Visiting their front page at http://workfu.com/ yields a lightboxed "UPDATE 31/08/2012: We are currently in discussions regarding the possibilities of keeping WorkFu alive and will update as soon as we have more information."
Is nine months really enough time to make a determination whether a company is viable? It seems a little on the short side, and I recall reading in a number of places that you can only truly know how it's going a couple of years in. Is the issue here that resources/finances weren't adequately planned for?
> Since I run Folyo by myself I have very few expenses, and can always feed myself by taking on client work if need be.
I believe that's also true if you're a team. In my opinion even more, because you don't have one person being distracted by too many things, but can distribute tasks to various people, where each of them can focus on those that are related.
One of their blog posts states "4 wives placated" ... your life situation tends to determine what risk and austerity you can afford so this particular team might find it harder than other teams would to also do side projects to pay the bills.
Hey Sacha - how are things in Japan!
Good to see you are doing well and that you are doing whatever it takes to keep Folyo up and running.
What do you think of Scoutzie? launched by not too long ago with much fanfare along w the latest YC batch.
Feel free to reach out to GroupTalent if you need project flow
I'm very afraid of Scoutzie, that's what I think of them! They're a very close competitor with more resources and YC backing, and their execution is better than mine for a lot of things. But we'll see, as long as Folyo clients and designers are happy that's enough of a reason to keep on doing my thing :)
I read a quote recently that "most startups get interesting around 18 months". I think you guys are giving up too soon. Workfu has enormous potential. Either way, kudos for making it as far as you have.
Took a look at the home page, did a double take when I saw the "FU Score". Maybe that resonates poorly with potential users? I get that we're supposed to use cutesy Web 2.0 names, but if what makes a hacker smile doesn't lead to revenue, it has no place.
I guess I was a bit brief. The discussion of the "bullshitting" article ended up centering around the question of whether startup founders are deliberately lying/deceiving or just paint rosy pictures for themselves and live in those pictures.
Of course, the answer to that depends on the founder. I strongly suspect the latter would be the case here.
Off topic, but I'm very curious... why did you decide to launch on Labor Day? Aside from the slight symbolic connection to your product, aren't you concerned that you'll have a much smaller audience due to the holiday?
I literally conceived of this idea a month ago. My day job is in finance, so this break is the first contiguous block of time I could find to put it together. As far as audience is concerned, its true that the audience is smaller but that's good insofar as emergent problems can be addressed before people come back on Tuesday :)
Maybe they did the maths and it turns out even with many clients, the current costs are too high (just an hypothesis)?
Or it would take much more time than allowed, even with some outside funding?
For sure, I find the site is really, really beautiful and polished for a bootstrapped venture. It could maybe have helped to have something less polished but focusing on selling subscriptions earlier on? (no sarcasm really here, real question).
If one of the founders is reading, as a bootstrapper myself, I'd love to hear more about the underlying reasons to close.