It doesn't really matter if 1P is dominant across the whole market. It matters a lot if it's dominant across the part of the market that's willing to pay actual cash money for password management.

How did that work out for DropBox? Google and/or Microsoft could announce tomorrow that they are either giving the same functionality away or bundling with their Office product.

It worked out well enough for them to get an exit. DBX is unexciting, but it’s not a penny stock.

And Google and Microsoft do exactly that already.

That’s originally what I said, if you define “success” as the original investors being able to pawn a money losing company off on the public market, it could be successful.

But if you define success as a company that can actually turn a profit consistently, Dropbox is not a success.

They’re selling Teams at $4/mo per user and I guess if they go after enterprise we’ll see additional tiers with features aimed specifically at that.

It doesn’t take too many deals with huge companies who need cross-platform to get to $200-300 million, and “worth” $3.2bn. Multiples from revenue have been a little interesting lately.

And as soon as they start moving into the enterprise, Microsoft is going to offer a good enough cross platform password manager and bundle it into Office 365.

People made the same argument with Slack. How is that working out?

I don’t know about Android, but iOS supports third party password managers through the extension system.

Slack has a $12bn market cap, therefore “pretty well”.

I think competition in this space is good but I use and like Slack over Teams.

I know at least two companies who pay Slack over $20MM a year, and have over 100k users provisioned onto Enterprise Grid, and who are also happy consumers of Microsoft Office 365.

What is it about people defining success of a for profit business by market cap instead of you know - the ability to make a profit?

Being able to sell $1 for 95 cents is not a successful business strategy.