Clarify publicly and in detail how Kagi will handle future buy out offers.

Rot127

Kagi is one of the few products which actually provides great value for the money paid. It is a very useful tool, really nice to use, implements privacy friendly features, and has apparently a great philosophy in the background.
To me Kagi feels like excellent infrastructure.

It delivers on its promoted promises for a reasonable price and respects me as a customer/user. A rare thing these days.

What I wonder now is, what happens if a Meta/Google/Microsoft comes around and makes an offer with so much money that you folks seriously consider selling Kagi.

If you would accept the offer in such a theoretical scenario I'd understand it from a personal perspective of course. But the chance that Kagi would become yet another "forced to produce maximum revenue by any means necessary" thing, is very high then.
Or to put it more flowery, it would rob Kagi of its soul and no one could know what it will become.

Infrastructure like software (WhatsApp, social networks) getting sold and turned into addictive and/or surveillance tech is unfortunately a very common problem in our world. And I wonder what your plan is, if Kagi is targeted for this transformation as well?

Of course, I understand this is an internal business decision. And one which can't just be communicated publicly without thinking seriously about the perception of it.

But as a normal user I simply wonder:

Do you consider Kagi a start-up which is sold, if a big enough offer comes around?
Have you thought about what you will do, if such an offer comes up? If so, what are your considerations?
Are there any (hard) guarantees (not just promises and marketing) you can give your customers that we won't be treated as "a product being sold" in the future?

Answering these questions publicly in detail and with different perspectives explored, would improve trust with your customer base.
It would also enhance transparency and, in case of hard guarantees, add a unique selling point compared to most other (or all?) Silicon Valley start-ups.

Vlad

Rot127 Things I think about every day when I go to sleep are contained in our recent blog post, which took days to write:

https://blog.kagi.com/first-three-years

Happy to discuss them vs hypothetical scenarios. What I can say is that Kagi is set up as a Public Benefit Corporation and any future for Kagi will have to involve some sort of public benefit.

Rot127

Thank you for your answer. I read the blog post before and I am very happy how Kagi develops.
I hope of course that my skepticism is mistaken and it stays a hypothetical scenario.
Thank you for your work.

Rot127

With the recent buy out of Astral.sh I had to think of this question again.
I spent an hour to look up the Kagi business structure and think the original question deserves another look.

Kagi Inc. is incorporated in Delaware (Company Number 3480099)
with a branch in California (Company Number: 4858973).

Sadly, Delaware doesn't provide any free public company records.

OpenCorporates lists 505 BROOKFIELD DR, DOVER, Kent, DE as the address.
Assuming this address is correct, it turns out there are a few companies listed there.
But the building at the address doesn't look even remotely like a house able to host more than one company.

Given that Delaware is famous for tax evasion, provides no public and free access to company records,
and assuming the address is correct, it could lead to the conclusion that Kagi is incorporated in Delaware for tax evasion purposes.

If that is the case, it could be seen as conflict with Kagi's purpose to serve "public benefit" besides profit making.

Side note: Kagi apparently missed in the past paying sales tax (according to this blog post).
I personally feel empathetic towards a young company missing that. And I am happy Kagi managed to get through it.
But incorporating in Delaware still doesn't match the public benefit image.
And it doesn't help with a trust for sure.

In my original question I asked if there is a system planned to prevent
buy out of Kagi and/or possible platform decay.

The law in Delaware regulating PBCs states under § 367
that only share holders with 2% of, or $2,000,000 in shares are able to enforce action
against the company, if the "public benefit" duties are not fulfilled by the directors.

I couldn't find how many investors Kagi has (except this blog post),
But apparently there are not that many. So it seems like +90% of the user base doesn't have any hard control over the destiny of Kagi.
Of course, being controlled by the users is not a mandatory requirement for a for profit company.
But the original question asked specifically, if there are plans to provide this control or alternative.

Kagi being a PBC in Delaware is very obviously not enough.

With all that I think it is worth pushing off the discussion again.

I do not expect from Kagi to become a 100% non-profit company (what right would I have anyways).
But it would be nice to know if there are any plans to change the company structure to a more transparent one.
Or if there are plans to give low-net worth individuals the possibility to acquire sufficient shares in the future to act.

Lastly, I want to highlight that I am very satisfied with Kagi.
And I think that the service is excellent and worth every cent.
That is why I care so much about this question in the first place.