reply to Mango
Re: [General] Which VOIP Services are known to have redundancy?
said by Mango:How do you know they do not have the backing of venture capitalists?
Both Anveo and VoIP.ms are private companies so we don't know if they're profitable, but since they don't have the backing of big venture capitalists, I think it is highly likely that they are.
DPC3825 (bridged mode) - WRT610N + Tomato - Panasonic KX-TGP500 - Asterisk 11.0.2 on Virtual Server
Anveo - FreePhoneLine - Voxbeam - Numbergroup - Callcentric - VoIP.MS - Localphone - UKDDI
said by grand total:Good point - I made an educated guess there. I should have said something like "since the fees they charge are comparable to the rest of the industry, I think it is highly likely that they are [profitable]."
How do you know they do not have the backing of venture capitalists?
reply to grand total
As far as others being VC backed, I do not know. I have searched and could not find anything. Normally a VC firm will list their "portfolio" on their websites and I was not able to locate any VC firms listing them.
Atheists swear there is no Heaven, but pray there isn't a Hell.
said by jduffy:I doubt very much that there is any large-scale VC money for those providers or any others (except Ooma which was old news).
As far as others being VC backed, I do not know. I have searched and could not find anything....
I think that the question was rhetorical.
The people who put many millions into Ooma have not made any money on their investment, and in many cases lost money.
Among externally funded companies, we have had:
Jeff Pulver's TELLO: Comedy
VoiceStick (which ended life as GEOS): Comedy and Tragedy
I would [run away hard] from any provider that was VC backed.
You want a company where people are using their OWN money, not someone else's.
Among companies where owners are active participants are FutureNine/CheapVoip, Voip.MS, CallCentric, Anveo, CallWithUs, FlowRoute, etc.