6 ms·
It reads that they raised no external funding whatsoever? Is that true? If so, how? Did they just code an app and start immediately selling it, working another
by tekkk 6y ago
It reads that they raised no external funding whatsoever? Is that true? If so, how? Did they just code an app and start immediately selling it, working another jobs until it become enough profitable to support them full-time? It sounds quite implausible that they did not receive any funding, but I guess it could be true. Very impressive achievement nonetheless.
- elliekelly 6y ago> It reads that they raised no external funding whatsoever? It sounds strange now but I suspect for most of history this was true of businesses large and small. I wonder when external funding became "the rule" for successful companies rather than the exception?
- OJFord 6y agoBank loans used to be more significant and commonplace though. And probably historically it would be (even) more likely to be significantly self-funded as opposed to being all but unfunded and 'bootstrapping', that's my impression anyway.
- dumbfoundded 6y agoBank loans are still used for many more conventional small businesses.
- OJFord 6y agoAbsolutely; I didn't say 'banks used to give loans', just that they used to be more significant (number and magnitude) lenders to businesses; not just high street butchers and the like, but what we would today call a 'start-up' too.
- avarun 6y agoThis is false. How could the common person have possibly had the capital to start their own business without external funding prior to the 20th century? No, they all had to rely on bank loans, which were arbitrary and capricious, as well as required collateral that made it a very risky proposition to start a company. Venture Capital by comparison is a miracle of the modern world, allowing you to start businesses risk-free.
- scarface74 6y agoAnd this is what the modern VC fueled world has brought us to. Why is it impossible to believe that a company can start small, become profitable and grow without VC funding? This is how the vast majority of businesses become successful.
- ryukafalz 6y agoThe company I currently work for also started this way to my knowledge, and I think we're better off for it. It may be harder than getting funding right from the start, but I wouldn't say it's implausible.
- brentm 6y agoIt looks like they started by selling a Java tool called IntelliJ Renamer. Likely just bootstrapped that and then reinvested the profits. They only switched over to the SaaS model maybe five or six years ago, before that you'd buy one copy the application and then buy a newer version when you felt like it. Now you're basically buying a new copy every year no matter what, just like everything else.
- renewiltord 6y agoNo, their current licensing thing becomes the other one after a year. For instance if I stopped paying I'd have IntelliJ IDEA 2019 forever. There was a huge controversy when they switched and the backlash made them re-evaluate to this which I think is a fair license.
- brentm 6y agoI've been paying for it for a while and I didn't actually know that. I thought after I stopped paying it would be unlicensed and bricked. Either way though I think the upgrades are probably worth paying for.
- renewiltord 6y agoIf you login and look, they'll say "Perpetual Fallback License for X". That X is what you'll be able to use for life. And I agree with you on the upgrades.
- imhoguy 6y agoI wouldn't say it is SaaS model. You own a licensed copy pinned at version forever without extra pay and also for offline use. I would rather call it annual upgrade subscription software.