I would encourage people to read the Pets.com 10-Q to understand what the dot com bubble was like from a corporate finance perspective, because there are deeper

I would encourage people to read the Pets.com 10-Q to understand what the dot com bubble was like from a corporate finance perspective, because there are deeper lessons than "Some companies with substantial Internet operations IPOed." https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1100683/000089161800004394/e10-q.txt https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1100683/000089161800... Pets.com paid $10.5M for pet food then sold it for $8.7M, while needing $23M to keep the lights on that quarter. Compare to https://sec.report/Document/0001628280-19-004786/ https://sec.report/Document/0001628280-19-004786/ : Slack, unsurprisingly because it sells software, has positive gross margins rather than negative gross margins; they're healthy at ~80%. They appear to be able to turn $1 of sales and marketing spend in Year 1 into > $1 of software revenue in year 2. Their churn rate on a dollar basis is 43%. Excuse me, -43%; a cohort of SaaS customers paying $100M in year 1 will pay $143M in year 2 due to growth in number of seats more than offsetting churning accounts. There is no price at which a rational person should want to own Pets.com. There is, very clearly, a price at which a rational person should want to own Slack.