←back to thread

520 points kevinyew | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Shank ◴[] No.45126819[source]
I would've actually expected a buyer like OpenAI or Anthropic, if I'm being perfectly honest. Atlassian is such a strange buyer. $610m in cash is really low in the grand scheme of AI pricing too. If they're only worth $610m, I feel like this says a lot that "AI browsers" aren't actually worth that much. Remember, Instagram was $1b. The Windsurf acquihire was $2.4b and there are surely a lot more people in business that use browsers than write code.

Was Atlassian the highest bidder, or was Atlassian the only bidder?

replies(4): >>45126997 #>>45127512 #>>45127956 #>>45132867 #
new_here ◴[] No.45127956[source]
Agreed, OpenAI and Anthropic want to get as close to the user as possible. Browser is used more often than a specific website or standalone desktop app and much less work than an entire OS. Raycast also seems well positioned but perhaps more niche.

Perhaps Atlassian was sitting on cash and needed to make some bets. If you can build a big enough user base for a browser it can earn handsomely from AdWords type referral fees. Look at what Google pays Apple to be default on Safari and how much referral spend Chrome recouped for Google etc. Maybe Atlassian will try and promote Dia to its customer base and look to launch more AI type commercial product discovery experiences like Perplexity Shopping.

replies(1): >>45128669 #
1. utyop22 ◴[] No.45128669[source]
"Perhaps Atlassian was sitting on cash and needed to make some bets

Perhaps investors should put on a stupidity discount and discount the value of cash when valuing the value of equity!