Fable is winding down(fable.app)
fable.app
Fable is winding down
https://www.fable.app/blog/fable-is-winding-down
77 comments
This shouldn't be surprising anymore. This has happened every week since 2010. This is the VC cycle, and it happens over and over and over and over and over again. In fact, I'm sure there's some flashy new thing on the front page right now that will have its own corresponding "goodbye" thread in 2-10 years, and everyone will get screwed by that, too.
We can lament the current state of affairs, but let's not pretend it's abnormal.
We can lament the current state of affairs, but let's not pretend it's abnormal.
I run a solo bootstrapped SaaS. When people sometimes ask me whether I think this is a stable business, I tell them that with a VC-funded company, it's almost certain that there will be an outcome in several years that will not be good for customers. VC-funded companies go bankrupt, get acqui-hired, or get strategically acquired most of the time, and all these outcomes are bad for customers. The only outcome which is slightly less negative is going public, but very few companies reach that stage, and even then you get endless feature creep and progressive ensh*ttification (like with Dropbox, for example).
Self-funded sustainable businesses can be much more stable in the long term.
Self-funded sustainable businesses can be much more stable in the long term.
Wouldn’t the low credibility VCs, who don’t care about customers being thrown under the bus, be displaced by higher credibility VCs over time?
Why?
Most people (as in 99.9%) don't give a shit about venture capital and don't follow it at all. I would guess that most people (as in >50%) couldn't even give you a half-way accurate definition of it.
If you're buying enterprise software you're more likely to know that VC exists but you're not any more likely to care about it. None of the people writing 5-7 figure enterprise software checks are tracking which VCs are at which firm when, and who invested in what, and what company had a negative client impact when, and all that. And even if you were tracking it what are the odds that you'll need the same software 5 or 10 years later when it might be relevant to the decision?
Things evolve based on evolutionary pressures only and the VC world is too disconnected from its negative impacts to feel any pressure from them.
Put another way, credibility (from the standpoint of the customer) does not positively or negatively impact a VC in any way.
Most people (as in 99.9%) don't give a shit about venture capital and don't follow it at all. I would guess that most people (as in >50%) couldn't even give you a half-way accurate definition of it.
If you're buying enterprise software you're more likely to know that VC exists but you're not any more likely to care about it. None of the people writing 5-7 figure enterprise software checks are tracking which VCs are at which firm when, and who invested in what, and what company had a negative client impact when, and all that. And even if you were tracking it what are the odds that you'll need the same software 5 or 10 years later when it might be relevant to the decision?
Things evolve based on evolutionary pressures only and the VC world is too disconnected from its negative impacts to feel any pressure from them.
Put another way, credibility (from the standpoint of the customer) does not positively or negatively impact a VC in any way.
A lack of credibility is an easy excuse for asking for big enterprise discounts, on well everything offered.
The highly credible VCs should be able to positively influence the negotiated pricing, at least by association.
The highly credible VCs should be able to positively influence the negotiated pricing, at least by association.
My whole point is the association is very, very far removed from anyone signing checks. Nobody knows who the VC investors of their enterprise vendors are.
The smart money knows, which admittedly describes only a small subset.
But even if everyone was clueless, the seller will still likely present such information to the buyer to justify not providing discounts.
But even if everyone was clueless, the seller will still likely present such information to the buyer to justify not providing discounts.
There are no VCs that care about customers.
VCs care about their returns. They get returns by selling the company to the next entity in line — a strategic acquirer, an acqui-hire acquirer, or through an IPO. To maximize their returns, they insist on maximizing growth, specifically user base growth. And when they sell, the acquiring entity usually ruins the experience for users, shuts down the business, or both.
VCs care about their returns. They get returns by selling the company to the next entity in line — a strategic acquirer, an acqui-hire acquirer, or through an IPO. To maximize their returns, they insist on maximizing growth, specifically user base growth. And when they sell, the acquiring entity usually ruins the experience for users, shuts down the business, or both.
I think it depends on a lot of factors.
I think the biggest issue would be the most "successful" VCs aka the ones that make the most money, have the most money to invest in other companies.
If they can make the most return on their investment by fucking over customers than they would have a greater impact.
I suppose if we had the ability to "pierce the VC veil" we could see who the main VCs are and choose weather or not to use a product based on their track record.
I think the biggest issue would be the most "successful" VCs aka the ones that make the most money, have the most money to invest in other companies.
If they can make the most return on their investment by fucking over customers than they would have a greater impact.
I suppose if we had the ability to "pierce the VC veil" we could see who the main VCs are and choose weather or not to use a product based on their track record.
Even when the product isnt free, the customer is the product. The real customer is investors. Unless there are no investors this is the way things go.
> Self-funded sustainable businesses can be much more stable in the long term.
Can even grow at a progressive pace by expanding into adjacent segments: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20211024
Can even grow at a progressive pace by expanding into adjacent segments: https://apenwarr.ca/log/20211024
Yeah, this is the “disappointed but not surprised” kind of situation.
Was Fable using a well-known format, or is it a proprietary format specific to the app ? If it's proprietary, would it make any sense to export it directly? Is it even a file format, or is it possible they were simply storing various pieces of data related to your project in various places in backend DBs?
Says in the article “the Fable file format is not transferable to other platforms.”
So export a structured dump of all relevant data and leave it up to someone else to decipher.
I agree. I deciphered a few weird formats, for example the raw format of an old camera, the save files of drawings in WinWord 1. It's easier if you can make a few custom small examples, for example in the drawings use only one line, then two, then tree. They were binary formats, so the trick was to use an hex editor and look at them for a long time and make a few guess. I never deciphered them 100%, but I had enough info to read the files I care about and create new files.
Sometimes you get a riff format and a big chunk of the guesswork is solved.
And most modern formats are just a bunch of xml files inside a tar.gz , so now the first step is to change the extension to .zip and cross your fingers.
Sometimes you get a riff format and a big chunk of the guesswork is solved.
And most modern formats are just a bunch of xml files inside a tar.gz , so now the first step is to change the extension to .zip and cross your fingers.
Do you know what's less work and less legally fraught? Doing nothing.
I think it says more about us that we are at a loss for words or shocked that a startup goes under and its unwinding is messy. It is neither a big deal, nor is it particularly unethical that this should happen. Caveat emptor. This type of reaction should be reserved for real catastrophes like a cancer diagnosis, a war, the death of a loved one, etc.
Have we all become so fragile that something as minor as a startup with a small number of users shutting down causes us shock and disgust?
Have we all become so fragile that something as minor as a startup with a small number of users shutting down causes us shock and disgust?
This is a website full of startup people, a startup going under with a messy shutdown is something I would expect this audience to be upset about.
> This type of reaction should be reserved for real catastrophes like a cancer diagnosis, a war, the death of a loved one, etc.
Why are you on here lecturing us? Shouldn't you be out saving the world or something important? Or at least lecturing politicians?
> This type of reaction should be reserved for real catastrophes like a cancer diagnosis, a war, the death of a loved one, etc.
Why are you on here lecturing us? Shouldn't you be out saving the world or something important? Or at least lecturing politicians?
It always amazes me how many of these "we're winding down X" stories hit the front page here and I've never heard of X. We really do work in silos, even if it doesn't seem that way.
I had actually assumed it was the studio behind the Fable games, or some sort of mmrpg based on the games.
I have no idea why my startup Halo failed.
Same, my initial reaction is shock and disgust that I was missing out on a fable mmorpg
Or maybe it's that you're well informed and X wasn't well known...
When a product shuts down it's usually because it wasn't profitable (or not profitable enough). Either they didn't get enough paying customers or they set their pricing too low. For whatever reason- but there's probably some correlation between a product shutting down and many people not being aware of its existence.
Even without being well known, these stories can hit the front page if a few people upvote a post quickly, and then the post gets a few sympathy votes as it rises up the page.
When a product shuts down it's usually because it wasn't profitable (or not profitable enough). Either they didn't get enough paying customers or they set their pricing too low. For whatever reason- but there's probably some correlation between a product shutting down and many people not being aware of its existence.
Even without being well known, these stories can hit the front page if a few people upvote a post quickly, and then the post gets a few sympathy votes as it rises up the page.
When a VC-backed company shuts down, it's usually because they weren't growing. You can only get to the next round of funding if you're still growing—otherwise you run out of runway.
I don't think profit plays a big role.
I don't think profit plays a big role.
Profit plays the biggest role, growth is secondary. Another round of funding is only necessary if they aren't profitable enough to sustain themselves on their own.
Although, as I think about it, maybe as an AI company nobody ever expected them to ever get to profitability so the only way to continue their existence was through continued funding.
Although, as I think about it, maybe as an AI company nobody ever expected them to ever get to profitability so the only way to continue their existence was through continued funding.
IMO the biggest detriment of VC-backed companies is that they can still get killed when they're profitable because they're just not profitable enough.
You found a company and own 100%. You get investment and bring on partners, you set aside 20% for employee shares, etc. All of a sudden there's a dozen owners and nobody owns 50%. You're profitable in the sense that everyone's payroll clears and you're making rent, with money left over, but it's not enough to invest in anything big, and the investors won't put up anything more because your growth has stalled.
Every investor who was previously your "partner" will be trying to shut the company down and sell it for parts.
VCs don't make their money by having a portfolio of companies throwing off $200k/yr in profit to a dozen different investors.
You found a company and own 100%. You get investment and bring on partners, you set aside 20% for employee shares, etc. All of a sudden there's a dozen owners and nobody owns 50%. You're profitable in the sense that everyone's payroll clears and you're making rent, with money left over, but it's not enough to invest in anything big, and the investors won't put up anything more because your growth has stalled.
Every investor who was previously your "partner" will be trying to shut the company down and sell it for parts.
VCs don't make their money by having a portfolio of companies throwing off $200k/yr in profit to a dozen different investors.
Maybe if you had heard of it, it wouldn't be winding down
This is what happens when massive amounts of free money slosh around courtesy of ZIRP. Question is: will everybody rush to join whatever new darling graces the front page? Or will they finally learn their lesson?
This seems like a weird comment to make a throwaway for :)
The very best example of that is the Kagi search engine which, if you spend on time of HN, looks very widely used, but actually has less than 10,000 customers.
It is the right order of magnitude, but when stats are already publiclcy available let's be accurate :)
https://kagi.com/stats
https://kagi.com/stats
Ah yeah, my information is probably from a year+ ago since they passed 20K only in January 2024
Yeah, I thought it was the F#-to-JS compiler, and I was sad for a moment. I've never heard of this app so it's hard for me to be too upset over it.
Sad, I’ve been waiting for the “figma of after effects”—one of the few positive (albeit unlikely) potentials around the failed adobe purchase.
“However, by the time we started to take Fable to market, AI was beginning to challenge the very nature of software itself, and our multi-modal bet with Prism wasn’t enough to cut through. And while we hold a strong pov on how the next generation of creative workflows should evolve, unfortunately, we don’t have the time to get there.”
Failed AI bet?
“However, by the time we started to take Fable to market, AI was beginning to challenge the very nature of software itself, and our multi-modal bet with Prism wasn’t enough to cut through. And while we hold a strong pov on how the next generation of creative workflows should evolve, unfortunately, we don’t have the time to get there.”
Failed AI bet?
The app is built, why not just let it simmer for awhile. Are the costs of running it greater than the money it brings in?
It's a great reason why webapps suck. A licensed local app would be great here, as the customer wouldn't lose value when Fable disappears. Yet now customers lose all value. Great.
So frustrating as a user.
So frustrating as a user.
Webapps will work locally soon. Say hello to OPFS https://web.dev/articles/origin-private-file-system. Works surprisingly good, see this demo app https://fink2.onrender.com/
"Can store data" isn't "will work locally"
For one thing, it's origin-private, so take a guess how well that works when the company owning the DNS records for that origin goes out of business.
(There's also the issue with actually having an executable that can just run without any external dependencies)
For one thing, it's origin-private, so take a guess how well that works when the company owning the DNS records for that origin goes out of business.
(There's also the issue with actually having an executable that can just run without any external dependencies)
Yeah bummer that Safari and Firefox are blocking any origin file access for security reasons.
> when the company owning the DNS records for that origin goes out of business.
Likely not a problem. Local data in OPFS is synced with a remote server for collaboration reasons anyway.
> There's also the issue with actually having an executable that can just run without any external dependencies
Assume you target the browser as OS, then it's already possible to have an executable: Run the JS file that renders a UI. Related: We will likely have an app launcher demo soon for https://lix.opral.com/
> when the company owning the DNS records for that origin goes out of business.
Likely not a problem. Local data in OPFS is synced with a remote server for collaboration reasons anyway.
> There's also the issue with actually having an executable that can just run without any external dependencies
Assume you target the browser as OS, then it's already possible to have an executable: Run the JS file that renders a UI. Related: We will likely have an app launcher demo soon for https://lix.opral.com/
Sadly, I don’t think Safari or Firefox are close to shipping OPFS. https://caniuse.com/?search=File%20System
OPFS works in Safari, see this demo app https://csv-n2qj.onrender.com/.
What doesn't work in Safari and Firefox is (non sandboxed) access to the files of a user. OPFS is sandboxed.
What doesn't work in Safari and Firefox is (non sandboxed) access to the files of a user. OPFS is sandboxed.
Oh, thanks! That actually makes it useful for something I want to do.
I wish we could talk about your use case later at Local Thirst. But ... I lost my passport and won't be able to make it. Another time!
Yep. I lament the loss of native, local apps all the time (and the prevalence of "always online" local apps - I've seen LoB apps that were promising, native apps only to find out they won't run offline because the app does a license check online at startup and will refuse to launch without a connection).
Everything as SaaS web apps is just yet another chapter in the enshittification of tech.
Everything as SaaS web apps is just yet another chapter in the enshittification of tech.
> I've seen LoB apps that were promising, native apps only to find out they won't run offline because the app does a license check online at startup and will refuse to launch without a connection
Isn't this fine as long as this is the only thing it does?
"Making sure this has been paid for" seems completely legitimate.
Isn't this fine as long as this is the only thing it does?
"Making sure this has been paid for" seems completely legitimate.
Totally fine and legitimate, the problem comes in situations where you might need to launch without an active internet connection. Arguably this wasn't the best vendor in the world, but IMO there should be a grace period, i.e., must connect at least x times per months instead of at every start up.
Keeping an app running requires personnel, personnel is expensive, and good personnel is unlikely to cool their heels on an EOL'd app at an EOL'd company.
It really doesn’t though. You could scale down to a 1-3 person team. Stop building new features. Keep a full stack dev on for 1year to fix bugs and the remaining team does customer support.
Hiring a contracting company for 3 mo per year to perform updates.
My guess is the decision maker doesn’t think it’s worth their time to run a business like this. Instead of rapidly shifting focus into a higher growth area, they would continue to be attached to a shrinking product
Hiring a contracting company for 3 mo per year to perform updates.
My guess is the decision maker doesn’t think it’s worth their time to run a business like this. Instead of rapidly shifting focus into a higher growth area, they would continue to be attached to a shrinking product
A 1-3 person team in the US is a half million per annum proposition, and, again, even if you could make the payroll, you have to retain qualified engineers for a role that has zero growth potential.
1-3 people to do customer support do not cost $500k.
you don't have to retain qualified engineers b/c you hire a contracting company that manages employee growth within their own organization.
you don't have to retain qualified engineers b/c you hire a contracting company that manages employee growth within their own organization.
Serious contract engineers cost more, not less. This isn't a Fiverr job.
cool, so you hire one for 2x the the price of a full time one for 1 week per month. 12 weeks * 2x price < 52 weeks * 1x the price.
I've done this job for a 3-4 startups before. they can't afford a full time engineer, so they hire someone to work part-time to keep the lights on. its not a hard job and many engineers appreciate the consistent work and extra cash.
I've done this job for a 3-4 startups before. they can't afford a full time engineer, so they hire someone to work part-time to keep the lights on. its not a hard job and many engineers appreciate the consistent work and extra cash.
Yes. The app costs. The insurance costs. The franchise tax costs. The accounting costs. The legal costs.
If investors are getting nervous and want a faster ROI, they can decide to bail and force a rapid shutdown.
> However, by the time we started to take Fable to market, AI was beginning to challenge the very nature of software itself
No it didn't. ChatGPT spitting out snippets of broken shit where you have to tell it exactly what you want and think through the entire architecture yourself is not a challenge to the nature of software. Especially older models that were even worse than the current 2024 ones.
Also, AI-generated code is still code. The underlying hardware still works the same.
No it didn't. ChatGPT spitting out snippets of broken shit where you have to tell it exactly what you want and think through the entire architecture yourself is not a challenge to the nature of software. Especially older models that were even worse than the current 2024 ones.
Also, AI-generated code is still code. The underlying hardware still works the same.
If the founders drop by this thread:
* Please open source it! *
This is the best conclusion for everybody involved.
* Please open source it! *
This is the best conclusion for everybody involved.
Open Sourcing is a lot of work. Plus it might contain (even huge) parts that can not be open sourced.
And even unknown parts where real ownership and patents might be unknown.
Where did this bizarre myth start? You apache-license the code you wrote, write a paragraph about code isn't yours or you're not sure about and is therefore missing, and move on with your life.
Patent indemnification is not your problem, it's the problem of whoever wants to use the code.
Patent indemnification is not your problem, it's the problem of whoever wants to use the code.
Can't agree more.
Erlang, FoundationDB, there's plenty of success stories of products who were EOL at some point and open sourcing was the thing that made them explode in popularity.
I think Fable is a very-high quality product, it's unfortunate it didn't materialize as a business, but the software has enough quality and popularity to maybe become something like the Blender of that niche; a thing that would be extremely beneficial to any of the founders' future endeavors.
Erlang, FoundationDB, there's plenty of success stories of products who were EOL at some point and open sourcing was the thing that made them explode in popularity.
I think Fable is a very-high quality product, it's unfortunate it didn't materialize as a business, but the software has enough quality and popularity to maybe become something like the Blender of that niche; a thing that would be extremely beneficial to any of the founders' future endeavors.
Exactly. If the company is winding down anyways, it's hard for things to get worse anyways.
From their terms:
> You must be 18 years of age or older and reside in the United States or any of its territories to use the Services
In hindsight, excluding 95.3% of the world from using their product may have been a mistake.
> You must be 18 years of age or older and reside in the United States or any of its territories to use the Services
In hindsight, excluding 95.3% of the world from using their product may have been a mistake.
What's the TAM of people who want a web-app vector graphics and animation tool? It's certainly less than 8 billion.
[deleted]
How on earth does the "AI! Paradigm change!" noise make any sense as reason for a shutdown?
Huh, it's interesting the supposition is that AI tools are the future, therefore they're unable to compete in time especially when they seemed perfectly poised to adopt that strategy.
Why wouldn't they use that to sell another round to bridge?
Why wouldn't they use that to sell another round to bridge?
I was just looking at motion graphics (I guess it's called motion design now) tools yesterday. I have a small YouTube channel and I was noodling around with the idea of making a little intro screen that just does some kind of swishy flooshy thing. I am very good at operating technical software, but I have no graphic design skills, so as much as I am concerned about and skeptical about AI "art", I thought I'd see what's out there. Maybe instead of starting from a template, it could generate an idea that I could finish my own way.
To get to the point: I didn't find anything that looked usable. Maybe it's telling that I didn't find Fable/Prism at all. But from what I can make of their site, it seems to be about adding (to my eye, unpleasant and unnecessary) textures, rather than generating new animations.
This looked like a nice piece of software with a lot of functionality and a meaningful customer base. It sucks that everything is grow, grow, grow, grow, exit, or die. I've been contemplating starting something, but I don't know if there's any oxygen left for the idea of simply making something people want and selling/operating it at a reasonable profit.
To get to the point: I didn't find anything that looked usable. Maybe it's telling that I didn't find Fable/Prism at all. But from what I can make of their site, it seems to be about adding (to my eye, unpleasant and unnecessary) textures, rather than generating new animations.
This looked like a nice piece of software with a lot of functionality and a meaningful customer base. It sucks that everything is grow, grow, grow, grow, exit, or die. I've been contemplating starting something, but I don't know if there's any oxygen left for the idea of simply making something people want and selling/operating it at a reasonable profit.
I thought it was the reading community app [1], which I use off and on. Never heard of these guys, so nothing to see here for me.
1. https://fable.co/
1. https://fable.co/
What does AI have to do for the shutting down of a motion graphics design app?
They focused on the wrong thing, spent too much money and decided to call it quits.
They focused on the wrong thing, spent too much money and decided to call it quits.
Has someone reimplemented the flash Editor in some open source project? I know there's a player made in rust.
I found the "why are we closing down" to be somewhat weak.
I mean, you're closing down cause you ran out of cash right? But apparently the app is beloved by customers... right?
Something about AI (which seems somewhat vague...)
Anyway, why not just be honest? We swung for the fences, didn't quite get there, the money is all gone, and no-one wants yo give us more...
Frankly as post mortems go, this one is pretty weak.
I mean, you're closing down cause you ran out of cash right? But apparently the app is beloved by customers... right?
Something about AI (which seems somewhat vague...)
Anyway, why not just be honest? We swung for the fences, didn't quite get there, the money is all gone, and no-one wants yo give us more...
Frankly as post mortems go, this one is pretty weak.
I was wondering the same, was it a decision or a realization? I suppose the decision part is to do it now rather than later when it can get messier. I've gone down with a startup ship and it was rather pointless.
Do they live happily ever after?
Yet another example of how startups are often a negative for customers.
> We recommend you look through your Fable files and export your projects off the platform (e.g. to mp4, gif, lottie… etc).
I genuinely am at a loss for words here. Somebody sat down and decided that giving you your project sources in some form is too much work, just a GIF export will do.
(For those looking to save their data: go for Lottie, it’s a bit more versatile and you can preserve vector data at least.)
EDIT: the ideal way to go here would of course be open sourcing the whole thing!