4 ms·

> Since PIA was in debt, it doesn't sound like maintaining the current service as is would be profitable. Private Internet Access is very profitable [1] and ou

> Since PIA was in debt, it doesn't sound like maintaining the current service as is would be profitable. Private Internet Access is very profitable [1] and our new partner’s action of merging with PIA speaks louder than words whether privacy is important to them. [1] https://investors.kape.com/~/media/Files/K/Kape-IR/reports-and-presentations/2019/pop-ir-presentation.pdf https://investors.kape.com/~/media/Files/K/Kape-IR/reports-a... (Slide 5)

v64 7y ago
First, I'd like to thank you for your participation in this thread. As a long time PIA customer (until recently), I trusted (and still continue to trust) the current staff. All of my hesitation is with Kape and I truly hope at the end of the day they don't end up steamrolling you. That being said, if the company was profitable, why even entertain this merger? I simply don't see how getting into bed with a company with such a sordid past is worth it if you were able to make it on your own.
- donmcronald 7y ago
  I don’t know anything about the industry, but my guess is that being a big VPN company puts a target on your back. Everyone pretends they care enough about privacy to use a VPN, but the vast majority of users commingle environments and identities to the point that, IMO, they can be tracked across VPNs. VPNs are mainly for piracy and it’s only a matter of time until big media takes a shot at suing someone. No one wants to be that someone, so selling to anyone becomes attractive. I doubt there’s a lineup to buy a company who’s main talent is under assessing risk.
- Akababa 7y ago
  My guess is to partially cash out. According to the doc, the two founders each got about 26m cash and 21m equity in Kape, while PIA only had 14m EBITDA per year and 31m debt. So it's certainly a nice cash windfall for the founders.
  - Tenoke 7y ago
    This. It seems to be exactly so the founders could cash out.
  - jeltz 7y ago
    Thanks for looking it up. This was exactly what I thought.
LegitShady 7y ago
sorry I dont click pdfs from companies I dont trust.
phyzome 7y ago
Outsider here, no dog in this race. Never used a VPN, never really knew much about PIA until the recent merger, but very invested in privacy enhancing technologies. Here's a piece of feedback from that perspective: I think the critical thing you're missing here is that it doesn't matter if Kape is trustworthy, it matters whether people see it as trustworthy. And you're not in a position to change the latter, no matter how much you talk about the former, because you have a conflict of interest. The other thing is, you need to be able to explain the merger. If PIA wasn't profitable, the merger looks bad, because that means that Kape is going to find other ways to monetize it. If PIA was profitable, the merger is just confusing as heck, because why screw up a good thing? And confusion is bad, because people want security from a VPN. Not the computer kind, the emotional kind. Big upheavals like mergers throw that out the window, so you need to manage that transition very, very carefully. You're not doing that, so far.

v64 7y ago

First, I'd like to thank you for your participation in this thread. As a long time PIA customer (until recently), I trusted (and still continue to trust) the current staff. All of my hesitation is with Kape and I truly hope at the end of the day they don't end up steamrolling you. That being said, if the company was profitable, why even entertain this merger? I simply don't see how getting into bed with a company with such a sordid past is worth it if you were able to make it on your own.

donmcronald 7y ago
I don’t know anything about the industry, but my guess is that being a big VPN company puts a target on your back. Everyone pretends they care enough about privacy to use a VPN, but the vast majority of users commingle environments and identities to the point that, IMO, they can be tracked across VPNs. VPNs are mainly for piracy and it’s only a matter of time until big media takes a shot at suing someone. No one wants to be that someone, so selling to anyone becomes attractive. I doubt there’s a lineup to buy a company who’s main talent is under assessing risk.
Akababa 7y ago
My guess is to partially cash out. According to the doc, the two founders each got about 26m cash and 21m equity in Kape, while PIA only had 14m EBITDA per year and 31m debt. So it's certainly a nice cash windfall for the founders.
- Tenoke 7y ago
  This. It seems to be exactly so the founders could cash out.
- jeltz 7y ago
  Thanks for looking it up. This was exactly what I thought.

LegitShady 7y ago

sorry I dont click pdfs from companies I dont trust.

phyzome 7y ago

Outsider here, no dog in this race. Never used a VPN, never really knew much about PIA until the recent merger, but very invested in privacy enhancing technologies. Here's a piece of feedback from that perspective: I think the critical thing you're missing here is that it doesn't matter if Kape is trustworthy, it matters whether people see it as trustworthy. And you're not in a position to change the latter, no matter how much you talk about the former, because you have a conflict of interest. The other thing is, you need to be able to explain the merger. If PIA wasn't profitable, the merger looks bad, because that means that Kape is going to find other ways to monetize it. If PIA was profitable, the merger is just confusing as heck, because why screw up a good thing? And confusion is bad, because people want security from a VPN. Not the computer kind, the emotional kind. Big upheavals like mergers throw that out the window, so you need to manage that transition very, very carefully. You're not doing that, so far.