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

Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 177 posts

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#71

Post by paggle »

xwdv wrote: post #62
negrit wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So because you're bearish you think that SNAP's CEO regrets his decision?

If I didn’t then I wouldn’t be bearish. I think the headache and anxiety over running Snap and the pressure to grow users quarter after quarter with a simple app that is easily duplicated will eventually get to Evan.

The thing is that if Evan Spiegel, or any tech billionaire, just wanted to party on boats, they would have left long ago. You or I see "running Snap" as a negative, so of course if you could find a way to not do it, we would. He probably sees it as something he enjoys even when it is difficult.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#72

Post by duxup »

paggle wrote: post #70
duxup wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> could they really not anticipate future antitrust action? I we go by the pattern of behavior at Facebook, it really doesn't seem like the decision makers consider much in the way of anti-trust or much of anything. The pattern is well established and their version of move fast and break things is almost entirely off the rails.

And if we look at the pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice, the pattern of behavior at Facebook seems (at least at this moment) to be perfectly rational.

I don't understand what you mean by that.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#73

Post by smacktoward »

toxik wrote: post #50
throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

It may be competition, but it certainly isn't fair competition. As you note, Facebook has much deeper pockets than even a well-funded startup. They can afford to build a clone of your product and give it away for free, without any expectation of even future revenue, specifically to drive you out of business. And they can bundle their clone with their already-popular apps, so people never even feel the need to check out your original product since they have a "good enough" version placed right at their doorstep.

This is the exact same playbook that Microsoft used to strangle many, many promising companies back in the '80s and '90s: Stac Electronics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics), WordPerfect, Netscape, the list goes on and on. It's just impossible to successfully compete with someone who has an endless supply of money and can stand as a gatekeeper between you and your potential customers.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#74

Post by MiroF »

habosa wrote: post #65
MiroF wrote: post #17

Why is this thread full of commentators attacking Snap for completely unrelated things? Strikes me as odd. FB told IG influencers they might lose their verified status if they link to a SC profile? Seems like that was a mistake on their part, could they really not anticipate future antitrust action?

This is definitely not-nice behavior but is common. On an iOS App Store listing you can't even say the word Android, etc.

Ah yes, the iOS App Store that just lost a Supreme Court anti-trust case

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#75

Post by simias »

toxik wrote: post #50
throwaway_quote wrote: post #45

> For example, when Mr. Zuckerberg met with the founders of startups, including Evan Spiegel, chief executive of Snap, and Dennis Crowley, co-founder of Foursquare Inc., he presented them with two scenarios: either they accept the price he was offering for their companies, or face Facebook’s efforts to copy their products and make operating more difficult, according to people familiar with the conversations. In both…

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

It's fairly easy to escape Facebook and Google in the grand scheme of things. A lot easier than avoiding, say, Nestlé or Coca Cola IRL. It's easier to change your homepage than your dietary habits. The problem is convincing people that they need to switch, clearly the vast majority doesn't care enough to download Firefox or make two click in their settings to change the default search engine.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#76

Post by disjhshava »

paggle wrote: post #70
duxup wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> could they really not anticipate future antitrust action? I we go by the pattern of behavior at Facebook, it really doesn't seem like the decision makers consider much in the way of anti-trust or much of anything. The pattern is well established and their version of move fast and break things is almost entirely off the rails.

And if we look at the pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice, the pattern of behavior at Facebook seems (at least at this moment) to be perfectly rational.

Most industries can engage in anticompetitive behaviors with impunity. But I think if Facebook watches which way the political winds are blowing for them, they would be more careful.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#77

Post by denzil_correa »

VHRanger wrote: post #55
toxik wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

There are many economists that think the acquisition of IG should have warranted antitrust. This is a good case on it: https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art...

We don’t even need to go that far. Facebook snooped in users via an advertised VPN app to make WhatsApp and Instagram acquisitions. That in itself should be enough fodder to discuss them.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebooks-onavo-gives-social-me...

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#78

Post by joe_the_user »

khawkins wrote: post #60
toxik wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

If these features were critical enough that you could found a company on them, then clearly they brought innovation to the scene. If they had not come along, it's unclear as to whether Facebook would have ever introduced those features in their products. "Fair market competition" is the idea that products compete on their own merits, not that you can leverage your market position to destroy competitors. "Deeper pocke…

"Fair market competition" is the idea that products compete on their own merits, not that you can leverage your market position to destroy competitors.

This idea implies something akin to an implicit patent on every imaginable product "merit". But I should remind you that patents are not intended to be free market devices - rather, if a patent is granted, it is monopoly given in exchange for an individual describing their honest advancement of the craft. If Snap deserved a patent on their "business process", they could have stopped Facebook, if not, there's no reason that a deep pocketed entity shouldn't look at modest innovations and copy them. The alternative is every small innovation is controlled by a petty dictator, blocking all progress.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#79

Post by denzil_correa »

meowface wrote: post #41
ineedasername wrote: post #28

The headline doesn't really match the story. I don't doubt the likelihood that Facebook engaged in these sorts of things, but from the headline I expected a laundry list of complaints and at least anecdotes to support them. Instead there's only two vague accusation without support that Facebook discouraged influencers from Snap, and suppressed Snap content from trending.

The Onavo thing alone sounds utterly insane to me. I often think criticisms of Facebook and similar companies are overblown, personally, but Facebook really should have, at the least, faced as many repercussions as Volkswagen did for their deceit, if the facts are correct. >One area of focus for the FTC is Onavo, an Israeli mobile-analytics startup that Facebook purchased in 2013. Onavo offered a free mobile app that…

Thank you! It’s been 2 years since this story and yet there have been no follow ups.

Re: Snap Detailed Facebook’s Aggressive Tactics in ‘Project Voldemort’ Dossier

#80

Post by ummonk »

smacktoward wrote: post #73
toxik wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the problem with this. Isn’t it fair market competition? Facebook had (and has) deeper pockets and more users, so they won against Snap and Foursquare. Their acquisition of IG and WA were great moves too, it’s almost impossible to escape the Facebook and Google internet.

It may be competition, but it certainly isn't fair competition. As you note, Facebook has much deeper pockets than even a well-funded startup. They can afford to build a clone of your product and give it away for free, without any expectation of even future revenue, specifically to drive you out of business. And they can bundle their clone with their already-popular apps, so people never even feel the need to check o…

Would we prefer a world where disk compression, document editors, and web browsers weren't available as free apps?

There seems to be a fine line between price-dumping that ends up hurting consumers once competitors are driven out of business, and aggressive competition that benefits consumers by driving down prices and increasing availability.

Post reply on HN