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

IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

newsroom.ibm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 407 posts

Re: IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

#41

Post by AcerbicZero »

redeux wrote: post #19
yellow_lead wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had to check the numbers. IPO at $80 and sold to IBM for $35. Not great for investors, but insiders benefitted a lot!

Depends how you define insider. Employees were subject to a 6 month lockup and during that time the price dropped dramatically, but they still had to pay taxes on the $80 IPO price. Execs and institutional investors that were able to sell at IPO made out quite well though.

Too bad you can't sell the option to buy your shares the day you get them at whatever price you want :/

Re: IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

#44

Post by ethbr1 »

eikenberry wrote: post #23
danw1979 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeap we did. I wrote it off around the time of the licence change, just after they decided to ditch the TF Team plan in favour of the utterly ridiculous “Resources Under Management” billing model. I knew the company had lost the plot at that point.

It was made apparent right after the IPO. Our team got a new VP in charge who changed the mantra from practitioner-first to enterprise-first. Soon after they then laid-off anyone not working on enterprise features. It was a sad death of a great company culture. Mitchell left around the same time which, IMO, speaks volumes.

The older I get, the more I'm convinced that practitioner-first is the only reasonable way to drive a product's features, while enterprise-first is the only reasonable way to drive a company's revenue.

Which is to say strong sustainable products need both.

... but ffs don't let the entire company use enterprise as a reason to ignore practitioner feature requests.

Re: IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

#46

Post by hashicorporal »

jmclnx wrote: post #4

Sorry HashiCorp, been there and got the Tee-shirt (pink) :) Actually for me, the company I was at that IBM purchased was on the verge of folding, so in that case, IBM saved our jobs and I was there for many years.

We experienced arbitrary layoffs in 2023, followed by an ominous feeling that more layoffs were imminent. However, the announcement of a deal changed the situation.

Now, we are actively hiring for numerous positions.

Personally, I am not planning to stay much longer. I had hoped that our corp structure would be similar to RedHat, but it seems that they intend to fully integrate us into the IBM mothership.

Re: IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

#48

Post by brudgers »

jeeyoungk wrote: post #10
danw1979 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeap we did. I wrote it off around the time of the licence change, just after they decided to ditch the TF Team plan in favour of the utterly ridiculous “Resources Under Management” billing model. I knew the company had lost the plot at that point.

Who's the target audience for this pricing that can afford this? The RUM pricing is indeed quite ridiculous. It feels quite ridiculous, especially if you are managing "soft" resources like IAM roles via Terraform / Pulumi. At least with real resources (say, RDS instances), one can argue that Terraform / Pulumi pricing is a small percentage of the cloud bill. But IAM roles are not charged for in cloud, and there are s…

Who's the target audience for this pricing that can afford this?

The kind of customers it is good to have.

Because filtering out price sensitive customers is a sound business strategy.

As a rule of thumb, solve any problem your customer might have. Except not having money.

Re: IBM completes acquisition of HashiCorp

#49

Post by ryanisnan »

progbits wrote: post #18
jeeyoungk wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's the target audience for this pricing that can afford this? The RUM pricing is indeed quite ridiculous. It feels quite ridiculous, especially if you are managing "soft" resources like IAM roles via Terraform / Pulumi. At least with real resources (say, RDS instances), one can argue that Terraform / Pulumi pricing is a small percentage of the cloud bill. But IAM roles are not charged for in cloud, and there are s…

It also creates horrible incentives. Oh I won't run this in isolated project or under a separate service account since that costs more, let's just pile everything together.

To be fair to RUM pricing, there are also horrible incentives for workflow invocation based pricing models, or workspace count models.
Post reply on HN