GitLab now worth twice what Microsoft paid for GitHub(cnbc.com)
cnbc.com
GitLab now worth twice what Microsoft paid for GitHub
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/17/gitlab-now-worth-twice-what-microsoft-paid-for-github.html
25 comments
So, what you're saying is that Microsoft got an absolute steal.
Github was acquired for stock. Meanwhile MS shares have tripled since Oct 2018.
Microsoft’s stock has tripled while also giving out a dividend the entire time.
If it’s about who owns the company, Gitlab got diluted by 25% since GitHub got bought (9%, 11%, and 6% dilutions for last two series and the IPO).
GitHub likely would be worth a lot more today, but this isn’t a fair comparison at all. Especially if you’re on HN and care about founder and employee equity, not VC equity.
If it’s about who owns the company, Gitlab got diluted by 25% since GitHub got bought (9%, 11%, and 6% dilutions for last two series and the IPO).
GitHub likely would be worth a lot more today, but this isn’t a fair comparison at all. Especially if you’re on HN and care about founder and employee equity, not VC equity.
It is like people just can’t not to vendorlock even with git.
Eh, they provide a useful service. I wouldn't want to run my own git server.
Honest question, why not?
Its not like that's something that will scale infinitely, you only have so many devs and so many repos to work on, also it's not like it's hard to backup the data, actually, you can bet that you will have a updated copy of every repo on someone's machine if things really go south.
Of all things we can outsource in our infra, git seems one of the least necessary.
Its not like that's something that will scale infinitely, you only have so many devs and so many repos to work on, also it's not like it's hard to backup the data, actually, you can bet that you will have a updated copy of every repo on someone's machine if things really go south.
Of all things we can outsource in our infra, git seems one of the least necessary.
Git vaults do a lot more than host remote git repos. Gitlab and github are valuable for everything else they do - the UI, PR management, issue tracking, CI, and so forth.
You don't have to though, that's what makes it so great. Just push with ssh to a directory under /var/www and you're good to go.
Use FTP!
Conversely, services that give access to leave/clone via an open protocol like git are the last ones you should worry about lock-in with...right?
Unless you get too comfortable with the services' tertiary benefits, and that's not lock in — that's just comfort.
Unless you get too comfortable with the services' tertiary benefits, and that's not lock in — that's just comfort.
Having all of your issue tracking, docs wiki, build pipelines and more be reliant on a platform Ian or just comfort, it’s lock-in. If you ask a company “can’t we just switch from gitlab to github? Or the reverse, you’ll get a million reasons why it’s a huge task, because everything outside of the repo itself isn’t easily transferred.
That is what happens when huge chuck of devs expect to use software as free beer, while the people actually writing those tools need to figure out ways to pay their bills.
A big reason why we are back into timesharing, the free beer is only the thin terminal stuff.
A big reason why we are back into timesharing, the free beer is only the thin terminal stuff.
Maybe on Wallstreet it's worth more, but I personally don't see much differentiation from a fundamental product standpoint. Source code, PRs and issues are the core of the solution for most. After a certain point, adding more features is going to distract from this.
Also, some of the listed "features" are things I would actively prefer not to have, such as "self-managed reliability". Kinda the whole point of me paying that bill is so I don't have to spend time on menial IT bullshit. I want to live in a fantasy where my source control and project tracking is hosted in a perfect way so I can focus on my product and not someone else's.
Of course, "Microsoft bad", so factor that in accordingly as you see fit.
Also, some of the listed "features" are things I would actively prefer not to have, such as "self-managed reliability". Kinda the whole point of me paying that bill is so I don't have to spend time on menial IT bullshit. I want to live in a fantasy where my source control and project tracking is hosted in a perfect way so I can focus on my product and not someone else's.
Of course, "Microsoft bad", so factor that in accordingly as you see fit.
On premise. Do not underestimate the number of companies that requires it.
This begs the question: who's going to swoop down and suck the life out of GitLab?
Oracle? IBM? Facebook?
Oracle? IBM? Facebook?
Does Salesforce own an enterprise code management system?
Makes me wonder what a GitHub IPO price would look like in this market. Oh well
>gwe3232t 2 hours ago [dead] [–]
>Printing money makes bubbles.
You're not wrong...
>Printing money makes bubbles.
You're not wrong...
good company, but arguably overvalued https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2021/10/12/gi...
The article would be more convincing if it was less of a blatant hatchet job, I got a bit dizzy with how it tried spinning everything into a negative.
Look at this author’s other works. Disillusioned would be a succinct description.
This is a terrible article. I don’t even know where to start - judging by green name I’m guessing mods will remove this soon.
github's huge mistake
Partial Resume of Financials:
Operating Income: From a loss of -128 million in 2020 to a loss of -208 million in 2021
Cost of Revenue: Increased from 9 million in 2020 to 24 million in 2021
Free Cash Flow: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/freecashflow.asp
From -60 million in 2020 to -74 million in 2021
Results: Wall Street goes wild and values it at 16.5 Billion ( that is with a B) :-)
Peak 2021 Dot-com bubble anyone ?