This is interesting and brave because it invites others to make value judgements on your performance. Personally I love the transparency because it helps demystify the operation for others considering getting into the business.
But "Open Source" business does not mean "open implementation." Open sourcing the financial side of a business would look like sharing the systems, reports, analysis criteria, etc that you use to operate that side of the business. This is more like, "look at the memory that my open source API gateway is using!"
I've been following Jon Yoonfook for over a year now who was inspired by Pieter as well.
He is a really talented developer and seems to whip out production ready websites in a few weeks, but after what seems like a dozen pivots he's only at $500 revenue per month (https://www.mojosaas.com/)
It's actually a bit discouraging because he is relatively high profile, great designer/developer, gets on the top of Product Hunt, etc., and yet has hardly any revenue for the amount of time he's spent trying to get something off the ground.
I believe open sourcing the financial side of business will become more popular in the near future when more people want increased sustainability and fairness in business practices. It helps create a culture where employees and employers have a transparent and balanced relationship.
Oh Dear is a great product you should be very proud. When I first saw it a couple years ago I had that twinge of regret that we didn’t have a Cronitor plan with those features bundled.
Before reading this post I had no idea of who Mattias was and had never heard of Oh Dear! or DNS Spy. I'm happy to read about other people's finance during my lunch break, but I question what are the motivations other than cheap marketing reach.
I can't pinpoint where from, but I knew the name already before those businesses were started. I think Mattias had been active in some open source projects before.
So this is just one counterpoint to yours, also it doesn't matter - I'm just trying to say that it doesn't look like cheap marketing reach to me.
It seems like there are far easier ways to make money, such as buying an existing business with established revenue and growing that e.g. taking B to C instead of A to B.
Is it more about building something from scratch yourself?
Multiples for small companies are not insane but there are some real challenges with this.
First, it’s like buying the perfect used car. The people who take the most care and build the best thing are likely in it for the long haul. If an entrepreneur thinks they have something great, in SaaS the math almost always works to just hold on for one more year and likely double their equity value.
Second, buying 3000 euros of profit a month is going to cost at least 100-150k euros. You need that liquid. That’s not common. So it’s a bit glib to say “why not just buy the business”.
When real win/win small company buying occurs it’s often because the acquirer has a structural advantage (existing customer base or audience, ability to amortize costs across a portfolio, wizard at marketing etc) that allows them to unlock substantially more value than the original creator. Again, this is not common.
Yes, building something is hard work but it’s rewarding and can be quite profitable.
But "Open Source" business does not mean "open implementation." Open sourcing the financial side of a business would look like sharing the systems, reports, analysis criteria, etc that you use to operate that side of the business. This is more like, "look at the memory that my open source API gateway is using!"