4 ms·

I don’t get it though, why not just go public now and get tons of money? The IPO may never fetch as high of a price as it would now, even if the company gets mo

by xwdv 6y ago

I don’t get it though, why not just go public now and get tons of money? The IPO may never fetch as high of a price as it would now, even if the company gets more valuable in the future.

emteycz 6y ago
It's not easy for a Czech company to do IPO in the USA. It's not worth it here.
- saberdancer 6y ago
  They could find an investor willing to buy them out. Doesn't have to be an IPO. Still, if you are happy with the amount of money you have and you have a business you enjoy running, why sell? This is probably their view of it.
  - llcoolv 6y ago
    Avast did their IPO in London. Most companies I have heard of were considering doing it in Singapore.
  - ciceryadam 6y ago
    Yep, buyouts happen here more often than IPOs, just recently Socialbakers got acquired by Astute, and Integromat got acquired Celonis. Also this is where Sun acquired NetBeans way back in 99.
- adambyrtek 6y ago
  Why does it have to be in the USA? You can IPO at other stock exchanges. For example, CD Projekt Red, the game studio that developed the Witcher series and Cyberpunk 2077, is listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange (Poland) and valued at ~$10bln (although the stock price has been really volatile recently).
uberswe 6y ago
Sometimes it's not all about money. Having shareholders can make the company head in a direction different to the direction that the current founders want it to go.
andylynch 6y ago
I don’t see why they need to. They are incredibly successful already plus pretty sure enjoying what they do. An IPO would probably put much of that at risk so why bother? I’ve always understood them to be driven more by the desire to help make software development more pleasant.
pdpi 6y ago
Because an IPO would have the founders lose a lot of control over the company, and they're more motivated by that than by money.
ce4 6y ago
Well, there's values that differ by countries. I've seen a few old family run businesses being sold off to US VCs and things didnt turn out well often: - customers got screwed over - same with employees - quality "optimizations" - financial engineering - founder's longterm values abondoned for quarterly gains Not taking VC cash is a more traditional take on things elsewhere.
- ce4 6y ago
  Stuff like this: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/remington-guns-jobs-huntsville.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/remi...
- sidlls 6y ago
  Not taking VC cash is a more traditional take on things here in the US, too. The VC cash/investment money chase is really only a thing in tech circles, and a few other niche areas. The vast majority of businesses simply build "organically" (and most die doing it).
domano 6y ago
Why would they? It seems that they have enough resources for the things they want to do, so why risk it?
hasa 6y ago
Why would anybody need tons of money? They have a working company, happy customers and perhaps happy enough employees too. And I'm sure they have salary big enough to pay the rent... and drive a Porsche if they want to.
mcv 6y ago
The cool part is, they don't need to. The founders are in control, not the VCs or other investors, so the company isn't obliged to put generating money over all other concerns. And being billionaires, the founders are probably doing fine. They'd apparently prefer to keep the good thing they've got going than to ruin it by selling it off. There's more in life than getting even more money.
- syrgian 6y ago
  Long term that should net them a lot more money. Having and keeping a true mission will allow them to leave all competitors behind. Because even if competitors can seem strong from time to time (VS Code and Atom recently) they will end up dying because of de-prioritization and leadership without vision (Atom).
- thu2111 6y ago
  I think they aren't technically billionaires. Rather, JetBrains is valued at over a billion dollars. So if they sold their entire stake, then they'd be billionaires. I'm sure they pay themselves well but I don't think they will be sitting on a billion dollars in either cash or shares.
jansan 6y ago
Did you read the headline? They are BILLIONAIRES. For some people that is enough money and they focus on different values.
- kgwgk 6y ago
  But only in the sense of having a company that "is worth about $7 billion" according to some estimates. The point of the discussion is that they could convert that to real money that could be used to buy other assets (but no-one is forcing them to do so, so they really have the choice).
astura 6y ago
"Obtain as much money as possible" isn't the goal of everyone at every time, especially when one already has all the money and resources they need. Not everyone believes life is a game where the goal is to die with the highest score, above all else. Some do, but not everyone. You're able to control pretty much every aspect within a private company with no shareholders to answer to and no public disclosures. You're free to use the assets of your company to implement your personal values.
- xwdv 6y ago
  So that must mean they feel their values are worth more than billions of dollars? Really? Give up all that over some feelings about developer tools?
mekster 6y ago
If they lose control and starts putting profit up front as their primary objective than developer spirits, I'm sure many will move to vs code and vs code may speed up its development with more eyes and hands.

by xwdv 6y ago

I don’t get it though, why not just go public now and get tons of money? The IPO may never fetch as high of a price as it would now, even if the company gets more valuable in the future.

emteycz 6y ago

It's not easy for a Czech company to do IPO in the USA. It's not worth it here.

saberdancer 6y ago
They could find an investor willing to buy them out. Doesn't have to be an IPO. Still, if you are happy with the amount of money you have and you have a business you enjoy running, why sell? This is probably their view of it.
- llcoolv 6y ago
  Avast did their IPO in London. Most companies I have heard of were considering doing it in Singapore.
- ciceryadam 6y ago
  Yep, buyouts happen here more often than IPOs, just recently Socialbakers got acquired by Astute, and Integromat got acquired Celonis. Also this is where Sun acquired NetBeans way back in 99.
adambyrtek 6y ago
Why does it have to be in the USA? You can IPO at other stock exchanges. For example, CD Projekt Red, the game studio that developed the Witcher series and Cyberpunk 2077, is listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange (Poland) and valued at ~$10bln (although the stock price has been really volatile recently).

uberswe 6y ago

Sometimes it's not all about money. Having shareholders can make the company head in a direction different to the direction that the current founders want it to go.

andylynch 6y ago

I don’t see why they need to. They are incredibly successful already plus pretty sure enjoying what they do. An IPO would probably put much of that at risk so why bother? I’ve always understood them to be driven more by the desire to help make software development more pleasant.

pdpi 6y ago

Because an IPO would have the founders lose a lot of control over the company, and they're more motivated by that than by money.

ce4 6y ago

Well, there's values that differ by countries. I've seen a few old family run businesses being sold off to US VCs and things didnt turn out well often: - customers got screwed over - same with employees - quality "optimizations" - financial engineering - founder's longterm values abondoned for quarterly gains Not taking VC cash is a more traditional take on things elsewhere.

ce4 6y ago
Stuff like this: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/remington-guns-jobs-huntsville.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/remi...
sidlls 6y ago
Not taking VC cash is a more traditional take on things here in the US, too. The VC cash/investment money chase is really only a thing in tech circles, and a few other niche areas. The vast majority of businesses simply build "organically" (and most die doing it).

domano 6y ago

Why would they? It seems that they have enough resources for the things they want to do, so why risk it?

hasa 6y ago

Why would anybody need tons of money? They have a working company, happy customers and perhaps happy enough employees too. And I'm sure they have salary big enough to pay the rent... and drive a Porsche if they want to.

mcv 6y ago

The cool part is, they don't need to. The founders are in control, not the VCs or other investors, so the company isn't obliged to put generating money over all other concerns. And being billionaires, the founders are probably doing fine. They'd apparently prefer to keep the good thing they've got going than to ruin it by selling it off. There's more in life than getting even more money.

syrgian 6y ago
Long term that should net them a lot more money. Having and keeping a true mission will allow them to leave all competitors behind. Because even if competitors can seem strong from time to time (VS Code and Atom recently) they will end up dying because of de-prioritization and leadership without vision (Atom).
thu2111 6y ago
I think they aren't technically billionaires. Rather, JetBrains is valued at over a billion dollars. So if they sold their entire stake, then they'd be billionaires. I'm sure they pay themselves well but I don't think they will be sitting on a billion dollars in either cash or shares.

jansan 6y ago

Did you read the headline? They are BILLIONAIRES. For some people that is enough money and they focus on different values.

kgwgk 6y ago
But only in the sense of having a company that "is worth about $7 billion" according to some estimates. The point of the discussion is that they could convert that to real money that could be used to buy other assets (but no-one is forcing them to do so, so they really have the choice).

astura 6y ago

"Obtain as much money as possible" isn't the goal of everyone at every time, especially when one already has all the money and resources they need. Not everyone believes life is a game where the goal is to die with the highest score, above all else. Some do, but not everyone. You're able to control pretty much every aspect within a private company with no shareholders to answer to and no public disclosures. You're free to use the assets of your company to implement your personal values.

xwdv 6y ago
So that must mean they feel their values are worth more than billions of dollars? Really? Give up all that over some feelings about developer tools?

mekster 6y ago

If they lose control and starts putting profit up front as their primary objective than developer spirits, I'm sure many will move to vs code and vs code may speed up its development with more eyes and hands.