All autopsies

// STARTUP COMPARISON

Shippit (funding stagnation) vs Carillion

Shippit (funding stagnation) failed in 2022 due to Competition. Carillion failed in 2018 due to Unit Economics. Different causes, different sectors, different eras — but the same simulation outcome.

METRIC🔥 Shippit (funding stagnation)🔥 Carillion
SectorSaaSSaaS
CountryAustraliaUK
Founded20141999
Died20222018
RaisedA$30MPublic company
PeakA$30M raised£5.2B revenue · 43,000 employees
Primary CauseCompetitionUnit Economics

// WHY EACH FAILED

🔥 Shippit (funding stagnation)
Competition
Shippit built a multi-carrier shipping management SaaS for Australian e-commerce merchants. After raising A$30M, Shopify launched its native Shopify Shipping product with carrier integrations embedded directly into the Shopify checkout. For Shopify merchants — the majority of Shippit's customer base — the native Shopify solution eliminated the need for a third-party shipping tool. Shippit restructured in 2022, refocusing on enterprise customers.
// LESSON
SaaS tools that solve problems for a dominant platform's customers are building on borrowed time. When Shopify, Salesforce, or HubSpot ships the feature natively, your SMB customer base disappears. Build platform-agnostic features or enterprise-depth that the platform won't replicate.
🔥 Carillion
Unit Economics
Carillion was the UK's second-largest construction and services company with £5.2B revenue and thousands of government contracts. It carried £1.5B in pension deficits and £900M in debt. Three profit warnings in 2017 exposed structural insolvency. It entered compulsory liquidation in January 2018 — the largest ever UK trading liquidation — leaving 43,000 employees and thousands of subcontractors unpaid.
// LESSON
Revenue is not solvency. A company with £5.2B in revenue and £2.4B in combined pension and debt obligations is not viable — it is a zombie awaiting a trigger event.

// EXPLORE FURTHER