MongoDB extra funding round/IPO

[techunderground]

How is no one aware, heard, or talked about the extra $30 Million MongoDB took this Feb and what it means as they plan to IPO later this year?

Although they just surpassed $100 million in revenue this February, same time they took a "secret" round of funding from a private investor, they have been ramping and hiring just about anyone with a voice and half a brain. They're constantly blowing my colleagues and I to join with promises of IPO or an acquisition.

People I know there say the internal talk is the top guys are going for the IPO in Q3-Q4 or get bought by IBM, their prime target Oracle being the only other player with enough cash since Google showed no interest and released their own database software. From the New York office, rumor has it if it's an acquisition they're aiming at an evaluation of $5-6 billion.

Anyone else has thoughts on this because I'm starting to think about jumping on board with them if this is the case?

[zer00eyz]

Let me count how many people that I have worked with who are using mongo... ZERO...

How many are planing on using mongo... Zero (and one "why the fuck would you even ask this)

How many have used mongo 2 out of 20.

Why would you today pick mongo when there are so many better choices out there?

[ztratar]

First post. Shady. Sounds like a MongoDB recruiter trying to hack recruiting to me.

Trying to get in right before the IPO means that most of the money is already on the table and that will be priced into your options. If you think this is a method to get quick-cash, you're very wrong. Instead look to join a company ~1.5 years out. Why? 1.5 years = 1 year vest cliff, purchase shares. You then have to sit on them for 1 year to get capital gains tax instead of income tax.

You're also barred from selling options usually the first 6 months of the IPO. Thus, 1.5 years is perfect.

[Jare]

The "half a brain" bit is going to attract the cream of the crop I'm sure.

[techunderground]

Thanks Ztratar. Did a lot networking and researching to obtain this information, and what you say makes sense but their recruiters are promising A LOT. Seems a bit odd most their people, including the CRO, come from the similar companies who happen to have been acquired or IPO'd. Not a fan of what I'm hearing, definitely not a company I'm thinking of pursing. Thanks again.

[ParameterOne]

>Anyone else has thoughts on this because I'm starting to think about jumping on board with them if this is the case?

>Not a fan of what I'm hearing, definitely not a company I'm thinking of pursing.

Which of these statements is true OP?

[frigg]

Just an FYI, HN is staunchly against mongodb. If this is good or bad you decide but you won't hear good things about mongodb from HN.

[techunderground]

Whys that?

[techunderground]

To clarify, the sole reason I was considering is because they quote all this adoption and how much money everyone is making...

[xchaotic]

the 'eventual consistency' is ok for some use cases, but for those cases you have tools like Cassandra which are orders of magnitude faster. I just don't know who'd want to deal with mongodb consistency model in production.

[meghan]

Meghan from MongoDB here.

Agree that eventual consistency is inappropriate for the majority of database workloads. This is why we has always defaulted to strong consistency, by reading from primary nodes in a cluster. (Because eventual consistency is sometimes useful, MongoDB offers eventual consistency, too.)