[wallmountedtv]

What baffles me is how they have $41k in expenses monthly for so few users. I'd love to see a breakdown of what in their infrastructure is eating up so much money.

[kevingadd]

Pure speculation, but AFAIK they provided benefits like health insurance to their staff, so even if they weren't offering high salaries I bet a sizable % of that monthly cost is personnel and associated costs.

They put their money (and investors' money) where their mouth was and actually ran a co-op instead of relying heavily on freelancers or cheap outsourced labor. It's unfortunate that doing that hampers sustainability, though.

[tptacek]

At $41k/mo burn they couldn't have been offering high salaries.

[jkap]

salary for four employees working well under market rate

[aseipp]

Payroll.

It turns out that when you actually pay money to people for their work, it is expensive. That is because the value provided by the labor of humans is, in fact, valuable. However, if you instead just exploit people and take advantage of them, lots of things can be really, really cheap. In fact, they can be so cheap it'd be insane not to take advantage of, some might say...

[nightpool]

Expenses also includes salary and accounting fees, AIUI

[martinky24]

Software devs ain't cheap

[Hamuko]

Depends from where you hire them.

[lfkdev]

presumably unclassifiable aws costs