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

MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

bizjournals.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 121 posts

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#81

Post by Mistletoe »

randyrand wrote: post #73
Havoc wrote: post #61

Not quite following why MariaDB is even a listed company? It's a solid database sure but traditional relational DB isn't exactly a bleeding edge killer feature these days What was the intended differentiating hook?

Because going public is the only way for most shareholders (including most employees) to sell shares. Don’t ask me why startups are designed this way. It’s dumb.

Does anyone have info on what price early investors got the shares?

Retail launches are always designed to let them cash out with big multiples no matter what the price does.

I remember buying something I thought was “early” for $5 a share and later we learned the real earlies got in for $0.25. I was able to sell somehow at a price of $12 in the mania after it launched, but of course it eventually bled out down to $0.25 and beyond because of the constant selling from the insiders. They were always in profit, what did they care?

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#82

Post by Mistletoe »

exogeny wrote: post #4
netman21 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my problem with SPACs. The people who put them together walk away with all the money. IronNet, 23andMe, and Adstra, had similar drops.

I think the bigger problem is most of the companies that go public this way are dogshit money-losers that shouldn't be public in the first place.

> The company in February projected an operating loss of $43.2 million this fiscal year on sales of $47.4 million and an operating loss of $44.7 million in fiscal 2023 on sales of $63.5 million.

Nice stats haha.

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#83

Post by kbelder »

darkwater wrote: post #28
greenyoda wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A description of how SPACs work can be found here: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/spac.asp

From the link: > During a 2020–2021 boom period for SPACs, they attracted prominent names such as Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, and Deutsche Bank, in addition to retired or semiretired senior executives. Now, why retired or semi-retired senior exec who are most probably already swimming in money and have a certain age are even thinking about these investments instead of just spend the fortune they have and enjoy life…

Why would a programmer continue to program after retiring?

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#84

Post by Jedd »

> MariaDB's eponymously named open-source software ...

I'm sure they meant 'eponymous open-sourced', as named is implicit in the meaning of that word, but I'm less confident whether an eponym can be granted based on a familial naming attribution?

A few years ago I had a weird exchange with someone on these forums who enlightened me about the maxscale licence change, and identified this as a key turning point (not in a good way) for the MariaDB community's shift in attitude. [0]

I grew up with MySQL, even met Monty one time at a London meetup, moved to MariaDB at the appropriate time (around when Debian switched over), but have since embraced the joy of PostgreSQL (mostly because that's what we use at work). Not that PostgreSQL is without architecture / licensing complexities on the HA front.

[0] https://www.infoworld.com/article/3109213/open-source-uproar...

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#85

Post by jasmer »

mchusma wrote: post #53
jasmer wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit '-ish'. The bar is too high and there are huge numbers of really decent companies that need some kind of liquidity. We're just not set up for it. Maybe it's a matter of just bringing more attention to small caps, I don't know. Or another vehicle. There are just too many truly great value creating business out there whereupon it's very difficult for founders to get their accumulated value out of it. Peopl…

The bar for direct listings is not because of the model its because of the costs to go public and be public. Small cap stocks are not what they used to be, and it seems like some process for reducing regulation on small cap stocks seems like it would benefit everyone.

The very high bar for IPO (aka sarbanes-oxley, layers, bankers) is part of the 'model'.

Aside from expenses, there is a kind of 'stock populism' - big stocks get a lot of noise, which is a form of demand gen for the stock.

Companies with popular CEO's get a huge boost for example.

Both retail and bigger investors tend to prefer the bigger stocks.

This is part of the model which might possibly be improved.

We could adjust the taxation rules maybe, or, change listing rules, or literally just convince the banks that there is a huge opportunity in smallcap that's overlooked.

There are 100x mid-sized business opportunities for every big one - I see them literally every day.

I have told countless entrepreneurs that they have great businesses that are not suitable for VC because the growth and market is not there. And then what?

It's more economically efficient for them to nerd-out and compete for a 'Google Job' because they have all the power in the system.

Indirectly - there may be a bit opportunity with scale and regionality.

Large brands get a natural advantage in advertising as well, which doesn't work well for little regional shops.

I just bought a pair of winter boots on the high street out my door but totally by fluke - the are too small of an op to compete online.

There might be some taxation or international regs that we might want to put in place.

Perhaps I'm suggesting a bunch of adjustments that streamline financing for SMB and recognize the disproportionate power of conglomerates that it not always economically efficient. Often it is, but not always.

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#87

Post by Nifty3929 »

hakfoo wrote: post #69
Nifty3929 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that things are the way they are for good reasons, or at least historically good reasons. At least with next-quarter-itis you're holding execs accountable for delivering _something_ relatively soon. It's an imperfect check-and-balance. Are you excited by the fact that Mark Z doesn't suffer from this disease with Meta and is spending $25B/yr on a virtual reality platform that won't provide returns for man…

As you said, the relationship between shareholders and the C-suite is a check-and-balance. Meta's structure basically makes Zuckerberg unoustable. He can continue to toss money into the ether chasing a particularly bad idea. Conversely, it's possible to have voting power so diluted that nobody who has a long-term vision has any way to promote it. Broad ownership allows people to call bullshit, but maybe something lik…

"capital-gains surtax"

In the United States we have "long-term gains" which are taxed preferentially at much lower rates. How about we just stop doing that.

Also for carried interest.

Also also the "never mind about those taxes at all" stepped-up basis for your heirs when you die.

All of these things simply distort the overall market as people modify their plans to account for these tax breaks.

If you don't like to see higher taxes, then replace these distorting, selective tax-breaks with lower overall rates to make up the difference. Or if you like higher taxes then don't do that.

But for gosh sakes can't we please get rid of these behavior-distorting tax laws?

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#88

Post by jamesfinlayson »

chillfox wrote: post #79
jamesfinlayson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - I didn't realise it was a listed company. Does it compete with Oracle or SQL Server in terms of features?

It’s just a fork of mysql.

Yeah that was my recollection. I thought putting a company behind it might have changed that but apparently not.

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#89

Post by sanjayio »

ralph84 wrote: post #30
sanjayio wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corpse? It's actively used by many companies in production. Unless you're referring to the branching point, which is more like the younger version than a corpse.

> It's actively used by many companies in production The problem is not many of them want to pay for it. $40 million in ARR after 13 years and $227 million in funding isn't great.

I hear you, I just mean I wouldn’t call that a corpse. It’s clearly providing utility. Similar to OSS over two decades making $0 ARR. I imagine it must’ve been hard to monetize given alternatives.

Re: MariaDB plunges nearly 40% in NYSE debut after SPAC merger

#90

Post by tim-- »

chillfox wrote: post #79
jamesfinlayson wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - I didn't realise it was a listed company. Does it compete with Oracle or SQL Server in terms of features?

It’s just a fork of mysql.

but an incompatible fork. There are many major differences between MySQL and MariaDB. https://mariadb.com/database-topics/mariadb-vs-mysql/
Post reply on HN