5 ms·

That was an uncommonly good techcrunch article - good insight, domain knowledge, mostly a balanced look at some of the challenges startups in the "commoditized

That was an uncommonly good techcrunch article - good insight, domain knowledge, mostly a balanced look at some of the challenges startups in the "commoditized technology" space might be facing. I was entertained, I learned something, it was a pleasant reading experience (techcrunch has really improved their layout). All in all it makes me more likely to read the next techcrunch article (and some of Danny Crichton back material.)

pbreit 13y ago
I thought the opposite. First, the headline is just plain wrong and not even really in a click-baity way. Square hasn't even hinted at an IPO and Box is likely to have a successful one I the next 30-90 days. Dismissing either as a "commodity" is wrong. Both provide services that are fairly sticky and both have demonstrated the rare ability to acquire customers at scale.
- ryguytilidie 13y ago
  Square hasn't even hinted at an IPO? I think they've been hinting at an IPO to the people they've been recruiting for the past 4 years. They sold my friend on the value of their future IPO and he started there in late 2010...
- funkyy 13y ago
  I dont know how Box can get succsfull IPO. Then company is burningb cash without clear strategy to change that. Box ipo will be churn and burn unless they either change ceo or get idea how they can compete with dropbox and other big guys...
  - xerophtye 13y ago
    Now i may be wrong, in which case, do enlighten me. But hasn't Box been playing the corporate game for quite some time? And Dropbox was just beginning to step into that market, no? So wouldn't that make Box the big guy, and Dropbox the much adored underdog? I mean sure Dropbox has a MASSIVE userbase, but an enormous percentage of them are free users. Box on the other hand has a corporate userbase, and corporate pays.
    - phamilton 13y ago
      My experience with Box has been as follows: 1. Employees share files via email. 2. Employees start sharing files via Dropbox. 3. Management pitched Box by salesperson. Signs contract. 4. Employees told to use Box instead of Dropbox. Dropbox blocked. 5. Employees share files via email.
    - funkyy 13y ago
      Only because they are doing corporate game for long time is making my point even stronger. They are on the market longer with better sales strategy, yet they cannot break even, they are burning cash and as opposite to Dropbox they still have no business model that would help them to make the money. Owner have sold almost all his shares just to keep the company alive - I wouldn't be surprised if IPO would see some heavy drop in value as no investor well in the tech market will invest in this bubble. If Box will miss IPO they will run out of money in what - 1-2 years? And what's then? They will shut their sales and really poor marketing department? Do you see where this is going?
acchow 13y ago
It was a terrible article with baseless claims about Square's business. "While its profit margins have never been made public, it’s generally believed that the company is near break even or slightly unprofitable" That is entirely conjecture - and this is journalism??? Then it frames the narrative with negative leading: "These high expenses and low revenues lead to obviously high burn rates. Square is believed to have lost more than $100 million in 2013" But... the whole point of raising funding is to spend it. If you didn't need the capital for plans to grow rapidly, you shouldn't have raised capital in the first place.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  That is entirely conjecture - and this is journalism? When hard facts are not around to be had, reporting the general consensus seems acceptable to me. You may have been thinking of investigative journalism?
  - bigdubs 13y ago
    One of the principles of journalistic integrity is that coverage should be free of "editorialization" or injecting your own opinions as the writer into the narrative of the story (thus maintaining objectivity). One example: "it's believed that the losses number in the billions", you should say instead, "it is uncertain what squares operating metrics are currently, or have been in the past." Only report what you know to be facts, the rest, "conjecture", have someone more qualified than you make those conjectures. Maybe interview someone who works at square who is familiar with these things? Then, slightly, you as the writer will have distanced your own feelings about the subject by relying on someone else, who is hopefully in a better position to answer these questions.
    - sliverstorm 13y ago
      Ok, an interview would make sense then. My thoughts are basically, as an outsider I don't know the things that are "not fact but pretty much accepted as true". So it is valuable to me to learn about those things in an article.
  - 13y ago

pbreit 13y ago

I thought the opposite. First, the headline is just plain wrong and not even really in a click-baity way. Square hasn't even hinted at an IPO and Box is likely to have a successful one I the next 30-90 days. Dismissing either as a "commodity" is wrong. Both provide services that are fairly sticky and both have demonstrated the rare ability to acquire customers at scale.

ryguytilidie 13y ago
Square hasn't even hinted at an IPO? I think they've been hinting at an IPO to the people they've been recruiting for the past 4 years. They sold my friend on the value of their future IPO and he started there in late 2010...
funkyy 13y ago
I dont know how Box can get succsfull IPO. Then company is burningb cash without clear strategy to change that. Box ipo will be churn and burn unless they either change ceo or get idea how they can compete with dropbox and other big guys...
- xerophtye 13y ago
  Now i may be wrong, in which case, do enlighten me. But hasn't Box been playing the corporate game for quite some time? And Dropbox was just beginning to step into that market, no? So wouldn't that make Box the big guy, and Dropbox the much adored underdog? I mean sure Dropbox has a MASSIVE userbase, but an enormous percentage of them are free users. Box on the other hand has a corporate userbase, and corporate pays.
  - phamilton 13y ago
    My experience with Box has been as follows: 1. Employees share files via email. 2. Employees start sharing files via Dropbox. 3. Management pitched Box by salesperson. Signs contract. 4. Employees told to use Box instead of Dropbox. Dropbox blocked. 5. Employees share files via email.
  - funkyy 13y ago
    Only because they are doing corporate game for long time is making my point even stronger. They are on the market longer with better sales strategy, yet they cannot break even, they are burning cash and as opposite to Dropbox they still have no business model that would help them to make the money. Owner have sold almost all his shares just to keep the company alive - I wouldn't be surprised if IPO would see some heavy drop in value as no investor well in the tech market will invest in this bubble. If Box will miss IPO they will run out of money in what - 1-2 years? And what's then? They will shut their sales and really poor marketing department? Do you see where this is going?

acchow 13y ago

It was a terrible article with baseless claims about Square's business. "While its profit margins have never been made public, it’s generally believed that the company is near break even or slightly unprofitable" That is entirely conjecture - and this is journalism??? Then it frames the narrative with negative leading: "These high expenses and low revenues lead to obviously high burn rates. Square is believed to have lost more than $100 million in 2013" But... the whole point of raising funding is to spend it. If you didn't need the capital for plans to grow rapidly, you shouldn't have raised capital in the first place.

sliverstorm 13y ago
That is entirely conjecture - and this is journalism? When hard facts are not around to be had, reporting the general consensus seems acceptable to me. You may have been thinking of investigative journalism?
- bigdubs 13y ago
  One of the principles of journalistic integrity is that coverage should be free of "editorialization" or injecting your own opinions as the writer into the narrative of the story (thus maintaining objectivity). One example: "it's believed that the losses number in the billions", you should say instead, "it is uncertain what squares operating metrics are currently, or have been in the past." Only report what you know to be facts, the rest, "conjecture", have someone more qualified than you make those conjectures. Maybe interview someone who works at square who is familiar with these things? Then, slightly, you as the writer will have distanced your own feelings about the subject by relying on someone else, who is hopefully in a better position to answer these questions.
  - sliverstorm 13y ago
    Ok, an interview would make sense then. My thoughts are basically, as an outsider I don't know the things that are "not fact but pretty much accepted as true". So it is valuable to me to learn about those things in an article.
- 13y ago