why is net loss tagged as "not meaningful"?
The percentage change is "not meaningful": net income increased by 2100%! (non_sequitur commented on that point a few minutes before you asked, by the way)
Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
51–60 of 294 posts
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#52Tech companies, and startups in particular, are touted as the powerhouses of American innovation and economy. And yet, it seems that the past 5 years of economic activity have been illusory. I expect a similar fate of Uber and Airbnb. Once the dust settles only the staid big co's shall remain.
Do you still take an Uber to the airport?
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A very key number here is revenue per user [...] this is down from $1.05 (14%) from what it reported for Q4 2016, before its IPO. I disagree a little with Bloomberg here, the numbers are bad (active users isn't great), but given the same number of users you'd expect advertising revenue (which is what they're driven by) to be down Q1 vs Q4. Ad budgets and spending is cyclical and seasonal, far more money is thrown a…
I have snapchat on my phone, not because I use it... my daughter likes to make funny faces. She does NOT post. Am I counted as an active user?
Opening counts as active.
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#54Some quick highlights as to why the stock is being punished. > Adjusted Ebitda Loss $188.2M, Est. Loss $176.9M > 1Q Daily Active Users 166M, Est. 168M > 1Q Rev. $149.6M, Est. $158.6M > 1Q Loss/Shr $2.31 I'm guessing the big issue is the miss on Daily active users. This is the same thing that caused the street ot hammer twitter. Rule of thumb for non profitable tech companies.... If you are a company that isn't making…
> I'm guessing the big issue is the miss on Daily active users.
I'm guessing the big issue here is their losses doubled while only a small % of active users increased.
Just a guess tho.
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not think that investors are concern about net loss - at least I'm not. I'm disappointed by anemic growth: Facebook has 18 percent increase year over year. They have ~2B users [1] This q Snapchat had growth of ~5% which will be about ~20% per year. But they are 10x smaller than Facebook. [1] Facebook 5/3/17 earning report
I saw Scott Hanselman spin up 1000 Azure instances in a demo today; How many bots can each instance support? Instant growth. How much social media activity/growth is not human?
> How much social media activity/growth is not human?
As much as I agree with you, that kind of activity especially by first party or those related is called market manipulation. SEC and investors won't take lightly to it.
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#56Some quick highlights as to why the stock is being punished. > Adjusted Ebitda Loss $188.2M, Est. Loss $176.9M > 1Q Daily Active Users 166M, Est. 168M > 1Q Rev. $149.6M, Est. $158.6M > 1Q Loss/Shr $2.31 I'm guessing the big issue is the miss on Daily active users. This is the same thing that caused the street ot hammer twitter. Rule of thumb for non profitable tech companies.... If you are a company that isn't making…
I do not think that investors are concern about net loss - at least I'm not. I'm disappointed by anemic growth: Facebook has 18 percent increase year over year. They have ~2B users [1] This q Snapchat had growth of ~5% which will be about ~20% per year. But they are 10x smaller than Facebook. [1] Facebook 5/3/17 earning report
>Facebook has 18 percent increase year over year. They have ~2B users.
That's nearly 2/3 of people on the planet with Internet connections, according to estimates by the ITU (approx 3B internet users by the end of 2016) [0]. Even if I believed that user figure, which I dont, there is no way Facebook can grow at the same rate for much longer.
[0] http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFa...
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#57Tech companies, and startups in particular, are touted as the powerhouses of American innovation and economy. And yet, it seems that the past 5 years of economic activity have been illusory. I expect a similar fate of Uber and Airbnb. Once the dust settles only the staid big co's shall remain.
Do you still take an Uber to the airport?
I bet he does, because Uber subsidizes over 50% of the ride. If they didn't, no one would take Uber.
It's not difficult to know how that particular story is going to end.
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#58Some quick highlights as to why the stock is being punished. > Adjusted Ebitda Loss $188.2M, Est. Loss $176.9M > 1Q Daily Active Users 166M, Est. 168M > 1Q Rev. $149.6M, Est. $158.6M > 1Q Loss/Shr $2.31 I'm guessing the big issue is the miss on Daily active users. This is the same thing that caused the street ot hammer twitter. Rule of thumb for non profitable tech companies.... If you are a company that isn't making…
Sluggish user growth probably doesn't look much better when Facebook's overt effort to clone their product seems to be working. Instagram Stories alone already outpaces Snap 200M to 166M. Looks like an uphill battle from here. http://www.thefader.com/2017/04/14/instagram-stories-more-po...
When you put it like that, you have to wonder how they have any chance at all, save some crazy pivot.
From a consumer perspective, it's disappointing that Facebook controls itself and now this arena. It's gonna be hard to find innovation when purchasing and cloning are the way to do business.
In some circles, having an Instagram is as expected as having Facebook, which makes abstaining difficult.
Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results
#59This is one of the ugliest financial statements I've ever seen. The multi-billion dollar loss is due mostly to stock compensation, but still their COGS or cost of revenues sold was greater than their revenues. That's probably the first time that's been seen for a sizable software company in the history of the industry.
They said their revenue per DAU is $.90 and their server costs per DAU were $.60...so that means server costs were around $100mn while total COGS were $160 mn. So what was that other $60 mn spent on? Admins? But I thought they used the Google App Engine infrastructure to avoid any server admins and such.
Their revenues are exploding with their revenue up nearly 400% from last year, but were below estimates as was user growth which are probably causing the current stock price drop.