Hacker News Reader

Comment by aphextron | Hacker News Reader

>They raised 204.5 Million dollars over 9 venture financing rounds. They have approximately 800 current employees. Does any of this seem wild to anyone else?

This honestly sounds pretty reasonable to me. They made a ~5x exit after 10 years of raising funds and developing the site. Glassdoor easily has the most reliable salary and job data for software engineers that exists, even beyond LinkedIn which Microsoft just paid $26 billion for, and that's incredibly valuable. I see this entirely as a smart acqui-hire and data acquisition move. Nothing to do with revenue.

View on HN

I've noticed that in your evaluation there wasn't a single mention of revenue, income or even market share.

It boggles the mind how a $1B takeover can be described as reasonable while paying absolurely no attention to very basic performance indicators.

Has the world learned nothing from the dot com bubble?

Look at Recruit’s existing line of business and revenue. The bigger question, to me, is what happens if Google decides two sites dominating their organic listings is not welcome.

Massive backlash, claims of bias, lobbying and negative PR pieces, and more than likely regulations would then follow, putting at least a sizeable damper on their business and an unforeseen impact on future business. Companies with millions of dollars available to them will not go down without a fight.

So froogle/shopping.google all over again? I think Google made the change in 2012[1] with no meaningful backlash in the US and a fine in the EU they are appealing. So I think the lesson is that Goog can do whatever they like with job searches.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Shopping

My whole point is that any revenue from Glassdoor is meaningless and irrelevant. Their data is so valuable to the current business of a company that runs multiple recruiting firms that it's just a cost of doing business for them.

> My whole point is that any revenue from Glassdoor is meaningless and irrelevant.

That's the same tired old logic that brought the world the Myspace and Yahoo deal.

It’s ads and shaking down companies to subscribe. Their data is likely to be very valuable.

Money is fiction, rich people understand that and embrace it, poor people do not.

Yep, it sure is fascinating!

Much of the world prefers riding the bubble to FOMO. The frothier it gets, the less need for and meaning held by useful indicators. It's human nature :/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com