Docker goes double unicorn with $105m Series C funding and $2.1b valuation

Docker hasn't just got back in the fight thanks to its latest round of funding: it's earned double-unicorn status, too.  The long-suffering containerization company today announced a $105 million Series C funding round led by Bain Capital Ventures bringing its total funding to $163 million, and a company valuation of $2.1 …

[Anonymous Coward]

"Docker said it has helped development teams release software 13x more frequently,"

They say that like it's a Good Thing.

[Anonymous Coward]

TLDR

"product investment will involve developer productivity," developer layoffs

"trusted content and ecosystem partnerships," outsourcing

"while go-to-market investments will involve expanding into new channels and global regions" more sales and marketing.

[Pascal Monett]

Re: TLDR

Maybe, but they still got $100 million with that pitch.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: TLDR

The great thing about private companies is that they don't need to provide full details about the money. However, for a company of Docker's size and age, $ 100 million probably won't last that long. And Bain also has a reputation for flipping companies after asset-stripping streamlining them. Sounds like an IPO is off the table so hoping to sell to a competitor.

[Dr Scrum Master]

Highly Popular, Not Profitable

If I read this correctly, we have a highly popular piece of software, but the vendor still has to cap-in-hand to investors because they can't make the product pay its own way?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Highly Popular, Not Profitable

The money being made in the containerization and VM world is in the interface controls and as far as I know Docker doesn't do anything but Docker while other companies do all of them.

The hard sell for containers is that as long as the underlying container software is bug free, then it's really the OS that is taking the wheel, so selling that type of software is similar to selling a boot loader. Well, I guess it's a very, VERY hard sell because VM's are more complicated but now VM software alone is a hard sell and ironically largely due to container software.

[Anonymous Coward]

Batshit crazy

Pretty much the first thing most developers and DevOps engineers I know did when Docker announced the end of the free-for-developers version, was to find a free alternative that got around the licensing changes. e.g. Colima on MacOS.

And if you want image hosting there's a number of providers other than Docker Hub that will do it for minimal pricing or even free below a certain storage/transfer limit.

So Docker have taken steps to basically make themselves redundant as far as developers are concerned, and to some extent have also cocked up the one major asset they had, which was that they were the default go-to brand for containers. And yet somehow now they've managed to convince some Muppets to invest millions more...???

I've got a bridge to sell, if the same investor's interested...?

[trevorde]

Only one possible outcome

Bought by Microsoft

[sreynolds]

Re: Only one possible outcome

There is nothing dishonorable with the traditional burning through the VC cash before going tits up.

[Dale 3]

I'm not a financier but

So their days seemed numbered yet investors hand over 105 million to keep paying the bills that their lack of revenue cannot, and this is called a turnaround? I get that the new money shows investors are optimistic, along the lines of "if we just keep them going another 12 months they will surely start producing renevue". No wonder they call it double-unicorn.

[Doctor Huh?]

Wait, this _isn't_ an April Fool's piece?

This is serious? Oh my.