 1.876x yoy so revenue growth exceeds loss growth in time they’ll be profitable. Especially if in 2021 they were profitable when companies were cutting down on things.

1.61x of costs not revenue. I was dividing the expenses from year to year.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#158

Post by anonymoustrolol »

alberth wrote: post #36

I realize plenty of tech companies IPO and aren’t profitable. But it seems scary to be losing more money than what you generated in total revenues. REVENUE: 2021: $152m (loss of $192m) 2020: $81m (loss of $130m) EDIT: reworded for clarity.

152% NDR tells me they should either buy as many customers as possible right now (IE burn), or they are under pricing and should raise prices and increase revenue that way. Cash flow on its own is kinda meaningless.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#159

Post by oweiler »

ModernMech wrote: post #107
benatkin wrote: post #71

I'm grateful to GitLab for providing an alternative to GitHub, and an open source one. It's an open core product with the community edition providing a lot of value. Here are some community hosted instances: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/List_of_Community-Hosted_GitL... The CI system is quite powerful, and Travis CI's struggles before and after acquisition has shown that it's hard to host a major CI platform. I hope…

Yes, Gitlab has been leading the way for a while now, consistently introducing new features that Github eventually copies. It's a real testament to the power of competition. I first started using Gitlab due to free private repositories, which Github eventually added. Gitlab had free built-in CI/CD first, and Github eventually followed. I'm still on Gitlab these days despite Github catching up, and still enjoying feat…

Except Github Actions is leaps and bounds above Gitlab CI.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#160

Post by [deleted] »

INTPenis wrote: post #148
ignoramous wrote: post #112

Gitlab is one of the pioneers of "remote-first" [0] and "building in public" [1], to the extent of sometimes even live-streaming CEO meetings [2] and sales pitches [3] Gitlab, I believe, informs the common strategy behind most other source-available ycombinator enterprise startups: the buyer-based open-core model [4] Congratulations Gitlab. You're far from a copycat and deserve all the success for relentless executio…

Yeah I absolutely support Gitlab and love seeing new projects use Gitlab over Github. But to be fair, they have a massive backlog of issues to fix. Basic issues too, like variables not expanding correctly in CI jobs, or Google not being able to index projects on gitlab.com unless there's another page already linking to it. I've been using Gitlab.com and Gitlab on-prem since 2013 and over the years I've found many of…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN