CloudatCost and Pertino
-
Oh wow haha
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I doubt they will be around another year or two. reported gross (not profit). is less than $85 a day.
That's quite a bit lower than I would have imagined. Where did you hear that report from?
-
Although if you think about it, two years of getting customers, even if they buy a handful of servers, you'd still only be looking at revenue in that ballpark even if you are bringing in a customer or two every day.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I doubt they will be around another year or two. reported gross (not profit). is less than $85 a day.
That's quite a bit lower than I would have imagined. Where did you hear that report from?
It was in some business documentation I found online. I'm guessing they have no one on the monthly plans and very few buying one time plans per day.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I doubt they will be around another year or two. reported gross (not profit). is less than $85 a day.
That's quite a bit lower than I would have imagined. Where did you hear that report from?
It was in some business documentation I found online. I'm guessing they have no one on the monthly plans and very few buying one time plans per day.
How do they pay their employees let alone buy new equipment? This is really starting to look like its run out of someone's house.
-
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I doubt they will be around another year or two. reported gross (not profit). is less than $85 a day.
That's quite a bit lower than I would have imagined. Where did you hear that report from?
It was in some business documentation I found online. I'm guessing they have no one on the monthly plans and very few buying one time plans per day.
How do they pay their employees let alone buy new equipment? This is really starting to look like its run out of someone's house.
It's a venture. They have a few others. http://www.fibernetics.ca/about-us/fibernetics-ventures/ Venture Capital rarely makes financial sense.
-
@IRJ said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
I doubt they will be around another year or two. reported gross (not profit). is less than $85 a day.
That's quite a bit lower than I would have imagined. Where did you hear that report from?
It was in some business documentation I found online. I'm guessing they have no one on the monthly plans and very few buying one time plans per day.
How do they pay their employees let alone buy new equipment? This is really starting to look like its run out of someone's house.
That's how startups work. You get cash to start the business and grow it before making money. Spiceworks ran at losses in the millions for years (maybe they still are, no idea.) When you have venture capital you don't necessarily worry about making money. Or not right away. Sometimes never.
-
In Silicon Valley, hardly anyone makes money. It's all venture capital money.
-
@scottalanmiller Hmm... Maybe I should open my own hosting company and maybe even get them to fund it, lol.
I think that would be a fun adventure, even if not successful!
-
I've always wanted to do that. Running a cloud host sounds like fun. It probably is not in any way. LOL Just like it sounds fun to own a datacenter, but the reality is... it sucks. None of those servers are yours. You don't get to do fun things with them. They have to sit there and chug away at customer workloads and you just keep them running.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I've always wanted to do that. Running a cloud host sounds like fun. It probably is not in any way. LOL Just like it sounds fun to own a datacenter, but the reality is... it sucks. None of those servers are yours. You don't get to do fun things with them. They have to sit there and chug away at customer workloads and you just keep them running.
It's not fun in anyway way, you watch monitors hoping something can go wrong so you will have something to do most of the time. Being a contractor for a Datacenter isn't bad though.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I've always wanted to do that. Running a cloud host sounds like fun. It probably is not in any way. LOL Just like it sounds fun to own a datacenter, but the reality is... it sucks. None of those servers are yours. You don't get to do fun things with them. They have to sit there and chug away at customer workloads and you just keep them running.
Right... but if the customers are paying and your servers are working... you get paid to do nothing, but keep them running... which if you are using new servers and have things configured correctly, that should not be too big of a problem for at least a year or two.
-
@Sparkum said:
Its hard to own something for "life" and not use it haha
Personally I bought mine more as an investment, I know they cant be fully trusted right now but perhaps in a year two two when they become more stable, and no longer offer one time buys
Kind of what I was thinking. The issue is if they continue to have issues like this, they won't be around by then...
-
My understanding is that most startups will lose money their first 12-20 quarters, or 3-5 years. I believe the number was 12. That's common. They might be growing and have revenue coming in, but they will report a loss every quarter for an average of their first 12 quarters. After that, they might make a little money intermittently and then after another couple years they start to become profitable regularly. But yeah, on the West Coast, everything is venture capital.
-
It's running painfully slow. Pulling stuff off at about 100kbps not sure if that's the network or Disk IOs fault.
-
With the sudden move to the other link there might easily be heavy network congestion. If you think about it, everyone with a server is suddenly using it, updates are running, email queue are flushing, etc.
-
@thecreativeone91 Mine is reporting a lower IOWait now than it has the rest of the month, lol. Generally mine reports around 5%. It is down to ~1%-ish.
-
I noticed that too. IOWait has really dropped. I'm wondering if they moved hosts to handle the failover.
-
It's funny noticing everyone on Twitter posting congratulating them on how well they handled this outage. Really? that's considered handling it well - especially when you had the resources to fix the issue the whole time with redundant links.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
It's funny noticing everyone on Twitter posting congratulating them on how well they handled this outage. Really? that's considered handling it well - especially when you had the resources to fix the issue the whole time with redundant links.
Yeah, the degree to which they failed is unforgivable. This was an intentional outage, not a mistake. They chose to keep it down all that time. And now, the servers that are back up are broken. No power cycles, no re-images. They have effectively lost the service completely.
