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

Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

investor.snap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 294 posts

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#141

Post by nwjtkjn »

monkmartinez wrote: post #91
pm90 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have TV in my house, not because I watch any TV programs, but because I like BasketBall. Am I counted as an active user? Not trying to come across as snarky, but trying to setup an easy analogy :).

If you watch the advertisements and can actually act on said advertisements all is well with the system. However, if you have zero spending power, no influence and miss the ads... all is not well. When are we going to say; What the hell is the point of this? Users "using" something doesn't make it profitable unless they are willing to pay you for it. Furthermore, advertising IS NOT working. Look at retail, malls AND…

Physical stores are being replaced by digital stores, which are better equipped to measure precisely how effective an ad is.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#142

Post by acchow »

slackoverflower wrote: post #112
peacetreefrog wrote: post #92

It still seems overvalued. What would you rather own? Snapchat -- which, after dropping 23% today has a market cap of 21.5B. Or ALL of... Yelp - 2.21B GoPro - 1.21B FitBit - 1.38B Groupon - 2.01B Twitter - 13.59B Sonic - 1.27B ...for a total of 21.67B

I would most certainly buy $SNAP over every one of these companies. People don't get it. For everyone between the ages of 13 to 26, Snapchat is their only social network, their only messaging app, their go to camera! That is inherently more value that any of those companies combined.

Where are you getting your data?

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#143

Post by krakensden »

self-diversity wrote: post #140
trevyn wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I explained what Google can help with: searching for information, reading news, etc. He showed me that he read news and did searches for things all from within the Facebook app. This is the most frightening thing I've read in a while.

I can only imagine being frightened by this if I held a large stake in Google. Do you have a different reason?

Death of the open web. It isn't google per se, it's that there is no knowledge/interest of the things outside of the Facebook garden.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#144

Post by zenlikethat »

EGreg wrote: post #137
thedarkginger wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Just out of curiosity, what kinds of things can a startup do to avoid being copied and killed out of the gate by Facebook? Poison pill? Patent?

There's a reasonable concern in the air that it's getting more and more difficult due to network effects, but the short answer is the same way you always compete with big companies -- you can be more agile and engage with the user base in a way that big companies just can't because of bureaucracies and unwillingness to take risks.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#145

Post by amoorthy »

tuna-piano wrote: post #136
amoorthy wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um no. https://qz.com/612159/why-trai-backed-net-neutrality-and-kil...

Gotcha. I'm not sure it's a win-win, but it feels crazy to say that giving 0 free sites is better than giving Facebook free. It's a level playing field, sure, but consumers are worse off than if they had free access to Facebook. In my opinion, opportunity is better than equality.

A lot of people think this way, Zuck included, and that's what makes the decision in India so interesting and, at least for me, correct.

FB does not categorically improve the quality of life for its users. FB provides connectivity to others... this is good. But if the cost is making you think the world is askew from what it really is because all you see is what FB's feed shows you... well that's a steep price that nobody, even the poor, should be asked to pay.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#146

Post by tbrock »

awkwardtortoise wrote: post #38
pm90 wrote: post #13

Lets not forget that Facebook lost a lot lot of money before finally discovering a way to monetize its services. This is SNAP's first public earnings report. Disclosure: Not a user or stock holder of SNAP

With a company like SNAP, it's not a matter of monetization. It's a matter of growth. SNAP better get its act together or it's gonna end up like YHOO or TWTR looking for another company to buy it out. FB grew at a faster rate than SNAP from a much bigger base.

They would be lucky to end up like twitter. This one is circling the drain folks.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#147

Post by seattle_spring »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #111

[Net Loss] primarily due to the recognition of expense related to RSUs with a performance condition satisfied on the effectiveness of the registration statement for our initial public offering. This reads like they gave out $2 BILLION in RSU's that vested if the company went public. That is a pretty sweet payday. EDIT: It is a sweet payday unless you can't sell the stock to pay the taxes owed right away. Then if SNAP…

Not only can you, the company is required to do it for you. These aren't stock options.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#148

Post by sbov »

monkmartinez wrote: post #105
askafriend wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're severely underestimating the scale and reach of Facebook. There's a reason it's a ~450B company. It really does have that many users. Even if a solid 20% of them are all fake accounts (which I don't think the percentage is that high), it's still a large part of the connected world. There's a reason Facebook is developing technology to bring the rest of the unconnected world online. It's because they kn…

It is not hate and you may well be right about the scale and reach of facebook right now. However, I think many people over-estimate the real utility of Facebook. That is, lives would not materially change for the better or worse if facebook fell off the face of the internet tomorrow, imo. Emotional reactions aside, Gajendra from Nepal and Tom from California would continue with life as they did before Facebook was a…

For a large portion of the population, Facebook IS the web. You say it adds no value. I say it adds a ton: Facebook is their Google. Without "a google" - something to make sense of this mess of trillions of pages, the web is damn useless. Google might be your Google, but Facebook is their Google, and becoming more people's Google every day. Sure, you can slot another company into Facebook. But you could do the same for Google too. Doesn't mean they're useless or scams.

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#149

Post by thedarkginger »

zenlikethat wrote: post #144
EGreg wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just out of curiosity, what kinds of things can a startup do to avoid being copied and killed out of the gate by Facebook? Poison pill? Patent?

There's a reasonable concern in the air that it's getting more and more difficult due to network effects, but the short answer is the same way you always compete with big companies -- you can be more agile and engage with the user base in a way that big companies just can't because of bureaucracies and unwillingness to take risks.

This aspect is what makes me think Snap might be a canary in the coal mine.

In the temporary image space, virtually all of the innovation has come from that company, whether it's the initial concept, expanding scope with stories, adding visual effects, etc.

In the end, it might not matter. Facebook repeatedly cloned Snapchat's features, starting with the Poke app in 2012 that Zuck reportedly wrote code for himself.

The result? They jammed it into all of their products (Insta, Messenger, WhatsApp, etc.) and seem to be riding the network effect to success.

Not saying that smaller players can't win, but man, brute force and a big network were really effective this time.

https://techcrunch.com/2012/12/21/facebook-poke-app/

Re: Snap Inc. Reports First Quarter 2017 Results

#150

Post by jtmcmc »

monkmartinez wrote: post #107
askafriend wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They have your attention and they can do things to slowly nudge you to start engaging in deeper ways. For example your daughter grows up and is used to the "Snap-like" interaction already and will engage far more on Snapchat or similar products. Or maybe she one day finds the "Discover" section of the app and starts watching content on there. The fact that they have you and your daughter engaging with the produc…

Nope. This sounds very SV-ish and I don't mean that in a disrespectful way. I am not a Snap user period. To count my daughter as a user is just plain sad from an investment point of view. She is not going to have a job for 9 years minimum. That means I control the purse strings. Sanp is like those games that have a gajillion users and then simply die as no one plays them anymore.

People buy things for the children at their behest often. That means children are prime marketing targets.
Post reply on HN