Disclosing Your Finances

Should you publicly publish your finances?

This article was published on January 06, 2010.
So far, 27 people have left a comment.
Do you want to leave a comment?

Prominent startups such as Balsamiq and others like Squarespace and 37signals (to some extent) have been open about disclosing their revenue — and in Balsamiq's case also their profit. I'm not sure whether that's such a good long-term strategy and I'll argue why below. You've got to be careful that you're in the right position to share these confidential numbers, and I think that for anyone else the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Disclosing Your Finances

What's the Advantage?

The obvious advantage for anyone is that as long as your numbers are large enough to talk about then you're going to generate buzz when you release them. You'll in fact get a lot of good press and praise for being so open. On Sunday, January 2nd Peldi Guilizzoni (Founder of Balsamiq) posted his company's 2009 revenue ($1.6 million), profits ($1.1 million), number of transactions per month, average revenue per transaction, and cash flow. You can't get more detailed than that. In under 24 hours his blog post received over 200 re-tweets, there were over 140 comments spanned across his blog and Hacker News, and over 250 up votes on Hacker News. That's a lot of attention.

Balsamiq isn't the only startup to share their finances. Squarespace shocked people when they released their figures earlier this year in Inc Magazine, reporting revenue of $269,545 in 2005 and $2.2 million in 2008 — a 723.3% increase. Nobody knew the jump was so big, and now it's known that they are running away with their market. Even 37signals, who as far as I know had never disclosed their revenue, mentioned kind of nonchalantly in their third podcast what they were generating with their new Haystack service (now known as Sortfolio).

But who are the people who care about this information? Only two sorts of people really care about these figures: (1) other entrepreneurs who want an inspiring story to motivate them, and (2) potential acquirers whom you could interest by other means. Who doesn't care? Most of your customers or potential customers, who don't fall into either of those categories.

Suffice it to say that I don't think that the press you're going to receive outside the entrepreneurial community is enough to justify exposing your finances to the public. There are just too many disadvantages in doing so. I don't think it's going to significantly move your bottom line. I'd actually like to see how many referrals Peldi Guilizzoni generated from his post. I doubt too many.

What are the Disadvantages?

What do these three companies have in common? They're all self-funded startups that are all leading their respective markets with no immediate competitive threats. There's no better small business software company than 37signals, Balsamiq is clearly leading the wire-framing and mockups business, and Squarespace has a chokehold on providing managed website building tools. They have nothing to lose. But suppose they had major competition?

One disadvantage of disclosing assets would be if you're a startup hoping to raise money; even bootstrapped startups consider fund-raising after they get their feet wet. I can assure you that openly talking about your revenue if it's not mind-blowing is going to turn off investors. If you show that your company did $100,000 a year in revenue last year and increased to $150,000 this year, then fewer investors are going to be interested in chatting with you. That's just not enough growth. As soon as you publicly reveal your finances you're looked at differently than you were before.

Jason Fried and many others have argued that many startups don't try to generate revenue from the beginning because that prejudices their valuation when they do try to raise money. The investor can look at your numbers when the time comes and get a true valuation of the company rather than making up ballpark figures based on speculation and spreadsheets. I completely agree.

Another disadvantage is that your competitors know exactly how much you're making. If I know that one of my competitors is making $2.5 mil a year I can work out a lot of information from those figures. In Balsamiq's case they included everything but the kitchen sink, so I can see nearly everything I need to know.

You might say: "Well, how is that information going to help you surpass them?" For one thing, you may be seen as less as of a threat if your competitor doesn't know how much revenue you're generating. I'd bet that most companies undervalue their competition, so they may not try as hard in certain areas to combat them. Why give them the motivation of knowing how much you make? Additionally, it may spawn new competitors who see how well you're doing.

The third disadvantage is that it may be off-putting to your customers. In the case of Carbonmade specifically, our customers are mainly creative people who don't make a lot of money (for the most part), and shoving our finances in their face isn't the most neighborly act. It can also make you seem impersonal and corporate — which is why so many bank ads say they're small and user-friendly. Yes, publishing our revenue could show that we're a healthy and thriving company that's not going away any time soon, but I think there are more subtle ways to express this.

Don't Do it

I am all for being open about your business. You only have to read through my essays to see that. Carbonmade even boldly shares our user count on our homepage (many won't even do this), but I don't think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages when it comes to sharing financial information.

If you do decide to publish your revenue, only do it if you're well established and far beyond the startup stage, like Balsamiq, 37signals and Squarespace. Don't do it if you're hoping to raise money or if you're not (or not certain that you are) the leader in your market. These three companies are the exception to the rule.

Comments

Adam about 2 months ago

The biggest issue, I think, is #3, and I'd put it a bit more strongly: most people are financially illiterate. They don't have a strong sense of the difference between gross revenue, net revenue, profit, etc. They can't read a balance sheet or a cash flow statement. This is fine, generally speaking. Although everyone might be better off with such knowledge, most of us don't really require it to get through our day.

But people also do seem to carry around a lot of implicit ideas about fairness -- about the correct margin to charge on products, on how pricing ought to work, on what constitutes a good deal and what constitutes gouging.

The problems here are self-evident. For starters, these intuitions are often simply wrong, reflecting a lack of understanding of how businesses are run. Further, these perceptions tend to be driven by intangible issues that companies have difficulty controlling. Witness the rage over relative small fluctuations in gas prices.

In the end, what probably matters most is whether customers believe that your company is building its success on their backs, or whether they're your partners in growth. And really it's hard to see how disclosing financial helps with that perception, and easy to see how it might hurt.

Scott Semple about 2 months ago

+1 on Adam's comments.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Adam: I couldn't have said it better myself. Can I copy and paste that into my article? :) Seriously, though, I think you hit the nail on the head with your last paragraph: ''What probably matters most is whether customers believe that your company is building its success on their backs, or whether they're your partners in growth.''

Publishing your finances can only help expedite the notion of being gauged. It's all about handling perception. As long as you keep your finances hidden then you won't risk waking up your customers to the fact that you're making millions from them.

David Mytton about 2 months ago

If you run an incorporated company, at least in the UK, you have to submit annual accounts which will contain manny of these figures anyway. Although they won't go into as much detail, anyone can get access to the accounts if they want.

You can bet that investors will do this, as will interested competitors and even larger companies you do business with may well dig them up.

Posting figures on a blog is more public, you're drawing attention to them, but given that the data is available anyway, it might be better to reveal them on your blog.

(Of course, accounts don't get filed until after the first year...but then you would only be publishing the last financial year's stats.)

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

David: Is that true for private companies also? That seems utterly ridiculous unless you're a public company.

Ben Mc about 2 months ago

Is Balsamiq's revealing some information about his partners as well?

Isn't Mockups in Fogbugz? Do we know if he gets paid per license, or if he was paid a flat fee? Does this say anything about Fogbugz sales?

I have no idea what their deal is, but they should all know that people like me are instantly making assumptions.

Joshua Paine about 2 months ago

utterly ridiculous

Utterly ridiculous, or just unfamiliar? I don't know about the laws of the UK, but e.g., I think the legal ''personhood'' of corporations here in the United States (and elsewhere, AFAIK) is at best a tremendous moral hazard.

If we're going to grant many civil rights to legal fictions, I don't have a problem in principle with extracting any number of concessions in return. On the face I'd agree that the general public has no right to your personal finances, but if the public chooses to let you create an entity that can do business, sue people, make contracts, and be subject to liability separately from yourself, I doubt that all your personal rights still apply.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Ben: Hmm? I'm not exactly following. Balsamiq is a different product than Fogbugz. Peldi is only posting data about his company.

kareem about 2 months ago

+1 on Joshua's comment.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Joshua: The problem is that when you run an LLC in the United States your LLC's finances are your personal finances. You're getting paid through distributions you receive through the LLC if you're a Manager (the technical LLC term for a shareholder). Therefore, if the public gets access to my company's finances then they're basically getting access to my finances. They won't know how I'm spending my money, but they will know my salary.

Ryan Graves about 2 months ago

Agreed +1 to Adams comment!

Although not the most important thing to question, I'm unsure about this claim...

''Squarespace has a chokehold on providing managed website building tools.''

Aren't there many that do this? Would Wordpress be a competitor?

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Ryan: Squarespace doesn't offer a free option while WordPress does. Squarespace may be more of a competitor to the WordPress.com hosted version, but they're way more of a managed solution than WP.

Joshua Paine about 2 months ago

when you run an LLC in the United States your LLC's finances are your personal finances

For those of us (me, too) whose primary or sole income is from an LLC, this is true, although access to my LLC finances wouldn't tell you what my expenses are or even whether I have other income.

But that's details. In fact anyone with access to my LLC financials would have a pretty clear picture of my personal income, and you wouldn't have to know me very well to guess that it's my only significant source of income.

While I have some kind of right to privacy, it's not in every detail an inalienable right. On the other hand, being able to create fictitious persons that can hold property, make contracts, sue real live humans, and do my bidding while shielding me from much legal liability is a remarkable power society grants me, and not one that I believe you or I have any inherent right to.

If society decides that it should get something more in exchange for that power than ~$300/yr in taxes, I wouldn't disagree. And if that meant revealing some of my finances, then I guess I'd have to decide if the benefits were worth it, just as I now have to decide if the benefits are worth some (slight) taxes and paperwork.

FTR, I'm not advocating for this specific change in the law. I'm just saying that the power to create corporate ''persons'' is a strong power (mostly an advantage gained against live humans) and mostly artificial. It's entirely reasonable for the live humans to get something out of the deal if we're going to make it at all.

David Mytton about 2 months ago

The reporting requirements in the UK differ depending on the size of the company but even small firms (private or public) have to submit accounts containing a profit/loss and full balance sheet.

Christofer Karltorp about 2 months ago

Just as David is pointing out in the UK, companies in Sweden also have to submit annual accounts. Private companies obviously submit less than what public companies do, but nevertheless the accounts are going to be accessible to the public (though with a certain time lag). I found your article very interesting and well written. I don't think I have ever considered not publishing my annual accounts (as that would make me a criminal :) - but I do see the beneficial points of keeping it private and would probably do so if I could. Thanks for stirring my longing to move my business to the US :)

Andrew Hyde about 2 months ago

+1 for Adam there.

I love supporting startups by paying. When that startup says ''we are wildly profitable'' I am less stoked on paying more. It puts you on the map, but in many ways alienates your customer base.

Great post!

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

David/Christofer: It's very interesting to learn that both the UK and Sweden make private companies report. I also just heard from a friend that Australia makes you report as well. I'm sure there are also other countries out there too.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Andrew: Great point. I'm much more likely to support a small company that's still struggling to make it than a conglomerate that's raking in the big bucks.

Rich about 2 months ago

Agree with almost all the points here, although what's not mentioned here is the downstream ego boost the entrepreneur gets from the buzz resulting from the disclosure.

kuls about 2 months ago

In the egalitarian social democratic utopia of Norway the Norwegian IRS publishes your wage and net worth, on the web. For everyone to conveniently search trough. They include your address... (burglars love it)

Michael about 2 months ago

I'm torn with your post.

I've always had an idea to license our business plan/strategy under a Creative Commons license. Why should I let other entrepreneurs make the same mistakes? It should be for the greater good. But I think this will probably never ever happen. If there's anything that's publicly released, it should be inside secrets.

I don't think companies should ever disclose anything with numbers. It's like asking your significant other how many partners they've had in their lifetime. Nothing good will ever come of it.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Rich: Haha. Yeah. I decided I wouldn't talk about the ego boost of posting your financials. The benefits of an ego boost might actually make you more productive so the next time you post numbers they're even better. Maybe you need your fix like heroin and it'll motivate you to do even better. :)

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Michael: No reason to make small business any more difficult than it already is. Releasing your business plan/strategy let's your competitors know exactly what you're thinking and planning. I may be selfish, but I don't see the benefit for you.

Regis about 2 months ago

Good article, though I'll raise the point that Balsamiq is not a leader in its field. Axure has far more customers and is much more known in the UX market, amongst professionals. I don't say that Balsamiq is not a good product: it is, I use it every day, but Axure is the leader. Period.

Logo of Spencer Fry Spencer Fry about 2 months ago

Regis: Thanks for the read through. I'm happy you enjoyed the essay. I hadn't heard of Axure before, but it does look like it has quite the following. Good find. Balsamiq not being the leader in the space makes it even more troubling that they're releasing their financial information to the public.

RMA Resolve about 1 month ago

.., this is a good post.. thanks... this is fair in both sides...

Les about 1 month ago

Hi, I came across this blog as I was searching for thoughts on financial disclosure to a customer seeking such info.

Having 20 years in corporate PR (public and private tech companies), it's telling when a privately-held company talks about financials in good times, and then goes ''private'' in bad times.

Top line: what is a private company trying to accomplish by releasing such figures? Agree, with previous posts in that there are very good ways of meeting this desire other than getting on this slippery slope.

Leave a comment