[SolarNet]

> Unity isn't close to profitable, and never has been

This isn't really true though, their core business is and was profitable if you exclude all the of acquisitions junk, stock shenanigans, and loans to pay for it they have been doing.

It just didn't have the margins expected of a public company and so they did all that other junk to pump those numbers.

[jeffchien]

I don't think this is true. Unless I'm misreading their S1, they have been operating at a loss: https://www.meritechcapital.com/blog/unity-software-ipo-s-1-...

[Scramblejams]

...with nearly 8,000 employees. I'd love to see a breakdown of how much is being lost by each of their various business units.

[hcks]

"It’s profitable if you ignore cost of capital"

I implore devs to watch any of the business 101 class they think they’re too smart for

[qwytw]

> stock shenanigans

They pay their employees and executives in stock. They'd have to spend much more cash if they stopped doing that.

[TylerE]

Could it not be argued that the situation they're in is exactly because "big number go brrrr" over building a sustainable business?

[maccard]

> This isn't really true though, their core business is and was profitable if you exclude all the of acquisitions junk, stock shenanigans, and loans to pay for it they have been doing.

"We're profitable if you ignore all the things we're spending money on"

[squeaky-clean]

> if you ignore all the things

Not all the things, just their unprofitable side business attempts. It's like knowing a guy with a well paying job who always complains he is broke. But he conveniently never mentions that he's spending $4500 per month on a Lamborghini lease.

[fineIllregister]

The claim here is that none of that spending is generating revenue. They could stop spending that money, their income would remain the same, and then they would be profitable.