41–50 of 89 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hundreds of millions of dollars already went to the founders. The only risk is whether they'll be super rich or ultra super rich.
There are more stakeholders in the company than the founders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Revenue per subscriber has absolutely tanked. AKA - people become stale and aren't buying so those marketing costs they were trying to hide as one time subscriber costs are going to be around forever.
I think that would be revenue per customer, which has been pretty steady at around $40/customer/qtr, for the past year. The reason revenue per subscriber has dropped is because the ratio of subscribers to customers has fallen. That is a different problem that they are now signing up people who aren't really interested in buying a coupon.
If that's true, then they will have a hard time bringing their marketing costs down later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that would be revenue per customer, which has been pretty steady at around $40/customer/qtr, for the past year. The reason revenue per subscriber has dropped is because the ratio of subscribers to customers has fallen. That is a different problem that they are now signing up people who aren't really interested in buying a coupon.
I'm lost at what you're saying. It clearly states revenue per subscriber has dropped off a cliff to $9.
Groupon not selling to Google was the dumbest thing I've ever seen a company do. Ever.
Groupon is a fundamentally bad business and I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot cattle prod. Some say that we know they're not profitable but that's really not the point. By counting customer acquisition as an extraordinary expense they are implying that: 1. The value of that customer is AT LEAST as much the cost of acquisition; and 2. That cost also accounts for the natural loss of customers. This is shady because (I…
My friends cupcake shop in union square was asked to sell their cupcakes for 25% of retail and at a loss in a very pushy way by groupon.
I have been on groupon for pretty much since they launched. I have bought in total (1) groupon. And I forgot about it and it expired.
I am not interested in the things they have, which are typically things I would never frequently buy anyway (skydiving, spas etc). Thus, I have never seen it being a place I would spend much money. I haven't logged into it for nearly a year. I stopped all emails way back as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that would be revenue per customer, which has been pretty steady at around $40/customer/qtr, for the past year. The reason revenue per subscriber has dropped is because the ratio of subscribers to customers has fallen. That is a different problem that they are now signing up people who aren't really interested in buying a coupon.
"That is a different problem that they are now signing up people who aren't really interested in buying a coupon." If that's true, then they will have a hard time bringing their marketing costs down later.
Groupon is a fundamentally bad business and I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot cattle prod. Some say that we know they're not profitable but that's really not the point. By counting customer acquisition as an extraordinary expense they are implying that: 1. The value of that customer is AT LEAST as much the cost of acquisition; and 2. That cost also accounts for the natural loss of customers. This is shady because (I…
There are many of us who have always known groupon was a bad idea. My information comes from all my friends in SF who own businesses that Groupon attempted to solicit. My friends cupcake shop in union square was asked to sell their cupcakes for 25% of retail and at a loss in a very pushy way by groupon. I have been on groupon for pretty much since they launched. I have bought in total (1) groupon. And I forgot about…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google's offer was $6B. The IPO is priced at $30B. I am scratching my head how that is the dumbest thing you have ever seen a company do. Ever. I can see the IPO valuation getting cut to a more reasonable $10B, but that is still more than the Google offer.
We'll see.. http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/web-ipos... "Groupon is still effectively insolvent, and without capital infusions is unlikely to exist in 18 months." In my opinion, valuing a company at $10B when they haven't ever shown a net profit is ludicrous.
GS is pretty evil in pushing ridiculous IPO values in order to get their higher cut. Cant wait to see what BS goes on with GS handling Facebooks IPO.
Groupon not selling to Google was the dumbest thing I've ever seen a company do. Ever.
Groupon is a fundamentally bad business and I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot cattle prod. Some say that we know they're not profitable but that's really not the point. By counting customer acquisition as an extraordinary expense they are implying that: 1. The value of that customer is AT LEAST as much the cost of acquisition; and 2. That cost also accounts for the natural loss of customers. This is shady because (I…
Groupon's subscriber count -- the one Mason says it is spending aggressively to beef up -- now stands at 116 million, up from 83 million at the end of last quarter. Among those subscribers, 23 million have purchased a Groupon at least once.
So they have 116 million "customers," but less than 1 in 5 of those have ever actually purchased a deal?
Plus aren't Groupon's customers really the businesses paying for the Groupons, not the millions of subscribers to their e-mail list that apparently don't even purchase anything from Groupon? Seems to me that the "customers" they're referring to is really the product they're selling, and at a huge loss apparently.