Congrats on figuring it out and having a clear focus, but also to trying a lot of things over the years and figuring out what works. And thank you for being so responsible with the future of your legacy products. There are too many companies that are too happy to simply shut down things as soon as ROI numbers don't line up.
We use Capsule + Streak. We're big fans of streak, but it's a baby CRM perfect for pipelines... we use Capsule to manage all of the other stuff. (Who talked to whom, etc.)
Check us out at http://nutshell.com — we've got a one-click import tool from Highrise. We're an established, profitable company focused on CRM with gorgeous UI.
It's definitely possible but I wonder what Githubs strategy long term is and how it would fit into that. While I'm sure there are lot of people that use Campfire at GH (or maybe not), it may not be right for them to take care of and expand.
But Github is already doing what 37signals is aiming for and that is being a company focused on a single product. I'd think they want to maintain that.
They actually sold Gauges to Fastest Forward a couple months ago. Hopefully the new owners will give it some much-needed love; it's pretty, but... let's say unnecessarily minimalist. (If there's a way to get it to give me all the referers in a time period other than day-by-day, for instance, I still haven't figured it out.)
My bet was going to be Atlassian. They have the clearest competitor to Campfire (Hipchat), a history of pulling off acquisitions (Bitbucket) and from 37Signals perspective could probably make a better case that they could take care / migrate their customers.
Not sure why anybody would want to acquire Campfire? It's an utterly terrible product. If GitHub wanted to added chat collaboration features they'd write them from scratch based upon WebSockets / Socket.IO... not the legacy polling that Campfire does!
GitHub are known to have invested a lot in using Campfire, for example their bot Hubot integrates really well and they use it to manage the majority of their infrastructure.
Q: If you're going all in on Basecamp, what happens to Campfire and Highrise?
In the short term, everything stays the same. Business as usual. No interruption in service, no changes that affect our customers.
In the long term, one of three things:
SCENARIO 1: We'll spin them off into separate companies where we'll retain partial ownership, but another fully-dedicated team will run the products and own the majority of the company. This would be our ideal situation as it would ensure continuity and no interruption for our customers, but we'd have to find the right entrepreneur/team with the right experience and enough financing to make it work.
SCENARIO 2: We'll sell the products outright (either separately or together). The key for us in this scenario is that the products, and our customers, are well looked after. We will not sell either of these products to a company that is planning to shut the products down. And since no one from our team goes with the sale, this is not an acqui-hire situation. We're looking to sell to a company that wants to add well-respected, well-established, profitable, growing products to their portfolio.
SCENARIO 3: If we can't find the right partner or buyer, we are committed to continuing to run the products for our existing customers forever. We won't sell the products to new customers, but existing customers can continue to use the products just as they always have. The products will shift into maintenance mode which means there will be no new development, only security updates or minor bug fixes. We did this successfully in 2012 with Ta-da List, Writeboard, and Backpack, so we know how to make it work.
If you're a company or team interested in exploring scenario 1 (spin-off) or scenario 2 (outright purchase), please get in touch. Based on current revenues, current growth rates, and a conservative multiple, Campfire will sell in the single digit millions, and Highrise will sell in the tens of millions, so serious inquires only please. Disclosure: We're currently in early discussions with a few interested parties.
I think it's commendable to take this approach. They are doing a few things very right. 1.) Not shutting down existing products and leaving users without a service, 2.) Not wanting to just sell it to the highest bidder but actually are concerned about their users, 3.) Having the guts to just put everything on the table and changing major things up. I feel like a lot of companies feel like, 'Well we have these products we have to either keep them going and scale or kill them.' Their solution here is a wise one that is certainly putting users before dollars and ease.
While everyone may not be happy with it, it's certainly better than a lot of shut downs and other moves startups have made that have pissed a lot of people off.
Big news! We've been big fans of 37signals for a decade or so and in many ways they have inspired us in building Close.io. I love that they are able to make the hard decision to focus on one thing.
We want to take great care of any Highrise customers looking for a new home: http://close.io/highrise
Check out http://close.io/ - mention that you were a Highrise customer and I can make sure you'll get a special discount.
Close.io is a next-gen sales communication tracking tool with an easy 1-click migration from Highrise, as well as automatic 2-way email syncing, call tracking, etc. See what our customers say at https://www.quora.com/Reviews-of-Close-io
Your comment implies Highrise is going to disappear - however, that's not the case. They're either going to sell Highrise (to a buyer who is committed to keeping it running + growing) or continue to run it themselves in maintenance mode.
I don't think it's going to disappear, but I do think many customers will consider alternatives when it's clear the original designers are no longer onboard with the product anymore.
Highrise was an amazing product years ago, but let's face it, Highrise has almost been abandoned for the past couple years at least. Could a new owner take over and revamp it to be amazing? It's possible, but not the common outcome of acquisitions.
They were formed to design websites and that's what they did for 5 years. Though I guess you can view web design as a "struggle" with all that IE6 testing and what not, but some people really enjoy it :)
I used to love battling with IE6 to get a webdesign looking great, cross-browser compatible and degrading gracefully. Ok it was maybe more like love+hate, it was a challenge, a puzzle and particularly trying to solve it in the least (subjectively) "hackish" way possible.
But then, I also used to write 4096 byte demos in x86 asm. And a bunch of other crazy things that don't even occur to me now, some things with JS ...
"Based on current revenues, current growth rates, and a conservative multiple, Campfire will sell in the single digit millions, and Highrise will sell in the tens of millions"
Anyone care to take a guess to what Campfire and Highrise revenue? What type of multiple of revenue do they expect to get?
37 Signals is the reason I started learning how to make web apps. They are really the poster child of successful independent software vendors. Not focusing on burning investors cash but growing as a profitable business. One can only dream to match their level of success.
Very interesting announcement. I'm sure they're making the right decision, and I'm even more sure they did a ton of user testing.
However, it's weird to lose the 37 Signals brand. I actually don't like Basecamp as a product, but I love 37 Signals. I treat their books like a bible, and read their blog posts religiously. Somehow, they seemed like more like a philosophy than just a product, and Basecamp (and Rails and their books) were a side effect.
I know it's the same people and nothing will really change (A rose by any other name...), but it's still so weird to me to lose 37 Signals.
2 years ago, I watched DHH's Startup School presentation on YouTube, and it completely changed the way I perceived what a "startup" could be.
Today, my partner and I are recently ramen profitable on our first SaaS product, and growing. It's extremely exciting - we're seeing the fruits of a project that we love actually paying our bills. "Exciting" probably isn't even the right word... we're building our way to financial freedom and liberation from the rat race.
Our business is our livelihood now, and you can find evidence of 37Signal's influence in every nook and cranny of it. Their writings and philosophy have affected our business and our lives deeply, so a deep emotional connection to the name is an obvious consequence.
It feels funny, but as Jason clearly alludes to at the end of the post, a lot of their moves have. I'm looking forward to following along as the future of Basecamp unfolds.
Though I share your sentiments about losing the 37Signals name, their philsophy remains the same and I have high hopes that this change will result in an even better Basecamp!
HipChat was a clone of Campfire that out-did them. It's a smart tactical move to give up on that conceding to Pete, Chris, Gary, et al. which did a superb job on HipChat.
No, it won't be a problem.. I'm sure they're already talking to Twitter about it. I heard something along the lines of accounts inactive for 6 months can be seized by Twitter.
The last I heard, it needed to be entirely dormant (meaning not a single log in) for 30 months in order to be eligible to transfer. Though they might have a trademark claim that would likely help.
So, what about Basecamp Classic? That's something they won't sell to another company, but is it something they'll continue supporting? I'd imagine it's simple to maintain.
We are fully committed to running Basecamp Classic forever. As long as we're around, Basecamp Classic will be around. A large chunk of our customer base loves Classic and we'll make sure they'll always have their Classic. The same rigorous uptime standards of Basecamp also apply to Basecamp Classic.
Background: Basecamp Classic was the original version of Basecamp we launched in 2004. Then in 2012 we released the all new version of Basecamp. Customers had the choice to stay on the old version, transition to the new version, or use both.
> Based on current revenues, current growth rates, and a conservative multiple, Campfire will sell in the single digit millions, and Highrise will sell in the tens of millions.
Amazing that those products are doing so well and they've largely been on autopilot for the past few years. This info + the switch to focus on Basecamp can only mean that they're making an absolute killing with Basecamp.
This is really cool. I love basecamp and have been a daily user since close to day one. However their maintaining legacy basecamp in parallel to new basecamp seems to make even less sense to me now then it did then.
It seems to me if the transition process between the two could have been smoother they could have got all their users on board for the upgrade.
I'm really hoping that as part of their renewed efforts with basecamp they might re-address people that are stuck in basecamp classic due to the much less than smooth upragde process.
Based on the lack of attention the new Basecamp has gotten after launch, this is incentive enough for me to more to a new project management tool. The only real incentive to say was the very minor integration with Highrise
Hats off to the simplicity and focus these guys have. I have loved and admired this company over years. These announcements have only added more respect for them.
There are so many project management apps out there, the competition is fierce. For a proj mgmt app to succeed, there either has to be USP and massive value. For example, Asana is especially good. I haven't tried Basecamp recently but it wasn't as lightweight, low-cost and nice as Asana.
I am extremely interested in this space, both as a user and as a developer[1].
As it happens, I use (and pay for) both Asana and Basecamp. I use Asana internally with my own staff, and I use Basecamp externally with clients.
My clients tend to be non-technical businesses with custom software needs -- and most of them would be like "WHAT. THE. FUCK. HELLLP~!" if I asked them to use Asana. Keyboard shortcuts, context menus, sliding popovers, disclosure widgets, multiple views onto the same data/work-graph, aiiiighhhhh!
On the other hand, Basecamp has really nailed their niche -- the project management app that really is simple enough for 'average folks'. Making that choice completely alienates the tech-savvy power user that most of their competitors seem to be targeting (e.g. Flow, Wrike, Teamwork PM, Azendoo, Dooster, Teambox, TeamLab, Do.com, FMYI, to name just a few that I have evaluated and rejected).
Which 37Signals, oops I mean Basecamp, is obviously OK with, given Basecamp's massive user base and success. Basecamp is a pretty cool software story, and actually a pretty cool piece of software, even though it is too limited and underpowered for me to use it as my own primary project manager.
[1] I develop software (among other roles) for a living, but I develop project-management web app software mostly just in my fantasies and rage-imagination... spending many hours in a week in these apps really makes a person want to develop the One True Project Management app, though.
It's not easy building that project-management app that is usable by both geeks and customers.
We (http://countersoft.com) are pushing the approach of a single tool for both project tracking (geeks) and ticketing (customers). It's not easy to say the least because customers love to just do everything in email!
There's different use cases. There are high-level / strategy oriented task systems and low-level microtask work systems that tend to have more specialist features for getting shit done baked in. As payware goes, JIRA is a pretty well-rounded high-level one. Gitlab seems fairly popular for dev work because it emulates much of github and is more integrated with source control (getting shit done) than say redmine.
The enterprise use-cases have to manage immensely more complexity than F(L)OSS projects, but at the same time, they want the agility and features of those lightweight services. (Without forgetting to CYA: document and hide as much information as possible.)
But in a sense a ticketing system is a double-ended marketplace of work: supply (fixer, be it IT, marketing, sales, admin) and demand (customers, be it internal or external).
1) I never understood the odd trend of having a jpeg of a handwritten signature included in a digital email. A signature is supposed to designate authenticity, but a letter on a authenticated website is inherently authentic.
So it's forced, and decorative. And makes me think the author is trying too hard.
2) I respect Jason very much and think this decision is the right one from a consumer perspective. If they are only going to make one product going forward (which is the right decision), there's no need for a separate company brand. Good call by them - and no doubt a difficult one to make.
Seems like a weird strategy. I admire the focus shown, but what if Thomas Edison had decided after 10 years to rebrand GE as Something Something Light Bulbs, Inc?
112 comments
[ 6.0 ms ] story [ 171 ms ] threadHere's to the future.
We've also got an easy migration tool for any existing Highrise users: http://close.io/highrise and a solid REST API http://developer.close.io/
We're polishing up our new JSON-API-based http://jsonapi.org/ REST API, and we've got a well-supported JSON-RPC API published at http://nutshell.com/api
We will not sell either of these products to a company that is planning to shut the products down.
IMO Hipchat is a better chat tool than Campfire.
In the short term, everything stays the same. Business as usual. No interruption in service, no changes that affect our customers.
In the long term, one of three things:
SCENARIO 1: We'll spin them off into separate companies where we'll retain partial ownership, but another fully-dedicated team will run the products and own the majority of the company. This would be our ideal situation as it would ensure continuity and no interruption for our customers, but we'd have to find the right entrepreneur/team with the right experience and enough financing to make it work.
SCENARIO 2: We'll sell the products outright (either separately or together). The key for us in this scenario is that the products, and our customers, are well looked after. We will not sell either of these products to a company that is planning to shut the products down. And since no one from our team goes with the sale, this is not an acqui-hire situation. We're looking to sell to a company that wants to add well-respected, well-established, profitable, growing products to their portfolio.
SCENARIO 3: If we can't find the right partner or buyer, we are committed to continuing to run the products for our existing customers forever. We won't sell the products to new customers, but existing customers can continue to use the products just as they always have. The products will shift into maintenance mode which means there will be no new development, only security updates or minor bug fixes. We did this successfully in 2012 with Ta-da List, Writeboard, and Backpack, so we know how to make it work.
If you're a company or team interested in exploring scenario 1 (spin-off) or scenario 2 (outright purchase), please get in touch. Based on current revenues, current growth rates, and a conservative multiple, Campfire will sell in the single digit millions, and Highrise will sell in the tens of millions, so serious inquires only please. Disclosure: We're currently in early discussions with a few interested parties.
While everyone may not be happy with it, it's certainly better than a lot of shut downs and other moves startups have made that have pissed a lot of people off.
We want to take great care of any Highrise customers looking for a new home: http://close.io/highrise
Check out http://close.io/ - mention that you were a Highrise customer and I can make sure you'll get a special discount.
Close.io is a next-gen sales communication tracking tool with an easy 1-click migration from Highrise, as well as automatic 2-way email syncing, call tracking, etc. See what our customers say at https://www.quora.com/Reviews-of-Close-io
Highrise was an amazing product years ago, but let's face it, Highrise has almost been abandoned for the past couple years at least. Could a new owner take over and revamp it to be amazing? It's possible, but not the common outcome of acquisitions.
... well, the web would be a very different place than it is now.
Your navbar links don't seem work on your Highrise page.
2004 first product launched.
5 years after the company and team came together.
5 years of time to hone the skills and struggle.
Oh yah, and another 10 years to grow to 43 people.
Simple reminder of the commitment to patience it can actually take to build a remarkable business.
They were formed to design websites and that's what they did for 5 years. Though I guess you can view web design as a "struggle" with all that IE6 testing and what not, but some people really enjoy it :)
Who.
0_o
But then, I also used to write 4096 byte demos in x86 asm. And a bunch of other crazy things that don't even occur to me now, some things with JS ...
Anyone care to take a guess to what Campfire and Highrise revenue? What type of multiple of revenue do they expect to get?
[Addendum] Perhaps 6x was extremely low given the current market. Need to update my priors: http://tomtunguz.com/saas-valuation-bubble/
However, it's weird to lose the 37 Signals brand. I actually don't like Basecamp as a product, but I love 37 Signals. I treat their books like a bible, and read their blog posts religiously. Somehow, they seemed like more like a philosophy than just a product, and Basecamp (and Rails and their books) were a side effect.
I know it's the same people and nothing will really change (A rose by any other name...), but it's still so weird to me to lose 37 Signals.
2 years ago, I watched DHH's Startup School presentation on YouTube, and it completely changed the way I perceived what a "startup" could be.
Today, my partner and I are recently ramen profitable on our first SaaS product, and growing. It's extremely exciting - we're seeing the fruits of a project that we love actually paying our bills. "Exciting" probably isn't even the right word... we're building our way to financial freedom and liberation from the rat race.
Our business is our livelihood now, and you can find evidence of 37Signal's influence in every nook and cranny of it. Their writings and philosophy have affected our business and our lives deeply, so a deep emotional connection to the name is an obvious consequence.
It feels funny, but as Jason clearly alludes to at the end of the post, a lot of their moves have. I'm looking forward to following along as the future of Basecamp unfolds.
Basecamp doesn't work for how I organise projects, and Campfire is a poor competitor to HipChat.
But I frequently point to them as an example of how to run a company. And they know their customers really well.
I guess I'm just not one of their customers.
Personally, I enjoy using FlowDock and Hubot.
Q: What about Basecamp Classic?
We are fully committed to running Basecamp Classic forever. As long as we're around, Basecamp Classic will be around. A large chunk of our customer base loves Classic and we'll make sure they'll always have their Classic. The same rigorous uptime standards of Basecamp also apply to Basecamp Classic.
Background: Basecamp Classic was the original version of Basecamp we launched in 2004. Then in 2012 we released the all new version of Basecamp. Customers had the choice to stay on the old version, transition to the new version, or use both.
>We are fully committed to running Basecamp Classic forever. As long as we're around, Basecamp Classic will be around.
> Based on current revenues, current growth rates, and a conservative multiple, Campfire will sell in the single digit millions, and Highrise will sell in the tens of millions.
Amazing that those products are doing so well and they've largely been on autopilot for the past few years. This info + the switch to focus on Basecamp can only mean that they're making an absolute killing with Basecamp.
It seems to me if the transition process between the two could have been smoother they could have got all their users on board for the upgrade.
I'm really hoping that as part of their renewed efforts with basecamp they might re-address people that are stuck in basecamp classic due to the much less than smooth upragde process.
As it happens, I use (and pay for) both Asana and Basecamp. I use Asana internally with my own staff, and I use Basecamp externally with clients.
My clients tend to be non-technical businesses with custom software needs -- and most of them would be like "WHAT. THE. FUCK. HELLLP~!" if I asked them to use Asana. Keyboard shortcuts, context menus, sliding popovers, disclosure widgets, multiple views onto the same data/work-graph, aiiiighhhhh!
On the other hand, Basecamp has really nailed their niche -- the project management app that really is simple enough for 'average folks'. Making that choice completely alienates the tech-savvy power user that most of their competitors seem to be targeting (e.g. Flow, Wrike, Teamwork PM, Azendoo, Dooster, Teambox, TeamLab, Do.com, FMYI, to name just a few that I have evaluated and rejected).
Which 37Signals, oops I mean Basecamp, is obviously OK with, given Basecamp's massive user base and success. Basecamp is a pretty cool software story, and actually a pretty cool piece of software, even though it is too limited and underpowered for me to use it as my own primary project manager.
[1] I develop software (among other roles) for a living, but I develop project-management web app software mostly just in my fantasies and rage-imagination... spending many hours in a week in these apps really makes a person want to develop the One True Project Management app, though.
We (http://countersoft.com) are pushing the approach of a single tool for both project tracking (geeks) and ticketing (customers). It's not easy to say the least because customers love to just do everything in email!
But in a sense a ticketing system is a double-ended marketplace of work: supply (fixer, be it IT, marketing, sales, admin) and demand (customers, be it internal or external).
So it's forced, and decorative. And makes me think the author is trying too hard.
2) I respect Jason very much and think this decision is the right one from a consumer perspective. If they are only going to make one product going forward (which is the right decision), there's no need for a separate company brand. Good call by them - and no doubt a difficult one to make.