71–80 of 366 posts
"we may maintain relationships with customers that others find hostile, offensive, or inappropriate" these dudes would be neutral in the face of Sauron.
https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/
Finally an IPO I want to buy into. Technical fundamentals matter. Edit: I mean that in the software/service way, not the economical way, in case there was any confusion.
> Technical fundamentals matter. Centralization of the entire internet behind a single entity is a _bad_ thing for people who care about technical fundamentals.
It should not be up to Matthew Prince to decide who to block. He has demonstrated his inability to function as censor in a very visible (and frankly embarassing) way.
Finally an IPO I want to buy into. Technical fundamentals matter. Edit: I mean that in the software/service way, not the economical way, in case there was any confusion.
I'm sure it's just in my head, but it feels like the first tech IPO in several years where there actually seems to be a viable business model.
It has carried them this far, but the real money will be when they turn to advertising (which investors will eventually figure out and insist on).
Remember all the crazy marketing data ISPs wanted to collect, then we pushed everyone to move to TLS? Well Cloudflare unwraps TLS for all their clients and is in a position to collect all the same data.
Here's the meat and potatoes: > We have experienced significant growth, with our revenue increasing from $84.8 million in 2016 to $134.9 million in 2017 and to $192.7 million in 2018, increases of 59% and 43%, respectively. As we continue to invest in our business, we have incurred net losses of $17.3 million, $10.7 million, and $87.2 million for 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2…
They went from growing at 60% YoY in 2017 with an 8% Operating Loss, to growing 43% YoY with an Operating Loss of 44%.
To put it another way, in 2018 they grew their revenue 40% (+$58m) and grew expenses 100% (+$115m).
I mean, apparently they raised a huge round and felt the need to increase spending massively. And then saw slowing growth as a response?
Was there a massive boost in R&D output? Entering entirely new product lines? My uneducated impression is that they offer largely the same product this year as they did last year.
The only thing I can think of is that they went from “scrappy startup” to “bloated unicorn” status?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure it's just in my head, but it feels like the first tech IPO in several years where there actually seems to be a viable business model.
Zoom stands out in this category too. Random blog on Medium, but the points all stand: https://medium.com/@alexfclayton/zoom-ipo-s-1-breakdown-1192... Growing >100% YoY, profitable, generating cashflow, NPS above 70, just an all around solid business.
I mentioned it in the We S-1 thread, but it really weirds me out that the S-1 is the first chance the public has a chance to see a company’s financial status.
why would the public have a chance to see the financial status of a privately held company? alternatively, would you like to share your financial status with the rest of us?
Cloudflare have around 75,000 paying customers (not to mention those on the free tier) who are dependent on their services, and would probably like to know if they’re about to go bust.
As would their employees, suppliers, private shareholders, creditors, etc.
> We have a history of net losses and may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability in the future. I never got this... Why go public if you literally say you won't make money? Who would buy stock in something that will not return a positive? Are they starving for money and hope some public trading gets them a boost? Edit: It seems to be following the same pattern as the other tech IPOs recently, just to cash ou…
This comment is on every S1 thread. And every time someone mentions that it is essentially standard copy for all S1s, because you can never guarantee anything on the market.
The admission that "we've never made money and there's a good chance we never will" being boilerplate S-1 copy is monstrously troubling.
When no one needs to see that a company can made a dollar before investing because profit is for suckers and this company's probably going to be a unicorn, maybe that's the stock tip from the shoeshine boy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure it's just in my head, but it feels like the first tech IPO in several years where there actually seems to be a viable business model.
This is a sure sign that: * You won't get allocated any shares * Trading will start at a ridiculously high valuation, maybe 10x sales or more
I adore, and extensively use, Cloudflare's free services for a couple of hobby projects. I hope they don't substantially change them post-IPO.
But tinbucket , I’m pretty sure you just loudly proclaimed you would be happy to pay at least $5/month!
Next to a few business accounts for larger projects, I probably have 30 low traffic sites which aren't much of a cost for Cloudflare. I'd happily throw something like 20$ per month their way to have them covered.