Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

Post by nothrabannosir » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 11:17 PM UTC

addicted wrote: post #17

nl wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sort-of, but it's a once-off: Net loss for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 includes $2.5 billion of stock-based compensation expense, 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.

Still leaves ~600mm in losses. Which is still greater than the ~350mm in losses last year. The idea that money given to employees as equity is not "real money" is toxic.

Post by fullshark » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 11:22 PM UTC

jondubois wrote: post #39

rblion wrote: post #25

How long do you think they have left? OR Do you foresee them surviving beyond 2027?

- They lost $3 Billion in 9 months. - For every $6 they spent, they got back $1 in revenue. - The product is an app which is free to use. - A large chunk of their system runs on Google App Engine; which is probably the most expensive and highest lock-in infrastructure solution that you could possibly use. - The CEO, who was basically fresh out of university, turned down a $4 Billion offer buy the company. So basicall…

Post by milkshakes » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 11:25 PM UTC

marcell wrote: post #50

Devolver wrote: post #46

Snap went from an incredible growth rate to a terrible growth rate because of a few simple (and sadly, quite common) strategic mistakes: 1. Underestimating the competition. Evan Spiegel clearly believed that Zuckerberg would never figure out how to beat him. He seems to have concluded that he was smarter, more creative, and more agile than Zuck. He profoundly miscalculated Zuck's relentlessness and is now losing badl…

From the article: > But it did not work with Snapchat and Evan Spiegel, who seems to have turned down Facebook’s $3,000,000,000 without hesitation or second thought. I think it did work out pretty well for Evan Spiegel and Snap Inc., since they're trading at around $18B on the stock market despite lots of concerns around their business...

Post by brianwawok » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 11:33 PM UTC

marcell wrote: post #50

Devolver wrote: post #46

Snap went from an incredible growth rate to a terrible growth rate because of a few simple (and sadly, quite common) strategic mistakes: 1. Underestimating the competition. Evan Spiegel clearly believed that Zuckerberg would never figure out how to beat him. He seems to have concluded that he was smarter, more creative, and more agile than Zuck. He profoundly miscalculated Zuck's relentlessness and is now losing badl…

From the article: > But it did not work with Snapchat and Evan Spiegel, who seems to have turned down Facebook’s $3,000,000,000 without hesitation or second thought. I think it did work out pretty well for Evan Spiegel and Snap Inc., since they're trading at around $18B on the stock market despite lots of concerns around their business...

Post by cobookman » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 11:48 PM UTC

rgbrenner wrote: post #28

liquidise wrote: post #21

> Hosting costs per DAU were $0.68 in Q3 2017 as compared to $0.64 in Q3 2016 and $0.61 in Q2 2017. Those are staggering figures to me and the trend is equally surprising. Maybe it's ignorance about hosting costs at such a scale, but i feel like cost/DAU should be declining over time, right? Is there something i'm missing here?

They have to receive the picture, then send it to a number of other users. So it's probably mostly bandwidth charges. They use Google, right? When was the last time Google (or any of the cloud providers) lowered their bandwidth charges? That small fluctuation is probably just minor variations in usage.