BigCommerce: Q1 Earnings Snapshot
AUSTIN, Texas — AUSTIN, Texas — BigCommerce Holdings, Inc. (BIGC) on Thursday reported a loss of $353,000 in its first quarter.
The Austin, Texas-based company said it had a loss of less than 1 cent on a per-share basis. Earnings, adjusted for one-time gains and costs, came to 7 cents per share.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
29 minutes ago
- Forbes
What Every Creator Should Know Before Launching A Digital Product
Man podcaster influencer blogger smiling while broadcasting his live audio podcast in studio using ... More headphones, laptop and headphones. Male radio host making podcast or interview The creator economy is entering its next major phase, not one defined by followers or viral content, but by real product ownership and long-term equity. From digital memberships to full-fledged software ventures, creators are unlocking serious revenue streams and reshaping what it means to build an audience online. Miles Sellyn, VP of Creator Partnerships at Rare Days, has helped some of the biggest names in the industry, from Colin and Samir to Ryan Trahan, launch products that now generate millions. I spoke to him to unpack what's working, what's not and how creators can move from content to commerce with intention. 'What the market is telling me is the biggest opportunity right now are memberships and subscriptions,' Sellyn explained. 'It's a bit of an evolution from courses or communities. You might have a course within a membership. You might have a community within a membership. You might have AI chatbots. It's a flexible container for delivering content.' Still, Sellyn's eyes are on a more ambitious horizon: creators building software. 'The cost of developing software is dropping dramatically. That opens the door for creators to own the product rather than just being the face of it,' he said. 'It creates long-term enterprise equity value.' 'The eye-popping ones: we work with a creator who is making more than $15 million a year through their digital products,' Sellyn shared. 'Another did $300,000 within 30 days of launching. We have creators who have sold $15 million plus of courses.' But big numbers aren't the only metric. 'Even $60,000–$70,000 a month in digital product sales can change the game for creators relying on brand deals. It's great for mental health and strategic freedom.' So what makes a creator product-ready? 'A ruthless standard for quality,' Sellyn emphasized. 'That stems from a deep respect for the audience. The top creators care about the person on the other end of the screen. They're not just selling—they're delivering outsized value.' He also urges creators to go beyond intuition and mine their DMs and comments. 'That's where the product ideas are hiding.' Rare Days uses 'feature vignettes' to validate product ideas. These are low-fidelity mockups that gauge audience interest. 'We'll create 10 to 20 of these and test them directly with the creator's audience. That feedback is gold.' When creators don't have a product idea, that's not a deal-breaker. 'They're filmmakers, creatives, educators, not necessarily product strategists. But if they know their audience, we can find the opportunity together.' The timeline depends on complexity. A course or membership might take three to four months. Custom software can take up to a year. One warning: 'Creators almost always underestimate the content burden. They're already making a YouTube video every week. Creating a product is another layer entirely.' Pricing is both art and science. Sellyn recommends Jay Clouse's four-question pricing framework, based on the Van Westendorp Model: Then, price toward the lower end. 'You want customers to feel like they're getting 10 times the value for every dollar they spend.' 'One of the biggest mistakes? The creator launches and goes dark,' Sellyn warned. 'You need to talk about it constantly. Algorithms don't guarantee reach, so act like you're inviting your audience to a party. They need to know it exists.' Sellyn recommends a two-week pre-launch window, followed by strategic post-launch engagement. 'It's not 'Field of Dreams.' You can't just build it and expect people to come. You have to market it.' Entertainment creators can still sell, but it's tougher. 'If your content is a vitamin, not a painkiller, the product needs a lot more thought. But if your content solves problems, the audience is already primed.' One standout example is Hannah Williams of Salary Transparent Street. Instead of launching a course, she built a salary database and a job board. 'It fits her mission and audience. Not everything has to be an educational product.' Sellyn sees a wave of creator-led SaaS products on the horizon. 'Creators used to partner with software tools. Now they're building their own. We're seeing creators in 3D modeling, for example, realize they can build plugins for $20,000 and keep the upside, rather than just taking affiliate fees.' It's not just about products. It's about ownership. If you're a creator thinking about launching a product? 'Spend time in your DMs,' Sellyn said. 'Read every comment. Look for pain points. Then build solutions around those. That's your roadmap.' And when you're ready to scale? 'Your audience is your edge. But your product is your future.' This article is based on an interview from my podcast, The Business of Creators.
Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
How Women's Unique Evaluation Of AI Tools Influences Corporate Culture
How Women's Unique Evaluation Of AI Tools Influences Corporate Culture When it comes to adopting AI tools at work, studies have shown that men are more likely to experiment with these tools, while women tend to hesitate. That doesn't mean women are less tech-savvy or less open to innovation. It often means they're asking different questions. And those questions reveal something important about how corporate culture is being shaped in the AI era. In Bloomberg's recent article, Why Are Women Less Likely To Use AI?, the author pointed out how women are significantly less likely to use generative AI tools than men. But the article also hinted at something deeper than just usage rates. It pointed to differences in trust, ethics, and perceived risk. That got me thinking about how much we're missing by not exploring those differences more fully. If you're building a workplace culture that includes AI as a core capability, you can't afford to ignore how different groups evaluate these tools. What Women Are Doing That Often Gets Overlooked With AI Tools Women in the workplace are not saying AI is bad. They're not rejecting it outright. What they're doing is pausing. They're questioning how it works, who created it, what data it was trained on, and whether it could be misused. In many cases, they're also concerned about how others will perceive their use of it. Will they look like they're cutting corners? Will the tool reinforce bias? Will their job become obsolete? That kind of hesitation is discernment and the careful weighing of trade-offs. And it reflects a kind of emotional intelligence and long-term thinking that often gets undervalued in tech conversations. Why Adoption Of AI Tools Matters More Than Most People Think Companies that ignore these perspectives risk designing workflows, cultures, and even ethics policies that leave people behind. If you have a team where the loudest voices are the ones who embrace new tools quickly, and quieter voices are the ones raising concerns, you need to ask yourself: are you hearing the full story? Women may not be the early adopters of every AI tool, but they're often the first to see unintended consequences. They may be the first to notice that the chatbot is reinforcing stereotypes, or that an AI-powered hiring tool is filtering out qualified candidates based on biased data, which are culture-shaping concerns. How Guiding Adoption Of AI Tools Creates Progress I've interviewed hundreds of executives, and the best ones aren't the people who jump on every new technology as soon as it hits the market. They're the ones who ask, "Does this make sense for our people? Does it help us do better work? Does it reflect the values we say we care about?" And more often than not, it's women who are asking those kinds of questions. Think about what that means in a practical sense. When a company is rolling out a new AI writing tool, a male leader might focus on efficiency. A female leader might ask if the tool risks replacing human insight or if it undermines original thinking. Neither approach is wrong. But they lead to different outcomes. What Corporate Culture Can Learn From This Adoption Of AI Tools Culture is created by what gets rewarded, what gets ignored, and who gets heard. If women are asking smarter, more cautious questions about AI, and those questions aren't being acknowledged, then you're setting a cultural tone that says speed matters more than insight. That's not the tone most companies want. Leaders should want people who think ahead, question assumptions, and who consider ethics, fairness, and trust. If that's the kind of culture you say you're building, then you need to create space for those voices. Organizations need to value the different ways people approach these tools. The more diverse the perspectives, the better the decisions. How Curiosity Impacts Women's And Men's Adoption Of AI Tools How Curiosity Impacts Women's And Men's Adoption Of AI Tools In my research on what inhibits curiosity, I found men and women score differently based on the influence of fear, assumptions, technology, and environment. Although both groups experience all four, women tend to score higher on the impact of fear, often concerned about whether they have enough background to speak up or try something new. Men, on the other hand, score higher on the impact of assumptions, more likely to believe they should stick to what's worked in the past. When it comes to the impact of over or under-utilization of technology, both men and women experienced the same levels of impact. For how much their environment (interactions with people) impacted them, men showed more inhibition than women. But the most eye-opening insights came from research which looked at what happens after people watch a seminar. Men were two and a half times more likely to ask a question than women. When a speaker made a mistake, men were more likely to challenge it. Women, by contrast, often assumed they must have misunderstood the point. They waited until six or more questions had already been asked before feeling comfortable enough to raise their hand. These insights matter when we talk about AI. Because using AI at work is often tied to comfort with asking questions, experimenting, and being visible. If women are second-guessing their instincts or waiting for a signal that it's safe, that's not a tech problem, it's a culture problem. What AI Tools Adoption Means For Leadership Right Now If you're a leader rolling out AI initiatives, ask yourself who's in the room helping make those decisions. Who's vetting the tools? Who's raising the questions others might not think to ask? And do those people feel like their voices matter? Too often, leaders surround themselves with enthusiastic adopters. And while enthusiasm is great, it isn't the same as foresight. If everyone in your inner circle is cheering every new tool without critique, that could lead to unintended consequences. It is more important to invite pushback, encourage skepticism and not assume that the people who are asking tough questions are slowing you down. They might be the ones protecting you from a much bigger mistake later. Let Women Lead In This AI Tools Adoption Space If women are more attuned to the risks and the long-term implications of AI, then it might be important to give them more authority in shaping how those tools are used. Make them part of AI ethics boards, pilot programs, and training others. Listen to cautionary voices rather than dismissing them to ensure companies build trust, retain talent, and create cultures where people feel safe to speak up. The Bottom Line About AI Tools Adoption It is important to recognize that different people bring different lenses to the same AI tools. The companies paying closest attention are asking better questions and drawing from a wider range of experiences to shape their approach. Women are influencing how AI is evaluated, refined, and applied with more discernment and context. That kind of thinking builds trust, drives smarter decisions, and leads to better results. The next wave of progress will come from those willing to listen before they automate.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
US-China Trade Talks; LA Immigration Clashes Escalate
The US and China are ready to resume trade talks in London today... with the flow of rare earth minerals set to be a key focus; clashes between law enforcement and demonstrators in Los Angeles over anti-deportation protests escalate. President Trump's deployment of the National Guard inflames residents... California's Governor says he will file a law suit to block the federal government's intervention; and Bloomberg learns Meta is in talks to invest in startup Scale AI. The financing may exceed $10 billion, making it one of the largest-ever private company funding deals. (Source: Bloomberg)
