Dropbox has been operating at a loss since its creation and is currently not making a profit, so the jury is still out on whether it is actually successful (or just a VC-subsidized service that got advertised a lot).
You are correct, but the metrics of success have always been different in tech. Regular businesses would be considered failures if they had 10 years in the red. But if you get a "unicorn" valuation and manage to IPO without even making a profit, well, that's the dream for a lot of HN'ers. If somebody out there makes you a multi-millionaire based either on faith in your company or in their ability to shift the risk to the next sucker, who're you to say no?
This gives me concerns about legacy. Henry Ford is still well known and quoted today not only because he built a well known company and iconic products a century ago, but because his company is still building cultural icons today (F-150 and Mustang).
I would much prefer to build a Ford than a Yahoo/Tumblr/Compaq, even if it meant my personal fortune was 10x or 100x lower.
>the metrics of success have always been different in tech.
It hasn't always been that way at all, but it certainly is now. I think this is one of the huge red flags about the modern incarnation of the tech industry.
If dropbox only had a high valuation on paper, but employees/founders/investors couldn't actually exchange that into real $ in their bank account then sure, you can say the jury is still out.
But that's not the case. They built a product, have tons of paying users, and have IPO'd with a market cap over $10B. It's not money that only exists on paper. Founders and employees can sell their shares for real money and buy real things.
Their shareholders aren't just a handful of VC's anymore - they are public. The jury has decided, it's successful
Hypothetically, what if it never begins earning more money than it spends each year? At some point wouldn't it be unable to borrow any more (from banks or investors) and be forced to shut down? And if so, we still don't know if it can be profitable, right?
It’s successful to me as a user. Beats the heck out of that whole “set up an FTP server” recommendation. And how much is their loss due to growth focused investment?
rchaud|6 years ago
max76|6 years ago
I would much prefer to build a Ford than a Yahoo/Tumblr/Compaq, even if it meant my personal fortune was 10x or 100x lower.
JohnFen|6 years ago
It hasn't always been that way at all, but it certainly is now. I think this is one of the huge red flags about the modern incarnation of the tech industry.
zild3d|6 years ago
If dropbox only had a high valuation on paper, but employees/founders/investors couldn't actually exchange that into real $ in their bank account then sure, you can say the jury is still out.
But that's not the case. They built a product, have tons of paying users, and have IPO'd with a market cap over $10B. It's not money that only exists on paper. Founders and employees can sell their shares for real money and buy real things.
Their shareholders aren't just a handful of VC's anymore - they are public. The jury has decided, it's successful
nathan_long|6 years ago
Hypothetically, what if it never begins earning more money than it spends each year? At some point wouldn't it be unable to borrow any more (from banks or investors) and be forced to shut down? And if so, we still don't know if it can be profitable, right?
briandear|6 years ago