4 ms·

Kinda bummed by this news. I know a bunch of people over at Slack and I'm sure none of them are excited about being acquired. I still don't understand how sales

Kinda bummed by this news. I know a bunch of people over at Slack and I'm sure none of them are excited about being acquired. I still don't understand how salesforce has gotten so big where they can acquire $25B healthy companies which really don't fit into their eco-system.

JoeOfTexas 6y ago
Their sales teams have been locking in all major corporations. I have no idea how they cornered a market so fast. They are living like kings right now.
- op03 6y ago
  Cause gaining Enterprise market share has nothing to do with tech and everything to do with scaling a sales team.
- thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
  Chat is mostly ephemeral, so there isn't much lost in switching providers even at large corporations. If a better chat app takes off in the next year there isn't much stickiness in the current app, especially when individual teams start using the new product. This is how I've seen both AWS and Slack become standards and large corps–the innovating teams start using it regardless of the corp standard.
- codeulike 6y ago
  You talking about Salesforce? They've been around since 1999 and have been dominant in SaaS ever since the phrase was first coined. There's nothing fast about it.
ForHackernews 6y ago
Low-code/no-code is a very compelling pitch to businesses that see software as cost center.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
  It's a compelling pitch, but when it comes to actually using low code/no code solutions... well, it's a conversation that we re-visit every few years for a reason. Everyone needs last-mile customization that requires coding and therefore some technical ability.
  - ForHackernews 6y ago
    Sure, of course. OP was asking how Salesforce got so huge when it has a medium-negative reputation among tech folks, and that was my answer: Management loves to hear "this will save $$$ on software"
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - lostcolony 6y ago
    Once a company realizes that it's not magical unicorns, they're too deeply embedded. Is it better to spend X every year to just make the Salesforce solution work (thereby not having to admit to a mistake, and mitigating personal risk), or spend 3X in one year to write something in house (that requires maybe 1/10th X to maintain/extend from then on, but which is riskier, and unlikely to show up on future evals such that they can claim credit and get a raise)? Corporations seem especially vulnerable to sunk cost fallacies.
    - preommr 6y ago
      Nobody wants to be the manager responsible for a large expense that might pay off in years when when the manager is in a different position and therefore the advantages will be reaped by someone else.
  - thrav 6y ago
    You’d be surprised by how much can be achieved with no code tools on SFDC. The biggest problem Salesforce has is that most customers are barely scratching the surface — or worse, still using the classic version that’s 10 years outdated. I’ve fixed 2 year headaches of billion dollar enterprises in a few hours. Why couldn’t they do that themselves? 1. Because Salesforce is so effortless to keep running, that billion dollar companies can get by with a couple of admins, and never put any investment into building on its functionality. 2. The people who know Salesforce well enough to do that are gobbled up and paid boatloads of money by Salesforce and Consultancies.
bpodgursky 6y ago
I'm pretty sure that nobody as Slack is going to be unexcited about a 50% stock bump. I've been on the receiving end of boring acquisitions, and I can assure you that the financial upside can excite people quite effectively.
- csallen 6y ago
  My friends at Slack are all very excited.

JoeOfTexas 6y ago

Their sales teams have been locking in all major corporations. I have no idea how they cornered a market so fast. They are living like kings right now.

op03 6y ago
Cause gaining Enterprise market share has nothing to do with tech and everything to do with scaling a sales team.
thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
Chat is mostly ephemeral, so there isn't much lost in switching providers even at large corporations. If a better chat app takes off in the next year there isn't much stickiness in the current app, especially when individual teams start using the new product. This is how I've seen both AWS and Slack become standards and large corps–the innovating teams start using it regardless of the corp standard.
codeulike 6y ago
You talking about Salesforce? They've been around since 1999 and have been dominant in SaaS ever since the phrase was first coined. There's nothing fast about it.

ForHackernews 6y ago

Low-code/no-code is a very compelling pitch to businesses that see software as cost center.

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
It's a compelling pitch, but when it comes to actually using low code/no code solutions... well, it's a conversation that we re-visit every few years for a reason. Everyone needs last-mile customization that requires coding and therefore some technical ability.
- ForHackernews 6y ago
  Sure, of course. OP was asking how Salesforce got so huge when it has a medium-negative reputation among tech folks, and that was my answer: Management loves to hear "this will save $$$ on software"
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- lostcolony 6y ago
  Once a company realizes that it's not magical unicorns, they're too deeply embedded. Is it better to spend X every year to just make the Salesforce solution work (thereby not having to admit to a mistake, and mitigating personal risk), or spend 3X in one year to write something in house (that requires maybe 1/10th X to maintain/extend from then on, but which is riskier, and unlikely to show up on future evals such that they can claim credit and get a raise)? Corporations seem especially vulnerable to sunk cost fallacies.
  - preommr 6y ago
    Nobody wants to be the manager responsible for a large expense that might pay off in years when when the manager is in a different position and therefore the advantages will be reaped by someone else.
- thrav 6y ago
  You’d be surprised by how much can be achieved with no code tools on SFDC. The biggest problem Salesforce has is that most customers are barely scratching the surface — or worse, still using the classic version that’s 10 years outdated. I’ve fixed 2 year headaches of billion dollar enterprises in a few hours. Why couldn’t they do that themselves? 1. Because Salesforce is so effortless to keep running, that billion dollar companies can get by with a couple of admins, and never put any investment into building on its functionality. 2. The people who know Salesforce well enough to do that are gobbled up and paid boatloads of money by Salesforce and Consultancies.

bpodgursky 6y ago

I'm pretty sure that nobody as Slack is going to be unexcited about a 50% stock bump. I've been on the receiving end of boring acquisitions, and I can assure you that the financial upside can excite people quite effectively.

csallen 6y ago
My friends at Slack are all very excited.