snapchat baffles me. It's just another instant messaging platform except that they came up with the idea of messages that delete themselves after a time period. The problem is that this killer feature is easily subverted by taking a picture of your screen. So basically, they have provided an instant messaging platform with one extra useless feature.
Snap falls to IPO price
31–40 of 253 posts
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you try to subscribe to the IPO? It was not hard at all. I'm an "average" investory with a standard Charles Schwab trading account and subscribed to it with a few clicks of my mouse. I imagine anyone else could with their brokerage. It was oversubscribed tho, so I got half the quantity I wanted and sold shortly after opening.
> It was oversubscribed tho, so I got half the quantity I wanted and sold shortly after opening. This seems like a pretty good reason to auction the shares in order to maximize the amount of money the company takes in. That they very rarely do has always seemed kind of dirty to me.
That would stop the issuers from making a bundle on just about every IPO and we can't have that now, can we?
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#33As skeptical as I am that Snap will ever be a moneymaker, this data point is not meaningful in any way. Facebook traded below (often _well_ below) its IPO price for the first 15 months on the market.
I don't think the two are equivalent however.
Agree with you here -- Facebook had a well-formed mobile strategy, the only question was whether it would work. Once it started to work, the stock took off like a rocket.
Snap is a much bigger question mark. So far their plan looks to be "Do what Facebook did, only for AR/VR". Except Facebook and Snap will be splitting the market; where Facebook had no competition and absolute dominance before they IPOed. Facebook is obviously playing to win on Snap's home turf. Even if Snap is successful, Facebook will make it very expensive for them.
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#34$17.00 was the IPO price but only for investors with access. Your average investor with an eTrade account saw a price of $24.00+ when the market opened that morning, and it hit almost $27.00 that day. So those folks have seen a 30%+ drop since IPO. Given that Snap paid out billions in IPO bonuses to executives and other employees, it's turned out to be a pretty big wealth transfer from retail investors to Snap employ…
Did you try to subscribe to the IPO? It was not hard at all. I'm an "average" investory with a standard Charles Schwab trading account and subscribed to it with a few clicks of my mouse. I imagine anyone else could with their brokerage. It was oversubscribed tho, so I got half the quantity I wanted and sold shortly after opening.
Thanks for the info, I think my next bank account is going to be with Charles Schwab ( I was waffling between Ally and Charles Schwab, but this is a useful feature for me and a good step up from Robinhood).
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bothers me that institutional investors and other insiders get preferred pricing while retail investors get less favorable pricing.
So this isn't true. Any average Joe could open a standard trading account and subscribe to the IPO.
Fidelity has a minimum of $100k or $500k to participate in IPOs depending on the specific IPO
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#36Lock-up expires 29 August [1]. On the other hand, they have $3.2bn of cash and short-term investments (as of 31 March) while burning about $600MM of cash from their operations (FYE 31 December 2016) a year. That's 5 years to get it right. EDIT: insider lock-up at T+150 comes in at the end of July. [1] http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/ipos/company/snap-inc-899497-8...
> Lock-up expires 29 August [1]. Its actually the end of July for the first and most important IPO lockup expiry. > The first key lock-up date for Snap will occur roughly 150 days following the IPO. At that point, pre-IPO investors, such as company insiders, will be allowed to sell their shares. The second major lock-up date applies to 25% of the shares that were offered in the IPO itself. Of the 200 million total IP…
Founding team cashed out pre-IPO for hundreds of millions each.
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#37Pardon my language but: no fucking shit. $20bil was unbelievably overpriced. This is the one major tech stock that I simply do not get . ~$125 a user is insane.
Facebook is >$200 per user.
Facebook grew so much, almost everyone has it and its use cases are versatile (and therefore the data collected). Snapchat is really just used by younger folks with almost no financial power for chatting in the weirdest way.
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you try to subscribe to the IPO? It was not hard at all. I'm an "average" investory with a standard Charles Schwab trading account and subscribed to it with a few clicks of my mouse. I imagine anyone else could with their brokerage. It was oversubscribed tho, so I got half the quantity I wanted and sold shortly after opening.
Thanks for the info, I think my next bank account is going to be with Charles Schwab ( I was waffling between Ally and Charles Schwab, but this is a useful feature for me and a good step up from Robinhood).
I've had Charles Schwab since I was 18 and I can't recommend them enough. I've never experienced any company with better customer service.
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#39What does $SNAP need to do to deliver on the hype? Is there anything that can make $SNAP a good investment for anyone other than the parties involved in trading the IPO? I tend to be bearish on $SNAP in general, but I'm interested in the discussion. How do they right the ship and boost back up to that $25-30 range? What's their play?
- Positive user growth numbers, not flat or negative
- Positive revenue growth numbers, not flat or negative
- New features launched and positively accepted in the market
Re: Snap falls to IPO price
#40As skeptical as I am that Snap will ever be a moneymaker, this data point is not meaningful in any way. Facebook traded below (often _well_ below) its IPO price for the first 15 months on the market.
Facebook was profitable before it went public, and faced serious strategic challenges immediately post IPO (specifically, mobile was exploding and Facebook's mobile story was not good -- it didn't even have advertising). I guess the meaningfulness of this data point is that people are dubious that SNAP will succeed long term. But that's somewhat tautological: if people thought SNAP would succeed, they'd buy it.
Facebook's mobile story 'was not good'...but it was clearly just a missing set of features in a product that was ripe for infiltrating mobile and they had the cash to buy to eventually buy instagram.
The question is whether Snapchat is fundamentally flawed or a few features away from becoming a strong company.
It just seems to me that they have too much competition against Facebook...a behemoth that's still innovating.
If some company came out with a cool twist on search after Google, I'd be bearish on them as well.