I haven't personally had a compelling enough reason to move from GitHub to GitLab, so I mostly just use it to mirror a couple of my repos there in case people prefer to browse various open source projects via GitLab. Regardless, I think competition in the space is a great thing. GitLab has come a long way and there are certain things I really like about the company. For example, I love how they tend to do everything…
Gitlab S-1
61–70 of 295 posts
Re: Gitlab S-1
#62> We have been a 100% remote workforce since inception and, as of July 31, 2021, had approximately 1,350 team members in over 65 countries. Operating remotely allows us access to a global talent pool that enables us to hire talented team members, regardless of location, providing a strong competitive advantage. Will be interesting to see how many publicly traded companies are fully remote in 5, 10, 15 years. Especial…
Re: Gitlab S-1
#63I 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.
Are they losing money on each customer per year? Are they spending a ton on sales that they expect to earn back over a decade per customer plus, but with a huge initial cost.
Re: Gitlab S-1
#64I dont know what to do, but public investors should stay away: the product is not ready for people to pay for it. It's years behind the competition.
Re: Gitlab S-1
#65Was wondering why their FY21 costs where much higher than first half of this year, this probably explains it: > Stock-based compensation expense for fiscal 2020 and 2021, and six months ended July 31, 2021 includes $32.7 million, $103.8 million, and $0.3 million, respectively, of compensation expense related to secondary stock sales described in Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in t…
Re: Gitlab S-1
#66So GitLab is advertising that it's the one place to do the entire software development lifecycle. Are there any big shops that have converted to 100% (or almost 100%) GitLab? Out of the six big names they list on their website, the only one that they have a case study for is Thomson Reuters, and they used Jenkins for CI (and it's from 2017, so a lot of this other functionality wasn't built yet). It's just a somewhat…
Although from what I heard they're porting the good parts into GitHub and deprecating/putting into maintenance mode ADO soon.
Re: Gitlab S-1
#67Sorry for off-topic but notice how long this page is and yet how fast it loads. Why is it so hard to pull off elsewhere on the Web.
Re: Gitlab S-1
#68> We have been a 100% remote workforce since inception and, as of July 31, 2021, had approximately 1,350 team members in over 65 countries. Operating remotely allows us access to a global talent pool that enables us to hire talented team members, regardless of location, providing a strong competitive advantage. Will be interesting to see how many publicly traded companies are fully remote in 5, 10, 15 years. Especial…
*Timezones and working locations restricted.
Re: Gitlab S-1
#69> We have been a 100% remote workforce since inception and, as of July 31, 2021, had approximately 1,350 team members in over 65 countries. Operating remotely allows us access to a global talent pool that enables us to hire talented team members, regardless of location, providing a strong competitive advantage. Will be interesting to see how many publicly traded companies are fully remote in 5, 10, 15 years. Especial…
And famously they're leaders on the location-based pay side of the remote pay argument (as opposed to the "we pay everyone based on the value they bring" side): https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation...
Median salary seems to be $170k according to Levels.fyi -> https://www.levels.fyi/company/GitLab/salaries/Software-Engi...
Re: Gitlab S-1
#70I 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.
Isn’t your second sentence just a truism on the first sentence? profit = revenue - costs
For a naive example, a company can have $1m in revenue and $1.1m in costs, therefore profit is negative 100,000 dollars - the company is unprofitable. However, they are not losing more money ($100,000) then they are bringing in ($1,000,000 is greater than $100,000) - though they are spending more money ($1.1m) then they are bringing in. This would not be a concerning amount of loss, many companies are deliberately outspending current revenue in order to increase future revenue/growth/market share, but could become profitable if they wanted to.
In this case, the person you replied to is remarking that the losses/negative profit ($192m, $130m) are greater than the revenue ($152m, $81m). This is a concerning sign, as the path to profitability is much further away.