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

Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

investor.snap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 204 posts

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#111

Post by schwede »

DrJid wrote: post #105
minikomi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you speculating or have you seen this clearly? Personally, any way you frame it, it comes down to a lack of focus; failing to act before the lens of public opinion shifted.

I think he was being punny, but given you use the word "spec-culating" Perhaps, you are being punny too. I can't tell anymore

  Are you speculating or have you seen this clearly? Personally, any way you frame it, it comes down to a lack of focus; failing to act before the lens of public opinion shifted.
speculating

frame

focus

lens

Did I miss any?

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#112

Post by woodsier »

DrJid wrote: post #105
minikomi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you speculating or have you seen this clearly? Personally, any way you frame it, it comes down to a lack of focus; failing to act before the lens of public opinion shifted.

I think he was being punny, but given you use the word "spec-culating" Perhaps, you are being punny too. I can't tell anymore

speculating, frame, focus, lens

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#113

Post by dingo_bat »

lobf wrote: post #104
dingo_bat wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not. I wish you would have actually taken the 2 minutes to explain your comment.

You think that would signal a healthy company?

Yes, I think concentrating efforts on the most profitable segment of your users may be better than diluting the experience for everybody.

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#114

Post by [deleted] »

mmanfrin wrote: post #72
replicatorblog wrote: post #52

Interesting factoid: Snap's current market cap ($18.1B) is lower than the price Facebook paid for WhatsApp ($19B). Snap is now "only" worth $4B more than Twitter. Does FB wait for the price to fall and take them out for $10B? Or grind them to dust to make an example of any startup foolhardy enough to forgo an acquisition offer?

Why would FB want them? They have successfully replicated Snap's model and are taking their users/recapturing shared users. WhatsApp had large marketshare and growth outside of FBs core markets.

[deleted]

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#116

Post by crunkykd »

minikomi wrote: post #83
perchard wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a spectacular failure

Are you speculating or have you seen this clearly? Personally, any way you frame it, it comes down to a lack of focus; failing to act before the lens of public opinion shifted.

Eye see what you're looking at, their vision has blurred, and putting on blinders or rose-colored glasses won't alter that view.

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#117

Post by kalessin »

donavanm wrote: post #60
rgbrenner wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That cost is definitely not bandwidth. Content delivery is around $0.005-0.01 per GB with an external provider. Less if yiu have the scale to do it in house. My guess is that the bulk of that spend is compute + storage/io.

The cost is definitely bandwidth, Snapchat doesn't have much of a storage problem as snaps have an actual TTL.

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#118

Post by [deleted] »

azinman2 wrote: post #69

“Excess inventory and related charges – In Q3 2017, we recorded $39.9 million of charges related to Spectacles inventory, primarily related to excess inventory reserves and inventory purchase commitment cancellation charges.“ Looks like spectacles was a failure.

[deleted]

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#119

Post by jjcm »

kalessin wrote: post #117
donavanm wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That cost is definitely not bandwidth. Content delivery is around $0.005-0.01 per GB with an external provider. Less if yiu have the scale to do it in house. My guess is that the bulk of that spend is compute + storage/io.

The cost is definitely bandwidth, Snapchat doesn't have much of a storage problem as snaps have an actual TTL.

Assuming half of it is bandwidth costs, that means that a daily active user is using ~380 MB/day (assuming $0.01/GB). That seems pretty hefty as an average. Especially if you consider the encoding snapchat uses puts each 10s video at about 1MB in size. 380MB is a little over an hour of snapchat quality video, that seems excessive as an average. If I were a major stockholder I'd be pushing to see why these hosting costs were so high.

Re: Snap Inc. Third Quarter 2017 Results

#120

Post by kevinastone »

teen wrote: post #90
throwayit wrote: post #85

Honestly, the best thing Snap can do to control their destiny is gut headcount by 2/3. If they bring their costs down so they aren't burning cash, they still have a highly engaged user base that is stable with decent advertising revenue. If they aren't burning cash like a wildfire, they can have some time to think strategically to build better user growth and engagement. Spiegel needs a strong COO like Sheryl Sandber…

Maybe they can get the fuck out of Venice

they did, they're at the Santa Monica airport now.
Post reply on HN