Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Snap Inc. S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 337 posts

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#51

Post by jonknee »

rwmj wrote: post #40
trendia wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Wikipedia, he has $2b in wealth [0]. I have no idea whether $900,000 / year is high or low for someone of that net worth. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Spiegel#Personal_life

Johnny Depp spends "Over $150,000/month on full-time security for his children" according to current revelations. So $900K/year for someone who's not very famous isn't unreasonable I suppose.

Johnny Depp is also in a huge financial hole for irresponsible spending... Not a comparison.

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#54

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #43
carlisle_ wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absolutely possible to build a stellar internal alternative to Google's offerings in 5 years with 2 billion dollars. edit: I should point out that this doesn't account for ramp-up. It would obviously take awhile before things would be to a point where it would be even comparable.

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#56

Post by F_J_H »

carlisle_ wrote: post #31
leothekim wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it not possible to build your own "alternative in the market" for $2 billion?

It is absolutely possible to build a stellar internal alternative to Google's offerings in 5 years with 2 billion dollars. edit: I should point out that this doesn't account for ramp-up. It would obviously take awhile before things would be to a point where it would be even comparable.

But by the time you matched them, they likely would have moved way beyond, with all kinds of new features...

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#57

Post by bduerst »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #12
stuckagain wrote: post #8

"We have committed to spend $2 billion with Google Cloud over the next five years and have built our software and computer systems to use computing, storage capabilities, bandwidth, and other services provided by Google, some of which do not have an alternative in the market." There's some numbers for you that Google wouldn't have provided (as far as I have seen).

I find the "do not have an alternative in the market" comment interesting - is there really anything which AWS does not have the GCE does?

There's a fairly exhaustive comparison between their compute services here: https://cloud.google.com/docs/compare/aws/compute

But without anymore context into what Snapchat is saying, it's too easy to read just about anything into that comment.

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#58

Post by aleem »

dvdhnt wrote: post #11

> We had 158 million Daily Active Users on average in the quarter ended December 31, 2016, and we view Daily Active Users as a critical measure of our user engagement. > We anticipate that our Daily Active Users growth rate will decline over time if the size of our active user base increases or we achieve higher market penetration rates. If our Daily Active Users growth rate slows, our financial performance will incr…

Worse still, Instagram is on a collision course with SnapChat [1].

> Mark Zuckerberg talked about the long-term strategy for Instagram’s growth, and the fact that in a few months, the company created a new product identical to Snapchat’s Stories that already has more than the 110 million users as Snapchat’s entire app is reported to have:

>> Over the next five years, we’re going to keep building ecosystems around our apps that a lot of people are already using. Growth and engagement on Instagram have been strong. We announced in December that Instagram now has over 600 million monthly actives and recently passed 400 million daily actives. Instagram Stories reached 150 million daily actives just five months after the launch, and we’ve added new features like Boomerang and Live into Stories and I’m excited to see that continue to grow.

While the numbers are impressive, it seems they may already have plateaued. Nothing wrong with that--if the addressable market is limited, it limits them too. However, the problem with a plateau is that everyone starts eating into your stagnant market share. Adding premium services results in higher churn. Adding advertising results in higher churn.

Remains to be seen if they can double down with the IPO capital injection but so far we haven't seen much beyond the gimmicky SnapChat Spectacles.

  [1] https://qz.com/901289/facebooks-fb-earnings-call-revealed-zuckerbergs-plan-for-taking-down-snapchat-before-its-ipo/

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#59

Post by dreaminvm »

vineetch wrote: post #19

They spent $890,339 on security for Evan Spiegel in 2016? Why does he need that much security? Who is trying to hurt him?

If Snap Inc. IPOs at their expected 25B value, Spiegel will be valued at nearly 5 billion (21% ownership), so ~1 million in security per year is not too far-fetched.

Re: Snap Inc. S-1

#60

Post by artursapek »

brentm wrote: post #55

Much greater losses than Twitter's S1. Snap's revenue is 27% higher but 548% greater net losses. Twitter s1: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000119312513...

...and TWTR isn't doing so well
Post reply on HN