It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his
salary depends on his not understanding it!—Upton Sinclair,
I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got
Licked
Valuation is usually based on potential revenue, not actual revenue. A $2 billion valuation would have been about $50 per user. It seems reasonable Stack Exchange should be able to make that much money per user somehow over the entire future existence of the company… if it’s run well. Which doesn’t seem to be happening from where I’m sitting.
Valuation is usually based on potential revenue, not actual revenue
How similar this is to how capitalists look at natural “resources”. “This website[wetland] sure is great. Lots of people[animals] are loving it. And it’s a vital part of the development[water] cycle… But it’s just not making me any money!”
I’m unsure of many people know that StackOverflow also had enterprise offerings. Our company has their own StackOverflow instance with very specific content to our tech stacks.
wasn’t it like 7-8 years ago an offer to host a custom community? Like $250 per site (while now i see their enteprise offer is only intranet and is priced per user)
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
lol almost $2 billion for a website with almost no ads and that makes almost no revenue? Especially now that they closed the (paid) jobs section?
ROI in 10000 years?
Valuation is usually based on potential revenue, not actual revenue. A $2 billion valuation would have been about $50 per user. It seems reasonable Stack Exchange should be able to make that much money per user somehow over the entire future existence of the company… if it’s run well. Which doesn’t seem to be happening from where I’m sitting.
How similar this is to how capitalists look at natural “resources”. “This website[wetland] sure is great. Lots of people[animals] are loving it. And it’s a vital part of the development[water] cycle… But it’s just not making me any money!”
I’m unsure of many people know that StackOverflow also had enterprise offerings. Our company has their own StackOverflow instance with very specific content to our tech stacks.
Yes but they stopped offering that years ago.
So, no more job classifieds, no saas, only ads from views… I don’t see where it can be profitable like that
No they didn’t? My company just recently introduced it.
wasn’t it like 7-8 years ago an offer to host a custom community? Like $250 per site (while now i see their enteprise offer is only intranet and is priced per user)
Stack Overflow for Enterprise ( https://meta.stackoverflow.com/revisions/326380/3 ) is a different product than Stack Overflow for Teams. The page where they sold that product is https://web.archive.org/web/20160821183132/http://business.stackoverflow.com/enterprise - note the pricing is “request a demo” which is typically short hand for “its gonna be expensive.”
The product later morphed into Stack Overflow for Teams and removed the on-prem options ( https://meta.stackoverflow.com/revisions/326380/11 ).