Nikolay: Hello, hello.
This is Postgres FM, episode number 105.
My name is Nikolay.
I'm the founder of Postgres.AI.
And as usual, my co-host is Michael, the founder of pgMustard.
Hi, Michael.
Michael: Hello, Nikolay.
Nikolay: So you chose an interesting topic.
Is it interesting?
I'm kidding.
But it's not technical at all, right?
Michael: It depends on how far we get into it.
Nikolay: Yeah.
So, we talk about startups, Postgres startups, ecosystem maybe
for Postgres companies and new companies, young companies.
We saw many of them launched in previous years.
And recently, starting last year, we started observing some of
them closing, which is natural for startups.
Yeah, let's discuss this.
Michael: Yeah, sounds great.
I thought it might be interesting for people.
I think not everybody pays as close attention to this as yourself
and I do.
So I think there'll be people out there that won't have heard
of a bunch of these companies.
I think it'd be really interesting to discuss what some of them
are doing, what kind of categories there are, how they run, what
kind of business models are popping up, what problems they're
solving, that kind of thing.
But the reason I brought this up now, I mean I'm kind of surprised
we haven't done this kind of thing already, But the reason I
brought this up now is I saw a tweet, maybe some other people,
it got a few hundred likes, I think probably a few people in
the Postgres world have seen it already.
I think it was a semi-serious prediction, which was from a guy
called Dax Rad.
I don't know if I'm pronouncing it right.
He's a bit of a joker online.
It does quite a few funny tweets, but I think this was semi-serious.
And it was a prediction that over the next 12 months, Postgres
startups are going to get decimated.
And that was the whole tweet, definitely in character for trolling.
But I thought it was interesting and funny.
And yeah, there were some funny responses too.
But that prompted me to think, what is the Postgres startup ecosystem
like right now?
Nikolay: I think it's, first of all, it's serious, very serious.
And second, I think it's wrong because it talks about next 12
months, not talking about what already happened last 12 months.
I think It's already happened.
Because if you think like, even if 3 startups closed, that means
they do have 30, right?
Because what does this word mean?
It means...
Michael: I did look it up.
I did look it up because that was part of the replies.
But I think there are two definitions.
One is the kind of the strict old school definition which was,
you know, from the Roman times, 1 in ten… KB – Punishment.
MH – …dies.
Yeah, exactly.
But I don't think that's what's generally meant when the word
Nikolay: decimated is used in English.
It's not just dice.
Other 9 killed this guy.
This is how it was originally, it was terrible, right?
Michael: Well, it was like
Nikolay: a group punishment.
One Random guy is killed by others, right?
So this, I don't know why we discuss it, it's not relevant maybe.
Michael: It's very relevant to the tweet, right, decimated.
But I think the more normal definition, the more normal use of
the word decimated means like a whole, a lot of them will die.
Nikolay: Reduction, right?
Reduction of number of...
Big reduction.
Well, actually in the world of startups, usually 9 of 10 die,
not 1 of 10, right?
It's vice versa.
Normally because lack of product market fit or something like
that, bad execution and so on, which usually looks like we cannot
raise next round, right?
But back to my idea, what happened in the last 12 months.
I know at least 3 startups which are dead now.
Did we have 30 startups before that?
If we did, I mean, did we have more?
I think no, actually.
Postgres-related startups.
Michael: It depends how you define them.
And I think even some of the ones you're talking about potentially
talking about weren't Postgres only.
So it depends...
Nikolay: Of course.
The biggest, aiven.com from Finland, I consider it a startup because
I remember they were super small and then they skyrocketed and
raised...
They are Postgres related because they started, I think, from
with Postgres and Kafka.
It's like an alternative to AWS services, but multi-cloud like you.
A single interface to multiple clouds, but including Postgres, right?
right?
And they had great Postgres materials, and so on.
Michael: I think I misheard.
What was the name of the company?
How do you spell it?
Nikolay: Aiven.
Michael: Aiven.
It must be a different Aiven to the one I'm thinking of because
they seem to still be going strong.
Nikolay: No, no, no, no, no.
They didn't close.
I mean, what I tried to say, I just reflected your words about
not only are they strong, although I heard about layoffs, but
they also raised the maximum number of VC capital among all,
let's call it Postgres-related companies, right?
So I just reflected the idea that some of them are not purely
Postgres.
And these guys are not purely Postgres.
Of course, they have MySQL and a lot of elastic and everything,
right?
Yeah, I would say we have a big range of very big companies and
Aiven, at least according to Crunchbase, raised $420 million.
It's insane, right?
Michael: With a lot of money.
Nikolay: Yeah, I think they were first who reached the like kind
of unicorn label among Postgres, let's call it Postgres-related
startups.
The other one I think is TimescaleDB also reached this good mark,
right?
Like unicorn means a valuation exceeding 1 billion.
By the way, speaking of numbers, 420 is easy to remember sitting
in California.
But it's an impressive amount of money and we have Supabase
and Timescale which raised more than 100 million, right?
Michael: Neon too, over 100 million.
Nikolay: Great, congrats everyone.
Michael: Hasura as well.
Nikolay: Yeah, Hasura.
By the way, I stopped hearing about Hasura for a couple of years
already somehow.
And by the way, they are also starting from Postgres.
I think they expanded to SQL Server and everything.
Yeah, we didn't see the collapse of really big startups, but smaller
and I think I would say Autotune managed to be already like mid-size
because how much did they raise?
16 million?
15?
Michael: I saw 12, but I don't know what they raised before that.
Nikolay: I think 15 or 16 was the total I saw.
Honestly, if we say database startups, this money should be not
serious, because database startups require more money, I think,
to go serious.
And we have a lot of small, very small things.
So let's talk about those who closed.
Like Autotune is 1 of the latest news.
Who else?
Michael: There's only 1 other that I know of, and that was Snaplet.
Nikolay: Snaplet, yeah.
Michael: It's not really in the same category, but it's kind
of in our space of making tools.
Nikolay: What about Bit.io?
Bit.io, it was a nice idea.
You have a spreadsheet, you just throw it to browser uploading,
right?
And it immediately creates Postgres node with table and with
data.
Michael: Oh, really?
Nikolay: Yeah.
It's like super cloud approach, like very, very cloud.
Like you just drop a spreadsheet and start running SQL queries
to it.
Was a nice idea, but they closed last year, I guess.
And similarly to AutoTune, they did very, very, very, very, very,
very short notice for their customers, which is, I think, very
bad behavior.
Not good, not good.
Like 30 days or so.
Get your data.
Yes,
Michael: it's difficult, isn't it?
Nikolay: So these 3 startups, like Snaplet, Bit.io and Autotune
are closed.
And my question is how many startups do we have post-Gresley
that are in this kind of broader term in general?
Maybe 30, right?
But 30 is quite a lot in my head.
And it means that maybe we already have this mission complete,
you know?
Michael: So...
Easiest prediction to make is something that's already happened.
Nikolay: Right.
Well, no, I mean, next 12 months maybe it will happen again.
Michael: What do you think?
Nikolay: I don't know.
By the way, I somewhere had a list of startups.
I think it didn't exceed 30.
Michael: Yeah, I've made a list.
I've made a bit of a list, but I didn't know what should count.
Like, how many years does it still count as a startup?
Nikolay: Right.
What is startup?
Michael: Yeah.
What about companies that haven't gone down the VC route?
That kind of like, do they count?
So it's, I think it's really difficult.
And then especially if you start to include companies that do.
Tools for more than 1 type of database.
Like We had an acquisition recently in the Postgres space where
Timescale acquired a company called Popsicle.
A cool name, by the way.
But they did a tool that worked with Postgres, but not only Postgres.
And there's been loads of companies like that, that I wouldn't
have thought to include if I was making this list.
So it's a very, very tricky definition.
But to be fair, DAX did actually qualify a little bit in some
replies, saying it was about the crop of companies that have
popped up to offer managed Postgres services, which does limit
it.
Nikolay: It's very different.
Michael: There can't be that many of those, maybe 5 or 10.
Nikolay: Right.
And yeah, we cannot take existing companies which started doing
this because they already cannot be considered startups.
So it means we talk about only like very few companies.
I think not more than 10 because most managed Postgres services
I can think of, they are done by companies which exist for many years.
So, Supabase, Neon, Tembo, who else?
Michael: Yeah, for sure.
I don't know how some of the others are monetizing.
Like, for example, there are people like FerretDB offering Mongo-compatible
Postgres.
I don't think they're offering a managed service though.
Is PGEdge as well?
Are they doing managed?
Nikolay: I don't follow.
Michael: I think so.
PeerDB as well, I don't know if they're doing managed.
I don't know if you would count it.
Nikolay: They don't have managed Postgres, they have managed
replication for Postgres.
Michael: There you go.
So I don't think they count in this prediction.
So it's a tricky one to...
I suspect it did its job and it was pure engagement farming and
I've fallen for it.
But in the grand scheme of things, I was most keen just to discuss
how do you see Postgres startups at the moment?
And are there any gaps that you'd really like to see maybe new
startups pop up or what kind of problems some of these are solving?
Which ones are most important to you?
Like that kind of thing?
Nikolay: Well I think I see things very differently than a few
years ago.
I think a lot of new people came, which is great, from different
market segments, like even from database, from different database
systems, for example, right?
Like Tembo is 1 of great examples here.
Michael: And, by the way, congrats to them.
They just announced a raise.
Nikolay: 14 million
Michael: or something.
Nikolay: And special congrats for Cybertruck to Ray.
Michael: We'll link that up.
Nikolay: With license plate startup, very relevant to today's
discussion, right?
I think we have very different types of companies and many attempts
and it's interesting time right now because if we talk about
VC maybe it's harder to raise but at the same time we know it's
harder to find a job, which also means that it's easier to find
people.
And for those who make startups, it's some additional window
of opportunity.
So it's a mixed situation right now.
Like you might fail to raise, but you might find good co-founder,
for example, technical, right?
And, and, and build something.
Yeah.
I'm honestly not standard startup guy at all.
I'm slow, bootstrapping.
I'm just observing this like VC.
If you raise, for example, 10, 20 million dollars, build something
which brings you some significant money, and then you need to
shut down your company because you didn't have 10x growth per
year.
It's weird.
For VCs, it's probably like a failure, right?
Because they expect hyper growth.
But why do we need the hyper growth in post-growth ecosystem?
Maybe we should have good companies which have normal growth,
like 30% per year and that's it.
I don't know, what do you think?
Michael: Well, I'm in the same boat as you in terms of my own
companies, trying to grow it sustainably with customer revenue,
customer funded, bootstrapped at the beginning.
So trying to do things slow and steady, but to do that, I felt
like I had to pick a very, very small niche of a product, a very,
very kind of low surface area compete in like a very, very small
area.
But I do think there are problems in databases that do require
a lot more investment up front.
And those things are harder to do self-funded slowly.
I think they do require a lot of capital.
And then the only model at the moment for that is either, well,
I guess there are examples, even in the Postgres ecosystem of
companies funding their own development there, like it, well,
back to the hyperscalers, but even, So obviously companies like
AWS, RDS, that was all funded through Amazon profits and Microsoft
as well, Google, but in the Postgres space, Crunchy Data, for
example, have been investing in their own platform that presumably
largely funded through their own consulting business and then
customer revenues.
But it's like yours, right?
Your business is also mixed consulting revenue.
So some of these other companies I see are offering kind of service-based
business models as well as the kind of more VC-friendly subscriptions
or hosting, like usage fees.
Nikolay: What is good about this all, it's definitely ecosystem
is still growing, expanding, and we see the growth of companies
which use Postgres in so many market segments.
Everywhere, it's everywhere.
It's great.
We see many customers who need help in many aspects.
So I agree we must divide companies by what they do, goals.
If you want to change something in the database itself, like build
a new type of Postgres itself or rewrite part of Postgres, it requires
a lot of effort and you must have a very long vision.
If you raise just $1,000,000, for example, and next year VC will
say either raise or close basically because you don't have customers.
This is not how it will work.
Fundamental things require a lot of effort and maybe money also.
So Neon is a good example.
They change.
Michael: Yeah, great example.
Nikolay: Yeah, and also AlloyDB, which is still under development
and Alexander Khodorkov joined Supabase also good driver probably
to continue the development of AureolaDB because what is there we
as Postgres users do need, right?
Features which are designed there.
Also, I would like to mention here like historical things.
If maybe you've watched this, Michael Stonebraker, who is like
father of Postgres, receiving Turing Award 10 years ago or so,
he had a great lecture about startups in the database, database startups,
because he is like, not only father of Postgres, but he's the father
of database startups as well, participating in doing this a lot.
So it was a great lecture.
I highly recommend it.
I remember he was comparing fundamental database startups as
riding a bicycle across America, like downhill, uphill.
Sometimes it feels great.
Sometimes it's like almost killing you.
Very good lecture actually.
I enjoyed.
So this is a fundamental thing.
But there are other types of Postgres related startups as well
and I think good things should happen when we saw in Postgres
area, we saw the first acquisition by Microsoft, it was Citus, right?
Michael: Yeah.
Which is
Nikolay: quite also fundamental, I would say, right?
It's not Postgres itself, but it's a significant layer of addition
to Postgres.
Michael: It's actually the one area that I would like to see more
deep work done.
I think we've got a lot of bases covered in the Postgres ecosystem,
but there is this kind of elephant in the room with PlanetScale
and Vitesse.
We had great guests on recently and I've since seen somebody
describe, I think it was actually Arka from Notion, he described
what Sammy and the Figma team are doing as somewhat starting
to build the Vitesse for Postgres.
I hadn't clicked that that's what they were doing, but that is
kind of what they're doing.
So that feels like a gap at the moment that could be, that probably
does require a lot of development and could be funded by a VC-backed
startup.
But that's the one area that I don't see currently being done.
Nikolay: Right.
But then there are several acquisitions, I think, for smaller
startups.
And we saw also a few companies which are Postgres-related in
YC.
Yeah.
Like PeerDB, right?
Michael: Is that the first time, right?
PeerDB and then ParadeDB, are they the first Postgres related
companies to get into YC?
Nikolay: No, Supabase was there as well.
Michael: Oh, great shout, yeah.
Nikolay: Good point.
Someone else was there.
Michael: Sorry, Supabase, I forgot.
Nikolay: Yeah, I forgot.
Maybe someone else.
So, But there are bootstrappers as well.
Is PgAnalyze bootstrapper?
Michael: Yeah, I had a list of bootstrappers that I wanted to
give a shout out to.
Yeah, PgAnalyze is a great example, but also DBeaver.
These bootstrappers don't get as much, because they don't raise
money often, well never, they don't get as much press.
So yeah, the rest of the other ones I had to give a shout out
to were Egger Apps, who make Postico, My favorite little Mac
client for Postgres.
Postgres Compare, which is run by an old friend and colleague
of mine, I call Neil Anderson.
And also there's another monitoring company, so PG Analyze, of
course, but with Lucas and the team.
Nikolay: PG Analyze, I see it very often lately.
Michael: Nice.
Nikolay: Do you consider Core Root as a Postgres startup?
It's very strange to classify, right?
Because they have good support for Postgres for self-managed
installations, I think, because they do eBPF monitoring, right?
I like the idea.
If we have like many Postgres nodes, and not only Postgres, we
don't need to install anything like additional extensions, but
we do need to have access to like...
Mason.
Well, right, right.
So it's a self-managed situation.
And they just observe whole traffic and perform a lot of interesting
stuff, including like flame graphs.
Historically, you choose the period and understand what Postgres
did in that period in terms of what CPU was doing.
And also query analysis.
Michael: I forgot them, but I think it's because they're not
purely, they're not only Postgres, right?
So it's a different-
Nikolay: Not only Postgres, but the founder was creating, it's
the same founder who created Okimeter and it had very good Postgres
monitoring, 1 of the best I consider still.
And you know, I had last year, I had the overview of Postgres
monitoring systems at PgCon.
People liked a lot my slide deck, so I know what I'm talking
about.
And Peter Zaitsev joined him recently as co-founder.
Michael: Yeah, very cool.
Nikolay: So it means serious thoughts about databases, of course,
maybe not Postgres only, but MySQL, but definitely serious about
databases.
So we can consider, like, this is the problem.
Fundamental, not fundamental, bootstrapped, VC backed, Postgres
only, not Postgres only.
So many dimensions for this classification.
Michael: Well, and that's part of what I wanted to discuss here.
It was, it does feel quite rich at the moment.
It does feel like we have a lot of options and I feel like that's
really positive and there's quite a lot of innovation going on,
not only at the startups.
It feels like there's quite a lot of innovation going on even
at some of the larger, older companies working on Postgres things.
Maybe I'm biased and rose-tinted glasses, but it feels really
positive to me at the moment.
Nikolay: I think the idea of that tweet was the company who raised
the lot are in danger.
Michael: Interesting.
You think?
Nikolay: Yeah, because they need to raise harder and if they
are not dealing with AI, for example, VCs won't give them money,
right?
Maybe.
It's a very silly thought, but it's actually in many cases true.
Michael: Well it will be interesting to see if any of them do
but it also feels like the ones that I'm aware of, they have
such good business models like if the business model is working,
getting companies to host their database on your system, the
ones that do well will grow with you and pay you more each month,
month on month.
And it's very difficult to move off, right?
It's expensive, it's risky.
So the fundamentals of...
Nikolay: IMAGINE you grow only 50% per year or just 100% per
year.
For VCs, it's not enough at some point.
Michael: Good point.
Nikolay: It's tough.
Michael: But if we're talking about 100 million in the bank,
even if you hire a lot of people, that's a serious amount of
money.
Nikolay: Right.
But how many managed Postgres services do we have already?
And RDS is still the king of the hill, right?
So I don't know.
And is it still expanding the user base in terms of managed Postgres?
Michael: Good question.
I did look, going back to the tweet, I go for what, if that's
the prediction, why is it the prediction?
I personally think the number of databases is growing really
quickly.
The number of startups seems to be exploding at the moment because
of the AI boom.
A lot of the AI use cases do need a vector database.
Postgres, because of pgVector, is positioned really well for vector
databases.
Nikolay: Do you think so?
Michael: Personally, yes.
Do you not think so?
Nikolay: I have doubts, because it's not in core.
If you check Postgres documentation, you don't see vector at
all.
This is a huge chance to lose this battle, in my opinion.
This is serious.
It might look so silly, simple, and so on, but it's a super serious
problem Postgres currently has.
And pgVector and all efforts.
It's good that all major managed services quickly added pgVector,
but they usually lag in terms of version.
It means that they lag to deliver the best performance, for example,
which is quickly improving in the latest versions.
And so on and so on.
Of course, this is a battle that's happening, but it's a barrier
in minds, and some people, some folks will not pass this barrier.
I mean, if you're not lazy, you will quickly realize it's kind
of a zoo, it's a bazaar.
It's open source, that's why, like, it's a bazaar.
So we have many options, you need to quickly understand the options.
But I recently had this customer, they said, okay, we are on
RDS, I think it was Aurora, and we have pgVector, blah, blah,
blah.
And I see they use a very old version of pgVector, much older than
even already available on Aurora, but they didn't upgrade because
to upgrade you need to switch to a different… I don't remember.
Some problems were happening.
This whole thing is so fragmented.
I mean vector story is very fragmented right now.
And the only path to make it strong is to put it inside Postgres.
But we know, we discussed that there are problems with that.
Michael: Well, I don't think that's...
I disagree personally.
I think if you're really a startup and you can't keep pgVector
up to date, you have bigger problems than, you know, that feels
to me such an easy thing for you to do.
If what I'm saying is true, If there are lots of companies that
want vector databases right now and are willing to go with Postgres,
I personally think it being out of core is a benefit right now
because it means it can get bumps in version really quickly.
Like, we see, I know they're not technically major versions,
but 0.5, 0.6, 0.7 have all come with quite big functionality
improvements.
And if it was in core, we wouldn't have seen those.
It would have taken years.
So personally, I think there are advantages in that area.
I've just remembered, though, I actually think the prediction
was made partly because of 2 other reasons.
I think it's partly that PlanetScale is very marketing level
kind of attractive to kind of medium-sized, like non-AI kind
of SaaS businesses.
I don't know how many non AI businesses are popping up right
now, but the ones that are, I think that they offer a very attractive
proposition, like kind of like Mongo did before, but with SQL.
And then I think the other driving force for the prediction is
probably the number of SQLite companies popping up saying, actually,
all you need is this.
For a long, long time, you can get by with SQLite, keep things
simple.
So I think at least that part of Twitter that I'm seeing is talking
about those topics a bit more.
And that might be why they think the Postgres startups might
struggle rather than a more nuanced take on vector databases.
But I might have totally misunderstood.
What do you think?
Nikolay: Hard to say.
I don't know.
Michael: I just remembered there's 1 I completely forgot.
Have you heard of Nile?
N-I-L-E.
Yeah.
Because they popped up quite, like relatively recently in the
grand scheme of things, talking about running a regular SaaS
on Postgres and some innovations in that area.
So that could be interesting, but they're another 1 that we're
offering a managed service again.
Nikolay: Well, yeah, talking about this lack of being in core,
of course, I agree with you about the pace of development.
That's great.
And maybe things will change in the future.
But it's just so sad that everyone has everything in documentation,
like Techmonger, Elastic, everyone, like any major database system.
They talk about vectors.
Postgres documentation doesn't talk about vectors at all, right?
I mean, it talks about arrays, but it's not like different, right?
So maybe at some point it will go to core.
I hope it won't be late.
Right?
Michael: But, just to push you a little bit, the super-based
documentation talks about vectors, the neon documentation.
Of course.
Nikolay: RDS, Cloud SQL, all of them.
Michael: Yeah.
But people are still then going with Postgres.
So what's the problem?
Nikolay: The problem is that you need to spend time to choose
and understand all the options here, because options are quite
different everywhere.
Michael: But that would be true even if it was in the Postgres
docs too.
In fact, 1 more option.
Nikolay: Maybe, maybe.
Michael: Anything you would like to see?
Anything, like if anybody's listening, wanting to do a startup
or like get inspired, is there any kind of area you'd like to
see more innovation in?
Nikolay: Of course, And by the way, Tembo is doing good steps
in this direction.
So I think, you know, 37signals idea about moving out of cloud.
I
Michael: thought you were going to say, I thought you were going
to say moving.
So they've also done this once product that runs on SQLite, like,
but no, yeah, the moving out of the cloud 1.
Yes.
Nikol gaming
Moving out of cloud and having greater level of control over
your database.
Direct access to files, for example, and so on, which is not
possible for managed Postgres services usually.
We discussed it a few times.
Good thing that, for example, CrunchyBridge provides full-fledged
super user.
So I expect, actually, Cytos co-founders, they launched new startup
as well, right?
And they do Postgres as well.
Yeah, good point.
In UbiCloud, right?
Michael: That was it, yeah.
Forgot them, yeah, good point.
Nikolay: The idea is great.
You can install it anywhere, you have full access, but it's still,
it's like the simplicity of management is similar to you have
in cloud.
You can do it with Superbase as well, by the way, I think.
You can host yourself, it's great.
So in this area, I expect good shifts in the future, because
I think demand will be growing.
People who are like, already say like, we've been in cloud enough.
We want to reduce overhead, how much we spent and so on.
Of course, some people will say cloud is great, I understand
this, But I think this party will grow as well, like an anti-cloud
party, let's say.
Michael: I think it might also be a little bit like stage of
company.
I can imagine a lot of startups going with the cloud initially
and then like that, perhaps a bit earlier than 37signals did,
maybe then moves workloads back off.
So I could definitely see both being true.
Nikolay: Yes.
So for example, new and fully betting, everything should be cloud.
I understand that, but I also understand like then we pay like
5 times more than we could.
So why do we do this?
I know small companies which also understand that they don't
want to pay a lot and they are good technically, so they are
successful and happy to be not in cloud.
Or in very low-cost cloud, for example.
And Postgres management there is interesting because you want
all the features but don't want all the overhead.
This is interesting.
In general, I don't know what will happen, but it's normal for
startups to die, especially if they are VC backed.
Yeah, because VCs put a lot of pressure, especially after like
3 to 5 years of existence of the company.
I learned it hard way with my second startup, like 10 years ago,
when I realized like 3 years passed and we need to move on and
huge optimization was needed.
It was successfully done, but it was very painful.
So it's good if you know this in advance, that there is some
period of time when you will need to raise again or you will
just be closed.
In my case it was not closure, it was just a huge optimization
to be very profitable at some point.
That's why I like the bootstrapped cases as well.
Michael: Yeah.
Right.
And I'm glad we got a chance to shout some of them out because
they don't always get the attention they deserve.
Nikolay: If bootstrapped company doesn't die in first year and
the founders still believe in this idea, it's a much more stable
company actually, because they don't have pressure from VCs.
But probably they have much less chances to grow significantly,
right?
Michael: Well, it depends, right?
I actually forgot a couple of similar companies that are bootstrapped
or mostly bootstrapped or at least they've stopped raising and
they're doing really well.
Like JetBrains, a really, really old company going from strength
to strength.
Nikolay: King of bootstrapped companies, I think.
Michael: There are some examples of companies that have scaled
to the same levels as some VC-backed companies without needing
to.
So kudos to them as well.
Nikolay: Right.
So my conclusion is like, I expect more closures and it's interesting
to observe the situation.
And unfortunately, I think closures will happen with companies
who raised a lot Or they will need to change things a lot.
Michael: Interesting.
Well, I'm not, I would be surprised.
So call me naive, but my prediction would be that none of them
do close at least in the next 12 months.
So let's see.
I'll be rooting for them anyway.
In fact, all the Postgres startups, I guess we'll be rooting
for.
Nikolay: Like a system is quite interesting and with challenges,
but it's still growing, I think.
And I think it's interesting to observe the further growth.
Michael: Yeah, should be fun anyway.
Thanks so much, Nikolay.
Anything else you wanted to add?
Nikolay: No, thank you.
See you next time.
Michael: See you next time.