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

Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

roymurdock.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–128 of 128 posts

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#121

Post by taude »

knieveltech wrote: post #91
dakrisht wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, yes they do. But like you said, that's fine. Props to the SnapChat guys for cashing out, raising a ton of venture from sheep VCs and getting millions of users? YES, absolutely. Props to the SnapChat guys for creating something of value, substance, technology, IP, etc. None, zero. Just another BS app riding the wave of the top-10 in the appstore. It's not a WIN for society when you create garbage that has some so…

"Props to the SnapChat guys for cashing out, raising a ton of venture from sheep VCs..." Is this what our industry has come to? Congratulations for raking gullible investors? Like, that's not only socially acceptable, but a worthy outcome that should be applauded?

Probably a lot of people's goals around here? Whether they're going to state it so bluntly or not.

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#122

Post by knieveltech »

taude wrote: post #121
knieveltech wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Props to the SnapChat guys for cashing out, raising a ton of venture from sheep VCs..." Is this what our industry has come to? Congratulations for raking gullible investors? Like, that's not only socially acceptable, but a worthy outcome that should be applauded?

Probably a lot of people's goals around here? Whether they're going to state it so bluntly or not.

Evidence that if you pile enough money up in one place the sociopaths will rush in like someone pulled a drain plug.

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#123

Post by tlrobinson »

skrebbel wrote: post #115
tlrobinson wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for the ways in which people are outraged over being spied upon.

I feel you, but you're conflating "angry, principled nerds" with "most people". If you really think people outside your filter bubble are "outraged", look further.

I mostly agree, but I was responding to sp332's suggestion that Snapchat does anything to solve the NSA "problem".

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#125

Post by skrebbel »

tlrobinson wrote: post #123
skrebbel wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel you, but you're conflating "angry, principled nerds" with "most people". If you really think people outside your filter bubble are "outraged", look further.

I mostly agree, but I was responding to sp332's suggestion that Snapchat does anything to solve the NSA "problem".

Ah, I must've read your comment out of context. My bad!

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#126

Post by dakrisht »

nemothekid wrote: post #103
dakrisht wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally. It's how the wind blows these days in "tech". It's reminiscent of a bubble with all of these mobile apps calling themselves "companies" when most aren't even profitable. It reminds of the early 2000s when "how many eyeballs do you get monthly" was the question of the day. Does Pinterest really need $400M+ in venture to operate? What are they doing over there? Advanced robotics with neural implants? Burn rate…

I'm unsure why you chose to pick on Pinterest. It seems to have a very real business model that is powered by very real and powerful engagement metrics. Pinterest could very well be as solid as facebook. Why does Pinterest need $400M in venture to operate? Lets ask ourselves why a glorified status feed, Twitter, needs over 100 engineers. Why does Twitter need to rewrite almost every aspect of real-time stream process…

Maybe because they're unprofitable? Maybe because what's the point of pinning random items on a virtual pin board? Maybe because what's the need for $500M in capital for a website? Maybe because what good does Pinterest do for anyone or anything aside from waste time?

In Twitter's defense, while they might not "need" 100 engineers to rewrite their code, they are certainly infinitely more than just a glorified status feed.

Twitter has allowed millions of people across the globe to share insight into what is happening in their back yard. While for us Americans, this might include the dog taking a shit on a Macbook, in the Middle East it's far different. Twitter and FB have been responsible for a lot of insight and uprisings, especially during the Arab Spring.

Additionally, Twitter is an innovation in communications. Just like Skype is, but perhaps less so or just differently. Marc Andreessen said it perfectly: "Twitter is instant global public messaging - for free." That has some value vs. pinning my dress on a pin board.

Point is - SnapChat is worthless, Pinterest is less worthless but still has little value. Sure, advertisers and brands flock to the net since their old-school TV/print models are being replaced by technology - but very few "apps" are companies/businesses. And young users, particularly teens are very prone to jump ship like fleas off a dog when the "latest and greatest" comes about. Do you see SnapChat existing in 10 years? I don't think so. Pinterest? There will be something newer. FB? Twitter? Dropbox? Yeap, they'll still be around. And probably doing better than ever.

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#127

Post by tonypace »

namenotrequired wrote: post #42

I'm particularly surprised about seeing Snapchat with twice the valuation of Whatsapp. Here in Amsterdam, Whatsapp seems to have close to 100% market penetration (i.e. almost all smartphone users use whatsapp), yet I've never heard anyone about snapchat here.

Similarly, in Taiwan Line has completely taken over from WhatsApp. Snapchat has no presence at all.

Re: Snapchat is Intrinsically Worthless

#128

Post by babakian »

Guest98130 wrote: post #94
babakian wrote: post #54

What Snapchat has is millions of users who have formed the habit of opening the app every day and using it to communicate, sending 350 million* snaps a day. You can go ahead and make clones of Snapchat (or Facebook or Twitter), but building a clone does not guarantee that you will get the number users that Snapchat (or Facebook or Twitter) have. The investors are betting that the folks at Snapchat will experiment to…

That's a steal. Buying at 4bn and earning 35m a year, it'll be paid off in a short 114 years. After then, it'll be smooth sailing.

Ha! I should have used larger made up numbers! How about $100/yr from 5% of their users? Anyhow, you know that the investors are betting that the numbers will grow.

My main point is, Snapchat has a lot of users who have formed the habit of opening the app and sending snaps, totaling hundreds of millions of snaps/day. Simply cloning the app in no way means that you can generate those kinds of numbers. The numbers are stellar, and the investors seem to think so as well.

Post reply on HN