6 ms·

I agree that there's a lot in that letter that hasn't aged well. But it looks like Microsoft considered paying about $8 billion back in 2016[1]. Slack held ou

by omh 6y ago

I agree that there's a lot in that letter that hasn't aged well. But it looks like Microsoft considered paying about $8 billion back in 2016[1]. Slack held out, Microsoft built their competitor and Slack are still around. And now Slack are going to sell for $24 billion or more. I'm not sure that puts Slack in too bad a light. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/04/source-microsoft-mulled-an-8-billion-bid-for-slack-will-focus-on-skype-instead/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/04/source-microsoft-mulled-an...

bogomipz 6y ago
>"I'm not sure that puts Slack in too bad a light." For another perspective, from a WSJ article on Friday: >"Zoom has grown to more than 300 million daily active participants—a broader measure than daily active users—from around 10 million before the pandemic. Microsoft’s Teams, which offers Zoom and Slack-like features and comes at no extra cost for users of its Office 365 suite, grew from 32 million daily active users at the beginning of the pandemic in March to more than 115 million last month. Slack stopped updating its daily active user number late last year when it reached 12 million." [1] [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/slack-missed-out-on-the-pandemics-zoom-boom-leaving-it-vulnerable-11606478401 https://www.wsj.com/articles/slack-missed-out-on-the-pandemi...
- russell_h 6y ago
  I wouldn’t trust any of those numbers. The Zoom metric is totally incomparable (they’re definitely killing it, but that metric counts each user many times over), and Teams is included for free with O365 and the product boundaries are getting blurry - so who knows how much how much actual engagement those users have with the chat or video features.
  - fgonzag 6y ago
    300 million for zoom is actually kind of believable. Here in Mexico private schools were using Zoom for virtual classes. I know of many other countries who took the same route. Obviously public education couldn't use it because of a lack of hardware or internet connection on both sides so it was broadcast over TV.
  - asutekku 6y ago
    When you report Daily/Weekly/Monthly Active Users, you report distinct daily users. So unless each one of these users are using a different device with no identifying features to connect them under a same identifier, the numbers are more or less accurate. Users who do not use the application during the period are not counted. Sure, it could be that they are lying, but considering how Zooming has become a synonym for video chat, I don't think it is that farfetched.
    - russell_h 6y ago
      Sure, but the Zoom metric is not "Daily Active Users" it is "Daily Active Meeting Participants". They've been very clear that this counts each time a user joins a meeting. See: https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/30/21242421/zoom-300-million-users-incorrect-meeting-participants-statement https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/30/21242421/zoom-300-million... (Of course this was all back in April, and especially with their adoption in education maybe they _do_ have 300m DAUs by now - I'm just responding to the metric in the original article.)
treis 6y ago
>And now Slack are going to sell for $24 billion or more. I still can't quite grasp these acquisition numbers. At that price you expect Slack to generate 1.5-2 billion in profit per year. That's 4 times their current revenue. When you factor in risk and time value of money it becomes more like 3+ billion per year. I just can't imagine a chat app driving that level of profit.
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  Especially since chat app users seem to be quite fickle. My workplace has been through about 6 chat platforms in the past 10 years.
  - dlhavema 6y ago
    Wow. We've used slack since we started 4 years ago and have no plans of moving to my knowledge.. I've been there for about 94% of those 4 years too..
    - monkeybutton 6y ago
      I've seen Slack, HipChat, Slack (round 2), Flock, and now Teams in as many years, at the same employer. I can't even say anything snarky about the people making these decisions because they're so far up and removed from us developers, I don't know anything about them. The whole thing is just comical now.
- ethbr0 6y ago
  This isn't about a chat app: this is a platform valuation. Salesforce is betting that Salesforce + Slack is worth more than the aquisition price. And more than the cost of letting a competitor acquire it.
- 9erdelta 6y ago
  I think it is a _little bit_ off to just consider Slack to be a chat app. Sure chat is the core function...One thing I find super valuable about Slack is that it is a searchable archive. When a new person joins a company, they have literally years and years worth of searchable content. This helps get up to speed, cuts down on time spent asking questions etc. I find myself searching Slack many times a day pretty much every day at work. Not to mention automated workflows, calendar, drive integration etc.
cutenewt 6y ago
MS, in hindsight, was fortunate to not buy Slack. They've built a compelling competitor in Teams that is more capable of competing with Zoom than Slack can.
- pwarner 6y ago
  Teams is completely failing to replace Slack in my experience. I think it's must closer to replacing Zoom. I use all 3 daily. Teams is strong in file storage, direct messages and video calling. Slack is strong in channel messaging. I would argue they barely compete, the Slack file storage and video are not great, and the Teams channel messaging is unusable and appears unfixable.

by omh 6y ago

bogomipz 6y ago

>"I'm not sure that puts Slack in too bad a light." For another perspective, from a WSJ article on Friday: >"Zoom has grown to more than 300 million daily active participants—a broader measure than daily active users—from around 10 million before the pandemic. Microsoft’s Teams, which offers Zoom and Slack-like features and comes at no extra cost for users of its Office 365 suite, grew from 32 million daily active users at the beginning of the pandemic in March to more than 115 million last month. Slack stopped updating its daily active user number late last year when it reached 12 million." [1] [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/slack-missed-out-on-the-pandemics-zoom-boom-leaving-it-vulnerable-11606478401 https://www.wsj.com/articles/slack-missed-out-on-the-pandemi...

russell_h 6y ago
I wouldn’t trust any of those numbers. The Zoom metric is totally incomparable (they’re definitely killing it, but that metric counts each user many times over), and Teams is included for free with O365 and the product boundaries are getting blurry - so who knows how much how much actual engagement those users have with the chat or video features.
- fgonzag 6y ago
  300 million for zoom is actually kind of believable. Here in Mexico private schools were using Zoom for virtual classes. I know of many other countries who took the same route. Obviously public education couldn't use it because of a lack of hardware or internet connection on both sides so it was broadcast over TV.
- asutekku 6y ago
  When you report Daily/Weekly/Monthly Active Users, you report distinct daily users. So unless each one of these users are using a different device with no identifying features to connect them under a same identifier, the numbers are more or less accurate. Users who do not use the application during the period are not counted. Sure, it could be that they are lying, but considering how Zooming has become a synonym for video chat, I don't think it is that farfetched.
  - russell_h 6y ago
    Sure, but the Zoom metric is not "Daily Active Users" it is "Daily Active Meeting Participants". They've been very clear that this counts each time a user joins a meeting. See: https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/30/21242421/zoom-300-million-users-incorrect-meeting-participants-statement https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/30/21242421/zoom-300-million... (Of course this was all back in April, and especially with their adoption in education maybe they _do_ have 300m DAUs by now - I'm just responding to the metric in the original article.)

treis 6y ago

>And now Slack are going to sell for $24 billion or more. I still can't quite grasp these acquisition numbers. At that price you expect Slack to generate 1.5-2 billion in profit per year. That's 4 times their current revenue. When you factor in risk and time value of money it becomes more like 3+ billion per year. I just can't imagine a chat app driving that level of profit.

throwaway201103 6y ago
Especially since chat app users seem to be quite fickle. My workplace has been through about 6 chat platforms in the past 10 years.
- dlhavema 6y ago
  Wow. We've used slack since we started 4 years ago and have no plans of moving to my knowledge.. I've been there for about 94% of those 4 years too..
  - monkeybutton 6y ago
    I've seen Slack, HipChat, Slack (round 2), Flock, and now Teams in as many years, at the same employer. I can't even say anything snarky about the people making these decisions because they're so far up and removed from us developers, I don't know anything about them. The whole thing is just comical now.
ethbr0 6y ago
This isn't about a chat app: this is a platform valuation. Salesforce is betting that Salesforce + Slack is worth more than the aquisition price. And more than the cost of letting a competitor acquire it.
9erdelta 6y ago
I think it is a _little bit_ off to just consider Slack to be a chat app. Sure chat is the core function...One thing I find super valuable about Slack is that it is a searchable archive. When a new person joins a company, they have literally years and years worth of searchable content. This helps get up to speed, cuts down on time spent asking questions etc. I find myself searching Slack many times a day pretty much every day at work. Not to mention automated workflows, calendar, drive integration etc.

cutenewt 6y ago

MS, in hindsight, was fortunate to not buy Slack. They've built a compelling competitor in Teams that is more capable of competing with Zoom than Slack can.

pwarner 6y ago
Teams is completely failing to replace Slack in my experience. I think it's must closer to replacing Zoom. I use all 3 daily. Teams is strong in file storage, direct messages and video calling. Slack is strong in channel messaging. I would argue they barely compete, the Slack file storage and video are not great, and the Teams channel messaging is unusable and appears unfixable.