Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round • Hacker News Board

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#331

Post by ChemicalWarfare » Fri, May 27, 2016, 9:28 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #330

ChemicalWarfare wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't you as a shareholder get much more volatility with 'hot shot' companies that can explode on a whim and are easily replaced by a competitive product due to a very low barrier to entry? I'm actually surprised the inctomis and lycos' of the dot com bubble aren't weighing in heavier on the investor decisions these days.

I don't know what was inctomis, but in the case of lycos it was very easy to switch of search engine, while someone who wants to compete with SnapChat will be facing a chicken and egg problem (nobody will want to join SnapChat because nobody will be there at first), so en barrier to compete to SnapChat is not that low, even if the product isn't technically hard to replicate.

Inktomi: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inktomi

Was valued at 25B in 2000, ended up getting acquired by Yahoo for 235M. In terms of stocks - from $241 down to $1.63

That easy replication of the product is exactly what I'm talking about. Search engine is actually a much more sophisticated setup and even in that space multiple companies went belly up.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#332

Post by argonaut » Fri, May 27, 2016, 11:05 PM UTC

malchow wrote: post #317

argonaut wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of that difference. As a company Twitter is not a cash cow.

As a few dozen people managing a webapp on AWS from home while eating udon noodles, it'd be a cash cow.

I know people who have worked at Twitter. Twitter's systems cannot be run, even in maintenance mode, by only a few people on AWS. Not only would Twitter crash / crawl to a halt on AWS, but that's not even enough people.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#333

Post by argonaut » Fri, May 27, 2016, 11:08 PM UTC

the_watcher wrote: post #327

argonaut wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of that difference. As a company Twitter is not a cash cow.

Sure, but the statement that they were unable to monetize the product is incorrect. They have successfully monetized the product. They (so far) have been unable to keep the user base growing at a rate that a public company generally requires.

I didn't say they would be exactly the same company. They would just be in the same position.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#334

Post by partiallypro » Fri, May 27, 2016, 11:53 PM UTC

sangnoir wrote: post #308

partiallypro wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more probable that their value will come down from bubbling heights and someone will buy them. To me chat models aren't sustainable without it working in line with your other verticals. It's too hard to monetize. IMO no chat platform can survive without being attached to another product or service; or just a vertical that is similar. Not in the mobile age it's not. There are too many chat apps as it is.…

> IMO no chat platform can survive without being attached to another product or service; I sincerely believe WhatsApp could have survived independently with a $1/yr subscription. They hit a sweet spot of having a 9-digit user base, a small team and not raising crazy amounts of venture capital.

I think paid providers can survive, but not ad backed ones. Skype has a paid offering for example and has a business platform, Hangouts has a business platform integration. Hard to do that with something like SnapChat, if you ask me. Eventually if everyone is collecting data, that data is going to become less valuable per user, so using that for valuation becomes nonsensical.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#335

Post by askldfhjkasfhd » Sat, May 28, 2016, 4:14 AM UTC

dave2000 wrote: post #329

askldfhjkasfhd wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not parent, but here's how I learned to understand snapchat. Think like a younger Millennial (18-25 right now). Their whole social lives have been in public on FB/etc. They're going through a horribly awkward time in their lives, but it's all public. When they act like an immature kid, or aren't sexy, or whatever, that is recorded for all time . So they feel incredible pressure to be sexy/fit/cool/smart/doing interes…

"The pressure to be cool and attractive is intense. With FB, there is no escape." Can't they just change how the stuff they posted on FB is shared?

It's not just what they share. Other people share things about them.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#336

Post by andyfleming » Sun, May 29, 2016, 6:54 AM UTC

gjolund wrote: post #252

argonaut wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. By definition most people's day to day lives are average and not particularly special.

I find conversations on snapchat annoy me in the same way as conversations with a needy attention seeking girlfriend. All the person wants is confirmation of existence, and most of the time they are not actually interested in a real conversation.

I think on the contrary, it is a more honest conversation. Because it is temporary, people share what is currently happening in their life. It may be boring or of little importance, but they share anyway. Sometimes it is because they want attention, but for others they are just staying connected. I would bet that most of them consume other peoples' content just as much as creating content themselves.

Re: Snapchat raised $1.8B in a Series F round

#337

Post by petercooper » Tue, May 31, 2016, 1:49 PM UTC

swombat wrote: post #212

petercooper wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a heavy Snapchat user and just sending stuff to a partner doesn't seem to be the main use case nowadays - it's stories (basically a video equivalent of Twitter and Instagram mushed together) or throwaway group sending.

Hey Peter. What's the point of stories? Seems like a more limited version of Twitter - you can post photos and videos on twitter too... and there you have 21k followers. Surely a better place to post stuff if you want to reach an audience?

It has a different use. If I'm posting links or stuff, it'll go on Twitter. If it's random insights, it might go on both. If it's real life, usually on Snapchat since a lot of people who follow me on Twitter don't care about my day to day activities, moving house, etc. Snapchat is for a closer, more personally involved audience. I unfollow people on Twitter who constantly post personal crap there but expect and enjoy it on Snapchat.