5 ms·

Wildbit has sold the family business work-for-other-reasons-than-monetary-renumeration trope for a couple of decades. They've had some great products like Beans

by jmacd 4y ago

Wildbit has sold the family business work-for-other-reasons-than-monetary-renumeration trope for a couple of decades. They've had some great products like Beanstalk and Deploybot and some total follies like Converyor. Employees had no ownership, products were often sold or put up for sale, and my understand is that compensation was middle of the road at best. It was 37Signals-lite. They seem like good people, but if you sell your employees and customers on a moralized construction then you do have a moral obligation. The great irony is that there is no good way for something like this to end unless the owners are ready to hand off their business to new leadership on terms that set it up to remain independent. A power of the capital class is that it eats succession for lunch. I wonder why there was no employee buyout. I suspect it wasn't the most attractive offer from the perspective of the current owners.

rapind 4y ago
> Wildbit has sold the family business work-for-other-reasons-than-monetary-renumeration trope for a couple of decades. I didn't realize this was a pattern with them before now (selling out). I was using Postmark specifically because it was (I thought) a sort of mom and pop type business. There are cheaper and better options, but sending emails was always such a small expense for me that I didn't care. I don't mean to sound anti-capitalist or anything. I just prefer spending my money on the small guys when possible.
- friendlybanzai 4y ago
  It's not a pattern, the original comment is nonsense: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31247296#31250037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31247296#31250037
  - rapind 4y ago
    Understood. I’ll do my own research.
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  Are you rethinking that perspective in light of how the valuable distinction might have less to do with big vs small capitalist and more something to do with the workers
  - rapind 4y ago
    More of a general approach I apply whenever I can. I prefer supporting smaller lifestyle businesses for market diversity. This may or may not be good for employees specifically, it’s more about having a healthy market (by my own narrow definition I suppose). Obviously I don’t assume I’m making a difference :) but it’s kind of like voting. If a good small alternative exists and I can afford it, then that’s what I’ll use.
troydavis 4y ago
> I wonder why there was no employee buyout. I suspect it wasn't the most attractive offer from the perspective of the current owners. Even assuming that employees wanted to own this business… how do you envision that employees would have funded an offer? I guess you could propose that they raise outside debt to be serviced by the business (like any other LBO), plus contribute their own funds as a 10-40% equity cushion, but that seems unlikely regardless of how such an offer would be evaluated. Wanting to work for a business does not necessarily mean someone wants to own it, let alone wants to have their capital at risk for it. (Not specific to this business.)
- cool_dude85 4y ago
  Presumably the owners already have more money than they will need to live a comfortable life. Why not just give it to the employees?
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    sweet summer child…
friendlybanzai 4y ago
> They've had some great products like Beanstalk and Deploybot and some total follies like Converyor. .. is every product supposed to be a perfect fit and wild success? > Employees had no ownership To what end? To be paid in the event of an acquisition? That happened. > products were often sold or put up for sale In 21 years there was one product sold, including one you described as great. I'm not sure where you're getting this from. > and my understand is that compensation was middle of the road at best That understanding is incorrect. > I wonder why there was no employee buyout. There has been and likely will be more, just not Postmark.

by jmacd 4y ago

rapind 4y ago

> Wildbit has sold the family business work-for-other-reasons-than-monetary-renumeration trope for a couple of decades. I didn't realize this was a pattern with them before now (selling out). I was using Postmark specifically because it was (I thought) a sort of mom and pop type business. There are cheaper and better options, but sending emails was always such a small expense for me that I didn't care. I don't mean to sound anti-capitalist or anything. I just prefer spending my money on the small guys when possible.

friendlybanzai 4y ago
It's not a pattern, the original comment is nonsense: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31247296#31250037 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31247296#31250037
- rapind 4y ago
  Understood. I’ll do my own research.
wahnfrieden 4y ago
Are you rethinking that perspective in light of how the valuable distinction might have less to do with big vs small capitalist and more something to do with the workers
- rapind 4y ago
  More of a general approach I apply whenever I can. I prefer supporting smaller lifestyle businesses for market diversity. This may or may not be good for employees specifically, it’s more about having a healthy market (by my own narrow definition I suppose). Obviously I don’t assume I’m making a difference :) but it’s kind of like voting. If a good small alternative exists and I can afford it, then that’s what I’ll use.

troydavis 4y ago

> I wonder why there was no employee buyout. I suspect it wasn't the most attractive offer from the perspective of the current owners. Even assuming that employees wanted to own this business… how do you envision that employees would have funded an offer? I guess you could propose that they raise outside debt to be serviced by the business (like any other LBO), plus contribute their own funds as a 10-40% equity cushion, but that seems unlikely regardless of how such an offer would be evaluated. Wanting to work for a business does not necessarily mean someone wants to own it, let alone wants to have their capital at risk for it. (Not specific to this business.)

cool_dude85 4y ago
Presumably the owners already have more money than they will need to live a comfortable life. Why not just give it to the employees?
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  sweet summer child…

friendlybanzai 4y ago

> They've had some great products like Beanstalk and Deploybot and some total follies like Converyor. .. is every product supposed to be a perfect fit and wild success? > Employees had no ownership To what end? To be paid in the event of an acquisition? That happened. > products were often sold or put up for sale In 21 years there was one product sold, including one you described as great. I'm not sure where you're getting this from. > and my understand is that compensation was middle of the road at best That understanding is incorrect. > I wonder why there was no employee buyout. There has been and likely will be more, just not Postmark.