[HN Gopher] Launch HN: Chatwoot (YC W21) - Open-Source Alternati...
___________________________________________________________________
Launch HN: Chatwoot (YC W21) - Open-Source Alternative to Intercom,
Zendesk
Hello everyone, We are a 3 founder team. Myself Pranav. Sojan and
Nithin are my co-founders. We are building Chatwoot
(https://www.chatwoot.com, https://github.com/chatwoot/chatwoot).
With Chatwoot, businesses can connect channels like website live
chat, email, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp etc and talk to the
customers from one place. Chatwoot is an open-source alternative
to Intercom, Zendesk etc. We help companies in regulated
industries to manage customer data without sharing it with third-
party providers. Since the software is open-source, it is easier to
build custom workflows that suit your business on top of Chatwoot.
We started building Chatwoot as proprietary software in 2017, but
the startup failed. Seeing the data privacy regulations and people
taking interest in self-hosted alternatives, we open-sourced the
product in 2019, we got a lot of love from the HN community.
(https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21559139). Over the last
year, we have been working with the community to build the
software. Seeing the interest from the open-source world, we
decided to quit our jobs and work full time on Chatwoot. We
introduced support plans to validate the need for self-hosted
solutions and it worked out well. We applied to YC and got into the
W21 batch. Right now, there are 1000+ companies using Chatwoot. We
have around 7.2k stars and more than 100 contributors in our
repository. The software can be used in more than 25+ regional
languages. Apart from the omnichannel support desk, we are adding
more features like a self-service portal, marketing campaigns,
customer segmentation, workflows etc. We make money by charging a
license fee of $99 per user per month for features like
customisable dashboards, SLA Management, Agent scheduling software,
IP blocklisting etc which are suited for large enterprises. We
will continue to work with the community to build Chatwoot. We
would love to hear your experiences, thoughts and ideas!
Author : pranav_rajs
Score : 311 points
Date : 2021-03-18 11:21 UTC (11 hours ago)
| hnarn wrote:
| Thank you for licensing this under a proper open source license.
| Out of curiosity, how would you feel about a company selling this
| as a service? It's obviously legal per the license, but I'm
| wondering what your perspective is. If you encourage it, do you
| have any plans for how to ensure everybody are happy and turns a
| profit from it?
|
| I have grown cynical over the years with these kinds of open
| source challengers as it seems to be a playbook these days to
| bait and switch, going from a) freely license a competitor to b)
| build a large user base to c) switch license to consolidate power
| over the software, make money and slowly kill it.
|
| Of course what's once open source will always stay that way, but
| if you're large enough when you branch, your engineering
| resources alone might be enough to turn people off the OSS fork.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| There are people who have built custom solutions on top of
| Chatwoot and selling it. There are people who are selling it in
| their country without changing the code and making profit out
| it. I'm happy to help those people out (not for free, would
| charge something obiviously). There are different markets where
| we might not be able to cater. Since the solution is flexible
| enough to build custom channels, I've seen people using it as
| "Whatsapp CRM for X country".
|
| We are following the path Gitlab has taken. To sustain as a
| business, we will have some modules suited for large
| enterprises under an EE license, but it would not hinder the
| open-source part and the freedom that comes with it. If people
| want to build on Chatwoot, they will be free to do that.
| samblr wrote:
| Curious on on how ee license works - will it not stop
| somebody to take that source and run it for free ? or do
| parallel implementation on top of your free offerings.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We expect to follow Gitlab's path on this. There will be 2
| repos. One with EE licensed code and the other one
| completely foss.
|
| eg: Gitlab[0] vs Gitlab FOSS [1] code
|
| [0] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab
|
| [1] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss
| randomsearch wrote:
| Love it. This (your commercial product) will go in an MVP I'm
| building. I've been using Intercom, which seems like the best
| option, but it's just so damn expensive for an MVP and that top
| tier price is not met by their medium tier product imo.
|
| tbh I'd pay even for the first agent (perhaps a free trial would
| have sufficed), but the Hacker tier does make it a certainty I'll
| trial it.
|
| Something most tool providers don't seem to get is that when I'm
| first building something I'm extremely price sensitive, but once
| I've got going I don't really care, like a tax if you take X% of
| my profit but you make my life easier and make it easier to grow
| that profit, who cares? That's fine compared to rinsing me when
| I'm not making any revenue (as with intercom). And if your
| product is any good, there's no way I'm going to switch once I
| get some traction, as the cost of any tool is ~ zero compared to
| the cost of employees.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| > like a tax if you take X% of my profit
|
| I have heard this analogy from other users of Intercom also.
| This is definitely an interesting take. But yeah, I got your
| point. Let us know if you need some help setting Chatwoot up.
| purrpit wrote:
| You guys are miles ahead, seriously.
|
| Glad to see a fellow Indian startup taking this route (I was
| surprised to see it licensed as MIT tbh)
|
| We are a successful Mumbai based startup who are in the process
| of integrating Chatwoot (beta release just went out today), it
| will replace Haptik.ai for which we had already paid in advance
| for a year but don't want to use it anymore just after 1 month.
|
| Chatwoot isn't a piece of cake to set it up but definitely
| peanuts compared to the money some companies pay to other
| customer support solutions.
|
| Moreover, we are in the process of hiring and dedicating a small
| team who will contribute changes to Chatwoot and raise PRs
| upstream.
|
| Good luck to you guys, hope to connect with y'all on discord in
| coming weeks.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| > Chatwoot isn't a piece of cake to set it up
|
| We are working on make it simpler. :D You will hear from us in
| the upcoming releases.
|
| > Moreover, we are in the process of hiring and dedicating a
| small team who will contribute changes to Chatwoot and raise
| PRs upstream.
|
| That's great to know.
| dr_faustus wrote:
| We have been using Chatwoot for a couple of months. Launch HN is
| a bit of an understatement, its already a very polished,
| comprehensive product. Congratulations!
| sojanofficial wrote:
| Thanks a lot !!!
| tin7in wrote:
| Well done and I hope this pivot plays out well!
| webofnithin wrote:
| Thanks a lot !!!
| mehal wrote:
| Product looks awesome! So for my understanding - to add email
| channel you have to forward an email to single monitored inbox,
| correct? What email protocols do you support?
| sojanofficial wrote:
| That is correct. Our email channel is an implementation build
| on top of Rails Action mail box.
|
| It support ingresses for Mailgun, Mandrill, Postmark, and
| SendGrid. You can also handle inbound mails directly via the
| Exim, Postfix, and Qmail ingresses
|
| ref: https://guides.rubyonrails.org/action_mailbox_basics.html
| mariushn wrote:
| Please consider adding Sparkpost support too.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| We will definitely take a look if there is enough community
| interest. Feel free to raise issues on our Github if you
| have feature requests.
|
| https://github.com/chatwoot/chatwoot/issues
| ignoramous wrote:
| Congratulations! Love chatwoot, and have been recommending it to
| others too.
|
| If I may, what's your take on Cloudflare's upcoming
| DurableObjects for Workers [0] and the possibilities that entails
| for chat-applications like these?
|
| > _...license fee of $99 per user per month for features like
| customisable dashboards, SLA Management, Agent scheduling
| software, IP blocklisting etc which are suited for large
| enterprises._
|
| I see a lot of F/OSS YC startups (like PostHog, SuperTokens,
| QuestDB, OpsTrace, SigNoz etc) following the buyer-based open-
| core model that GitLab pioneered [1]. I wanted to know if there
| are there any other _models_ other than GitLab 's that YC
| recommends to its startups?
|
| Also, curious why for-profit F/OSS startups would leave up a
| "sponsor" button on their GitHub. :D
|
| > _We started building Chatwoot as proprietary software in 2017,
| but the startup failed._
|
| Tangential: Was this the startup that failed [2]? If so, it would
| be interesting to read your views on it since it looks like
| except the co-founder that blogged about the failure, the rest of
| the original founding team is back building chatwoot?
|
| Off-topic: If you are okay, can you reveal if you've raised funds
| from Indian Angles (many particularly active in the SaaS scene
| [3]) and what has been your experience so far? And a set of
| recommendations, if any, for other Indian F/OSS SaaS upstarts?
| May be you should blog about it?
|
| Thanks.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24616169
|
| [1] https://www.heavybit.com/library/video/commercial-open-
| sourc...
|
| [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24988380
|
| [3] https://saasboomi.com/indian-saas-tribe/
| pabs3 wrote:
| The sponsor button means (slightly) more money for the company,
| is there a particular reason you suggest to disable it?
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| > If I may, what's your take on Cloudflare's upcoming
| DurableObjects for Workers [0] and the possibilities that
| entails for chat-applications like these?
|
| It seems interesting. We have not had time yet to deep dive.
|
| > I wanted to know if there are there any other models other
| than GitLab's that YC recommends to its startups?
|
| We have not seen any trend emerging other than open-core so
| far.
|
| > Also, curious why for-profit F/OSS startups would leave up a
| "sponsor" button on their GitHub. :D
|
| Some one wants to support us without taking subscription plans
| is a great reason to have it.
|
| > Tangential: Was this the startup that failed [2]? If so, it
| would be interesting to read your views on it since it looks
| like except the co-founder that blogged about the failure, the
| rest of the original founding team is back building chatwoot?
|
| I think you might have misunderstood, op was mentioning another
| startup, not Chatwoot.
|
| You can read our story here.
| https://www.chatwoot.com/blog/building-in-the-open
|
| > Off-topic: If you are okay, can you reveal if you've raised
| funds from Indian Angles (many particularly active in the SaaS
| scene [3]) and what has been your experience so far? And a set
| of recommendations, if any, for other Indian F/OSS SaaS
| upstarts? May be you should blog about it?
|
| We will definitely write about it soon.
| steipete wrote:
| MIT license. Easy to copy and host cheaper. Curious how long this
| will work before you change it.
| JanisL wrote:
| I was wondering the exact same thing, I think the MIT license
| is a really bad choice here for reasons explained here:
| https://www.lesinskis.com/MIT-licence-community-hostile.html
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We have a enterprise edition in works. We will launch it soon.
| Whatever is MIT now, will stay as MIT.
| mariushn wrote:
| Hope MIT core/features will continue to be improved, not
| abandoned. Adding new large features as enterprise only makes
| sense.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| The community edition remains a core part of our vision and
| is also the base on which the enterprise features are
| build. So rest assured that we will keep working on
| improving them.
| steipete wrote:
| _screenshotting_
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Haha! for sure.
| flylib wrote:
| What would you say are the main things that distinguish you from
| Papercups (YC S20) https://papercups.io?
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24133719
| cheeseblubber wrote:
| Thanks for the mention:
|
| Like Pranav said we think the space is good to have multiple
| players and we've had many friendly conversations where we have
| traded notes.
|
| I think our vision is very similar in terms that we eventually
| want to focus on omni channel customer communication.
|
| A few things that Chatwoot has that we don't at the moment are:
|
| 1. Omni channel through messenger and Twillio integration
|
| 2. A Mobile app to chat with your customers
|
| 3. Shared inbox for teams - for team management
|
| What we have that differentiates us from Chatwoot:
|
| 1. We have a Reply from Slack + Reply from Mattermost
| integration where you never have to leave your workspaces (We
| believe your tools should conform to where you work and not
| force you to use a different tool)
|
| 2. Highly customizable [chat
| widget](https://github.com/papercups-io/chat-builder) with
| react and flutter components
|
| 3. We have a live screen sharing feature that lets you debug
| issues with your customers through the browser
|
| Our goal is to build out omni channel communications too but at
| the moment we want to make our chat widget experience amazing
| and we believe that your chat widget should look like your
| website and not an ad for your tool.
|
| *Note we do have apis and webhooks that you can integrate with
| dialogue flow and Rasa
| randtrain34 wrote:
| From first impressions it looks like papercups focuses on chat
| while Chatwoot is a more complete suite around customer
| communication?
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We intend to build an entire suite for customer engagement
| while giving the flexibility to customize it to match the
| business needs.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Papercups is a nice product. It's good to have multiple players
| in the open-source space.
|
| Here are some of the thoughts which comes to my mind that
| differentiates Chatwoot from Papercups:
|
| 1. Omnichannel inbox [0]: Chatwoot let's you connect 7
| different channels including email, whatsapp etc so that you
| have all your customer conversations in one place.
|
| 2. API Channel for building custom channels: Some people see
| Chatwoot as an alternative to Twilio Flex (except voice) as
| they could build custom channel using our API Channel and have
| the flexibility to customize the software to the extend they
| need.
|
| 3. Integration with Chatbot providers: Chatwoot has a concept
| of agent bots which allows you to connect with the existing
| Chatbot providers like Rasa.ai and Dialogflow easily. [1]
|
| 4. Shared inbox with teams: You can create a group of users
| under specific team and collaborate over a ticket. [2]
|
| 5. Flexibility to manage more than one brand under the same
| account. If the company has more than one product, instead of
| creating multiple accounts, the same account allows you to
| create different inboxes and set different permission levels
| for the users.
|
| 6. Availability of mobile apps on iOS and Android which helps
| you to chat with your customers on the go.
|
| [0] https://www.chatwoot.com/features/channels
|
| [1] https://www.chatwoot.com/features/chatbots
|
| [2] https://www.chatwoot.com/features/shared-inbox
| pabs3 wrote:
| Since you are an open core business, how do you plan to deal with
| the situation where the community contributes features that are
| already in the proprietary enterprise version?
| deepstack wrote:
| nice to hear you guys open sourcing this product! Also be
| interested how you resolve this issue.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| This is a hard decision to make. It would be considered on the
| basis of a couple of things. If it is derivate of already
| existing code, we would suggest not to do that. If it is an
| original work, then we would consider those.
|
| Having said that, we want to reduce such kind of conflicts
| happening in the community. So we would try to limit an entire
| module under EE License rather a part of it.
| hanniabu wrote:
| > So we would try to limit an entire module under EE License
| rather a part of it.
|
| As someone not familiar with this license, can you expand a
| little more into what it offers?
|
| Also another option for this is for you guys to maintain your
| own branch which would be used for the free hosted solutions
| so any enterprise feature PR's can be contained to the self-
| hosted option.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Handling separate closed fork is one of the solution.
| Historically, it is an overhead for the team managing the
| project. You can read about the experience shared by
| Metabase [0].
|
| [0] https://www.metabase.com/blog/Opening-Metabase-
| Enterprise/in...
| ac29 wrote:
| I think by EE license, they mean "Enterprise Edition" (aka
| commercial license, not sure if the code itself would be
| considered open, closed or "shared").
| sojanofficial wrote:
| That correct. The code can't considered open but rather
| source available.
| avinassh wrote:
| Congrats on the launch! It looks really cool. The UI reminded me
| of DelightChat [0]
|
| [0] - https://www.delightchat.io/
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We know Preetam, they are a great team!
| grwthckrmstr wrote:
| Preetam here :)
|
| Congrats on the launch and traction Pranav!
| itsthecourier wrote:
| Great pivot, guys. We are leaving intercom to work with it :)
| sojanofficial wrote:
| happy to have you onboard. Feel free to reach out if you need
| any help :)
| etienne_ad wrote:
| No phone support though? That's why we have to use zendesk...
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We have had requests for phone support. At the moment, our
| primary focus is on text based messaging. We will get to the
| phone/video part in the future.
|
| We want to make the software simple and easy to use. Setting up
| Asterisk and using it with Chatwoot was too much to handle. So
| we deferred that work for now. We will come back to it later.
| ankurpatel wrote:
| Nice with Twilio a lot of use cases like callcenter are
| possible.
| mariushn wrote:
| Good choice!
| johnsonap wrote:
| Congrats! As a small bootstrapped startup I could see us
| switching from the company we currently use to something like
| this.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| Do let us know if you need any help in setting up Chatwoot.
| bberenberg wrote:
| Is your hosted version multi tenant? Or are you running an
| individual tenant for every customer?
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| It is multi-tenant, just like other SaaS providers. We can
| provide managed-services based on request.
| softawre wrote:
| Cool product.
|
| How do you expect you will be able to compete with the likes of
| the more advanced CX vendors out there? For example:
|
| https://www.genesys.com/genesys-cloud
| sojanofficial wrote:
| With Chatwoot being opensource, you will be able to customise
| and deliver a very tailor made experience for your
| organisation. Thats one aspect to consider.
| montroser wrote:
| We've been using Chatwoot for a few months now and been pretty
| happy with it.
|
| It's a Vue app that we have found easy to extend and and deep
| integrations with our product and support flow, without too much
| fuss. Nice work!
| sojanofficial wrote:
| Glad to hear you are happy with Chatwoot :) Do let us know if
| you need any help, anytime !!!
| ngokevin wrote:
| Oh, wow. I used Chatwoot in the past, happily surprised you went
| through YC! I did have trouble self-hosting once, I think I had
| to enable task queues in my Heroku or something. I might've
| eventually switched over to the hosted option which was much
| easier. I would use Chatwoot again on my current startup
| (https://learncoupling.com).
|
| Is there Discord/SMS or Zapier integration?
| sojanofficial wrote:
| We have sms channel available via Twilio. Discord / Zapier are
| integrations are there on our roadmap.
| mrwnmonm wrote:
| I specifically use Zendesk to use their support ticket system. I
| am not interested in live chat. I also like their CRM. Right now,
| you don't provide those features, right?
|
| I can only see live chat. Am I missing something?
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| You can integrate 7 channels with Chatwoot including Email.
| https://www.chatwoot.com/features/channels
|
| We have a base version of CRM at the moment, we are building
| more on top of it.
| scrollaway wrote:
| This may be out of your depth but I'd love to see a provider
| that supports Discord.
|
| eg. Tagging a bot in a #support channel for help, being able
| to reply from it, and being able to cross post announcements
| from such a bot alongside twitter/facebook.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| I didn't completely understand the use case.
|
| Do you wish to
|
| 1. Reply to the support messages from Discord
|
| or
|
| 2. Manage discord community over some other tool?
|
| The first one is an integration similar to what we have
| with Slack right now.
| scrollaway wrote:
| First one is definitely the primary use case.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We are using Discord for managing our community. We have
| already thought about this. There was not enough requests
| to build the integration.
|
| Anyway I have created an issue at the repo, so that this
| can be tracked.
| https://github.com/chatwoot/chatwoot/issues/1941
| scrollaway wrote:
| Congrats on the launch. One of my clients will become a customer
| of yours I'm pretty sure. :)
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Let us know if you need any help in setting it up.
| lonesword wrote:
| Congrats on the launch :)
| sojanofficial wrote:
| thanks a lot :)
| igammarays wrote:
| You know what I don't get about website live chat buttons like
| Intercom? The fact that you need to stay on the website to
| continue the conversation. Why not just provide a link to open a
| conversation in existing channels, like email, Twitter, Telegram,
| WhatsApp, etc.? That way the customer can choose whichever
| channel they already have or prefer, and the conversation
| continues seamlessly after they've left your website.
|
| Yes, I know Intercom offers the option to seamlessly switch to
| email, but at that point you could just build a simple 1990's
| email contact form in a fancy JS popup and it's effectively the
| same thing.
|
| I understand Intercom made a billion dollar company out of their
| chat widget because businesses want to look savvy, but that
| doesn't mean it's actually a good experience for users. As a
| startup founder myself, I care more about a seamless experience
| for my customers than for me.
| shawticus wrote:
| Given the way you see the world, I'd say you odds of being
| successful in this industry are probably higher than most.
| mfkp wrote:
| There are companies that do this. Example:
| https://www.messagebird.com/en/
| mosdl wrote:
| Intercom made its valuation because they are used to track
| engagement/etc, the chat widget is just the trojan horse.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| What we have seen is some customers prefer chat buttons
| especially when they prefer not to give out their personal
| information.
|
| In Chatwoot the channels like email, twitter, Whatsapp etc are
| also considered primary conversation channels. So its helpful
| even when your primary support channel isn't chat.
| rancar2 wrote:
| Congrats on the launch! Is there any plan beyond agent-based chat
| on the roadmap? I like to start with a dialogue flow for the
| common use cases before passing the conversation off to human
| agents.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Yes, we already integrate with Rasa.ai and Dialogflow. You can
| start the conversation with DialogFlow and pass it off to the
| agent.
|
| You can see a demo here
| https://www.chatwoot.com/features/chatbots and a setup guide
| with a sample code here https://github.com/chatwoot/dialogflow-
| agent-bot-demo
| rancar2 wrote:
| Amazing! You have a customer at CareDash. Feel free to reach
| out to me if you want any feedback as we will start
| implementing this shortly. rcarlton@caredash.com
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Great! Just sent an email :)
| samblr wrote:
| Intercom pricing[1] shows 5 seats for $119 - am I missing
| something in their pricing page ?
|
| If not Chatwoot seems expensive at $99/user/month ?
|
| [1] : https://www.intercom.com/pricing
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Our community edition which is available with MIT license and
| is free for use should cover the starter plans in Intercom.
|
| $99/user/month is targetted at large enterprises requiring
| enterprise support.
| samblr wrote:
| Makes sense.
| nicoburns wrote:
| Is the community edition available in hosted form? Otherwise
| you may wish to consider aiming a paid hosted product at the
| lower end of the market too. We use Intercom in our product,
| and it's the one thing we explicitly don't want to self-host
| because it's what our customers use to contact us if our own
| services are ever down or broken.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| We do have a hosted offering available on
| https://app.chatwoot.com/
| dassmario wrote:
| I tried to replace Zendesk (chat) with self-hosted Chatwoot for
| our SaaS in December 2020. Unfortunately I couldn't get email
| conversation continuity to work back then and the docs were
| lacking.
|
| Happy to see that this now seems to be resolved. Will give
| Chatwoot another go when our Zendesk license is due for renewal.
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| There was some issues with email continuity at that time. This
| is resolved and the docs for both continuity [0] and email
| channel [1] are updated.
|
| Let us know if you need some help setting it up, our team will
| be happy to take a call.
|
| [0] https://www.chatwoot.com/docs/conversation-continuity
|
| [1] https://www.chatwoot.com/docs/self-hosted/email-setup
| treve wrote:
| Another open source alternative:
| https://github.com/minimalchat/client
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| Nice to know!
| relaunched wrote:
| I'm starting to feel some sorta way about open-core model as more
| of a marketing mechanism for lead gen. I can't put my finger on
| it and I'm not saying it's bad. It just kind of feels like it's
| like a free-trial that appeals to engineers, that helps jumpstart
| your marketing funnel top-end.
|
| I'd love to hear Richard Stallman rant about this...he'd probably
| find a way to articulate, more elegantly, what I'm feeling.
| sojanofficial wrote:
| In our case, open-sourcing Chatwoot was pretty accidental.
|
| You could read the story behind how we ended up doing that over
| here
|
| https://www.chatwoot.com/blog/woot-journals-one-year-since-o...
| wyc wrote:
| I like to think of open source as solving a real problem for
| people and saving them a lot of time for free, otherwise they
| wouldn't use it. This often does have the effect of creating
| demand for complementary services that solve even more problems
| and save even more time, or even opening up whole new markets
| like Docker did with LXC.
|
| Anyone considering the addition of open source to their stack
| should also consider the downsides such as cost of fork and
| technological lock-in in addition to the benefits, and based on
| the rapid adoption of open source over the past decade I'd say
| it's a pretty good trade-off in a lot of cases.
| sixhobbits wrote:
| Looks very cool! For me, the USP of Intercom was their data
| model. The tag-based system and the fact that everything could be
| easily exported to a flat CSV file made it super powerful.
|
| Can you comment on whether Chatwoot is similar in this regard?
| pranav_rajs wrote:
| We allow tagging the conversations and contacts, filter them
| based on the tag. At the moment we don't have a CSV export, we
| are working on it. You can get the same information as JSON
| using our APIs.
| tnolet wrote:
| We use Intercom for support and sales, but also for email (drip
| style), mass emails like product updates and in-app
| notifications.
|
| Any plans for that?
| sojanofficial wrote:
| Right now Chatwoot is suited primarily for support and sales
| use cases where its one on one conversations with the customer.
|
| But we do have our eyes on marketing use cases(campaigns) in
| our future roadmap.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-18 23:01 UTC)