Hacker News Reader

Comment by tylerrobinson | Hacker News Reader

A compound monthly growth rate of “at least 15%” would be a hell of a treadmill to keep pace on. But aside from that, the target engagement figures seem aggressive. “A good metric for most SaaS startups … the typical monthly user visits the site at least two weekdays per week or 8 times per month.” “Most” SaaS startups?! I have used and loved plenty of B2B SaaS unicorns’ products that I consider the definition of successful but would never use so frequently. What business models other than social media are used so frequently?

View on HN

Context is important. There are plenty of startups that fit none of these criteria but can nonetheless be considered solidly successful. The article, however, is tailored for those ones that are looking to raise a $10M Series A funding round from a top Silicon Valley VC.

Yeah. I also see now from other blog posts on their account that they like project management and note taking style apps, which, like an email client, would much more reasonably be used daily.

Those apps aren’t only daily use but have a high switching cost. So it’s a double whammy: a company that can get punters to switch into their app at a high rate (despite the cost) must be doing something right and will also have the benefit of a drag on people switching out.

Wouldn't a tool used by employees of other companies conceivably be used 5x per week for x hours per day?

That's the type of applications I build. Essentially decision making tools.

What about tools that you configure once and then don't think about again. If the thing it does is useful then that feels like a very sticky model for a B2B SAAS tool.

Not to mention if you're providing some API's you might only expect people to visit the site after they initially sign up to read the docs and then maybe not again for weeks or months.

As someone who runs a currency data API [1] I can confirm this is strongly the case - even to the point where relatively often I get messages to the effect of "we believe our company uses your service - how do we access it and can we use your logs to help us identify where in our infrastructure requests are being sent from...".

Users from clearly legitimate businesses sometimes sign up, start the billing and then just disappear. No response to emails, support tickets etc. I'm often tracking down billing teams 18 months later trying to convince them they really do use our API, and that if I can't get them to renew their billing details I'll have to eventually disable their access due to non-payment and then their infrastructure will no longer have up-to-date exchange rates! In these situations I sometimes disable access for 24 hours and then re-enable it to see if this drums up a dev I can speak to. It's quite a process but I've won some "customers for life" by saving them from downtime they would have had if I just cut them off.

[1] https://www.exchangerate-api.com

Your domain is the keywords your customers would search for. I am surprised more companies don't follow this ingenious for SEO marketing.

We registered this domain in 2010 back when there was actually something called the "exact match bonus" in SEO. Basically if your domain exactly matched the searched keywords Google just automatically gave your site a massive boost in that SERP!

I can see why they did this since there were only a few TLD's back then compared to now and thus owning the .com for a specific keyword was a legitimate signal. I can't remember exactly when this got deprecated as a ranking factor but it was very useful for the first few years!

Over the years I've accumulated the domains of failed competitors that had more punchy names and toyed with the idea of rebranding but don't think it's worth it. The SEO risk of a rebrand is substantial concern.

Your service must work so well it became invisible and forgotten. That's quite the feat. Congratulations.

Thanks - I really appreciate that! On one hand it is partly this, the uptime/reliability/LTS endpoints have been the focus of many years of work.

However, that said, I think in the majority of the actual cases I'm describing above the cause is more a combination of 1.) the surprising percentage of tech companies that appear to be in a state of continual organizational dysfunction and 2.) how API's are inherently a background type of thing like lloydatkinson wrote!

In about 1 in 10 cases I'd also say the cause is actually because of merger/acquisition - which is just always a complex and organizationally challenging process.

If you provide an API then people hitting the API are also active users of your service.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com