Looks like we're missing out



  • http://www.joelonsoftware.com

     "2010 was an absolutely amazing year here at Stack Overflow.  We raised $6 million in venture capital, and we went from three
    full time employees to 27. We built a 7500 square foot office in New
    York, and we launched a ton of new features and sites, like Stack
    Exchange, a network of 33 Q&A sites on diverse topics from cooking
    to computer science."

    27 employees and $6 million for ....... what exactly?  Apparently I need to hire 26 people and build a big new office so I can get some of that VC money to run a website that generates zero revenue.



  •  From cooking to computer science?  Please tell me they're not going alphabetically.



  • So you think it's a WTF that a hugely popular site (which does take advertisements and sponsorships, as a quick look on the SO homepage will tell you) is making money?



  • Well, 27 employees for:






    C*O x 3

    Software Engineer x 12

    Sysadmin x 2

    Generic manager-y sounding titles x 4

    Generic sales-y sounding title x 5

    Designer x 1



    I don't think that's so ridiculous, is it?



  • @DaveyDaveDave said:

    Well, 27 employees for:






    C*O x 3

    Software Engineer x 12

    Sysadmin x 2

    Generic manager-y sounding titles x 4

    Generic sales-y sounding title x 5

    Designer x 1



    I don't think that's so ridiculous, is it?

    Not if I'm a part of it.

    Sadly, I'm not. So yes, yes it is ridiculous.



  • @da Doctah said:

     From cooking to computer science?  Please tell me they're not going alphabetically.

    They just choose an non-standard starting point.



  • I don't know about the employees, but 6 million should pay the rent in Manhattan for at least a few months.



  • @the_nell_87 said:

    So you think it's a WTF that a hugely popular site (which does take advertisements and sponsorships, as a quick look on the SO homepage will tell you) is making money?
     

    I see very little advertising ( a couple of job ads) and if you click on their "advertising Info" it mentions "tag sponsorships".  WTF?  I guess I just don't have the dotcom mentality.  I don't see anything that would require that many people or generate enough revenue to justify millions in investment.



  •  I'm pretty sure that they license the stackoverflow engine for corporate use (so you can create your own question/answer portal).  So they make money off the work they've done, even if stackoverflow makes minimal amounts of money.  Let's not forget that because stackoverflow has a very targeted audience, the adspace they sell is also very targeted, and thus they can charge more per ad impression than your average website.

     And if I were them, after having committed god knows how many hours to getting it right, I'd hire a few people to take over while I take some serious vacation time.

     



  • @dogbrags said:

     I'm pretty sure that they license the stackoverflow engine for corporate use (so you can create your own question/answer portal).  So they make money off the work they've done, even if stackoverflow makes minimal amounts of money. 
    Well, they did originally, but not any more. In fact, they refuse to license for money any more.



  • They also make money off their jobs portal. Don't know how much, mind you.



  • Isn't this the same guy who, only a few years ago, said he was purposefully growing his company without any VC? I guess "Stack Overflow" is a different company, so the rules don't apply.

    Well, with any hope, he'll read the post on how much OpenID sucks and will make Stack Overflow actually usable.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @the_nell_87 said:

    So you think it's a WTF that a hugely popular site (which does take advertisements and sponsorships, as a quick look on the SO homepage will tell you) is making money?
     

    I see very little advertising ( a couple of job ads) and if you click on their "advertising Info" it mentions "tag sponsorships".  WTF?  I guess I just don't have the dotcom mentality.  I don't see anything that would require that many people or generate enough revenue to justify millions in investment.

    I think tag sponsorships are where a lot of their money comes from. Basically, a software company pays SO big bucks so that whenever a popular tag (e.g. "flash") is displayed, that company's logo is displayed next to it (e.g. Adobe's). I don't get it either, but I guess that's why I'm not a venture capitalist.



  • For the uninformed among us, what exactly is wrong with OpenID? I haven't had any usability problems whatsoever with it and I've been using SO for a couple years now.



  • @Mason Wheeler said:

    For the uninformed among us, what exactly is wrong with OpenID? I haven't had any usability problems whatsoever with it and I've been using SO for a couple years now.

    The idea is sound but the implementation is very bad, in a nutshell, the biggest thing that jumps to mind is that is not standard (it will work on some sites and it won't in others) and that is broken from time to time in some sites (part the site fault, part google fault)

    If you use google then

     



  • @serguey123 said:

    @Mason Wheeler said:

    For the uninformed among us, what exactly is wrong with OpenID? I haven't had any usability problems whatsoever with it and I've been using SO for a couple years now.

    The idea is sound but the implementation is very bad, in a nutshell, the biggest thing that jumps to mind is that is not standard (it will work on some sites and it won't in others) and that is broken from time to time in some sites (part the site fault, part google fault)

    If you use google then

     

    Or read the links I posted in the other forum everybody ignores.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @serguey123 said:

    @Mason Wheeler said:

    For the uninformed among us, what exactly is wrong with OpenID? I haven't had any usability problems whatsoever with it and I've been using SO for a couple years now.

    The idea is sound but the implementation is very bad, in a nutshell, the biggest thing that jumps to mind is that is not standard (it will work on some sites and it won't in others) and that is broken from time to time in some sites (part the site fault, part google fault)

    If you use google then

     

    Or read the links I posted in the other forum everybody ignores. 

    Err, sorry if we don't pay enough attention to you, I did not see/recalled that thread but you have in the past talked about how much OpenID implementation sucks, so you have dibs or whatever



  • @serguey123 said:

    Err, sorry if we don't pay enough attention to you,

    I'm just trying to answer his question. I guess I should apologize for posting a relevant link to more information. Or whatever.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I'm just trying to answer his question. I guess I should apologize for posting a relevant link to more information. Or whatever.

    Perhaps I read too much into this sentence

    @blakeyrat said:

    Or read the links I posted in the other forum everybody ignores.

    But it looked like that, perhaps if the phrasing did not match an attention seeking ****** then I wouldn't make that assumption.  Sorry for that.



  • @serguey123 said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    I'm just trying to answer his question. I guess I should apologize for posting a relevant link to more information. Or whatever.

    Perhaps I read too much into this sentence

    @blakeyrat said:

    Or read the links I posted in the other forum everybody ignores.

    But it looked like that, perhaps if the phrasing did not match an attention seeking ****** then I wouldn't make that assumption.  Sorry for that.

    And all your various snarky comments aren't attention seeking?  Come on.

     



  • @serguey123 said:

    But it looked like that, perhaps if the phrasing did not match an attention seeking ****** then I wouldn't make that assumption.

    Well, a lot of stuff I type is an exaggeration (because it's funnier that way), but saying "everybody ignores" the General Discussion forum is pretty damned close to a statement of fact.

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.



  • @b-redeker said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.

    _whore? Like it's a member variable? ... I'm so confused.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Perhaps I should have used 5, did not count them, damn I'm getting dislexic.

    @b-redeker said:

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.

    Take your pick

    @frits said:

     

    And all your various snarky comments aren't attention seeking?  Come on.

    Not really, is more of a trait, also consider that english is not even my second language so stuff might get lost in the translation, one way or the other



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @b-redeker said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.

    _whore? Like it's a member variable? ... I'm so confused.

    Oo oo, I know...  Is it Object?

     



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @b-redeker said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.

    _whore? Like it's a member variable? ... I'm so confused.

    or TWhore, old prefix used when working in C++/C



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @b-redeker said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    What swear is masked by 6 asterisks? "Fucker" maybe? That's all I can think of... usually people would say "attention seeking whore" but that don't fit.

    Think OO and it makes perfect sense again.

    _whore? Like it's a member variable? ... I'm so confused.

    Look, it's either IsA or HasA, so take your pick.



  • T variable names remind me of Borland's VCL (Borland c++ / Delphi library)...bad memories



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Isn't this the same guy who, only a few years ago, said he was purposefully growing his company without any VC? I guess "Stack Overflow" is a different company, so the rules don't apply.
    Pretty much. He does explain this, if you're really interested: Raising money for StackOverflow@Joel said:

    At the time, I had no doubt that I wanted Fog Creek to be a Ben and Jerry’s type of company, and that model has served us well. By staying profitable and growing carefully, we’ve managed to survive two big downturns and we’ve grown into a stable, 34-person company that’s a great place to work and is likely to remain stable, and a great place to work, for a long time.

    StackOverflow, though, is a bit of a different story.

    I'll remain un-shocked until he raises VC for Fog Creek…


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.