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

Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 152 posts

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#141

Post by noncoml »

selectodude wrote: post #127
runeks wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Charging raises a huge barrier to entry, making it very hard to create a large network. Is this because digital payments are cumbersome, or are people really unwilling to drop 50 cents/mo on something they find valuable? Imagine getting 3 months of Snap usage for free, and having the ability to make a 50 cent payment as easy as dropping two quarters in a tip jar. Would this still be a huge barrier to entry?

There is not a chance in hell I would pay to put a photo on Snapchat, and I’m of their core demographic that can actually afford to.

Would you pay $1 a month to not see ads and not have your data be sent to third party companies?

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#142

Post by mwcampbell »

exogeny wrote: post #30

Snap suffers from a fundamental paradox, one that is difficult for me to imagine an easy way to solve. They've made their bones by being a uniquely fun and social way of a certain subset of the population to share their lives without parents dipping their head in and seeing what they're doing, ala Facebook. The UI is designed to generally support this; it is confusing and messy and understandable only by someone who…

I wonder if the confusing, messy UX you talk about (I've never used the app) is a deliberate strategy, or just bad design.

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#143

Post by glenstein »

exogeny wrote: post #30

Snap suffers from a fundamental paradox, one that is difficult for me to imagine an easy way to solve. They've made their bones by being a uniquely fun and social way of a certain subset of the population to share their lives without parents dipping their head in and seeing what they're doing, ala Facebook. The UI is designed to generally support this; it is confusing and messy and understandable only by someone who…

There seems to be a natural arc to the process we keep reading about: Get investors & users with your cool design. Burn cash. Have an IPO. Flail as you try to monetize.

But, they're at least succeeding at something that Google couldn't do if their life depended on it, which is make a social thing people want to use.

What I don't get is why Google doesn't just swoop in either at the early stage or at flailing-and-monetization stage, buy them and stick them in their back pocket.

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#145

Post by pfranz »

yusee wrote: post #56

Snapchat is a tabloid. The professionally made content is pure trash. I have Snap opened right now. Here is the top 5 pieces of Featured content it shows to me, a 25-yo male: 1) DailyMail: "Khloe [Kardashian] shocks with new FACE". 2) BROTHER: "Do You Actually Know The Right Way To Eat THIS?" (pictures of pizza) 3) FRIYAY: "Watch This to Start Your Weekend" 4) MTV: "These Rapper Names are SO Cringey" 5) NOW THIS: "CA…

Maybe the tabloids are to build the infrastructure and they plan to move upmarket quickly? Maybe Facebook courted users to share news while Snap is trying to court journalists? I googled "journalism at snapchat" and it looks like a lot of results trying to court young journalists.

Anecdotally, I've heard a lot of other journalists talk about Snap hiring good journalists. Separately, I swear yesterday I heard an article introduced something like; "So and so, from the NYT, currently at Snap, wrote this article for the Atlantic" which seems to reinforce that idea.

I don't use Snapchat and don't follow tabloids, but I feel like Snap has popped up on my radar occasionally with actual journalism.

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#146

Post by nojvek »

Or the CEO shouldn't make douchebag strategies that he only wants to expand in Rich contries and not poor countries like India.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/small-biz/s...

After this came out, all my Indian friends around the world instantly boycotted snapchat and moved to whatsapp

In a way I'm glad snapchat is suffering. The CEO has done a number of cringeworthy things.

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#147

Post by tim333 »

nojvek wrote: post #146

Or the CEO shouldn't make douchebag strategies that he only wants to expand in Rich contries and not poor countries like India. https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/small-biz/s... After this came out, all my Indian friends around the world instantly boycotted snapchat and moved to whatsapp In a way I'm glad snapchat is suffering. The CEO has done a number of cringeworthy things.

It's debatable that he did. Politifact rated it "mostly false."

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#149

Post by pkaye »

thedrbrian wrote: post #122
pkaye wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Snaps core demo likely doesn’t have the discretionary income to pay for a social network. How valuable are a demographics with no discretionary income to advertisers?

Here’s an example, This year I want a [blank] from Santa/father Christmas.....

I want a Snap Spectacles for Christmas!

Re: Snap’s Rise and Fall: How a Big, Splashy IPO Prompted the Doubters to Keep Mum

#150

Post by maherbeg »

username223 wrote: post #97
traek wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 billion monthly active users. They hit 2 billion this summer [1]. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2017/6/27/15880494/facebook-2-billi...

> 3 billion monthly active users. I was trying to suggest that a lot of those "users" are not sources of income/data. I'll bet a lot of them are either bots, or humans smart enough to use an ad blocker. And most of the MAU humans are probably in a 10-year age range, having signed up when FB was useful.

I would disagree again here. Significant numbers of their users use their apps only/majority of the time. Can't block ads on closed platforms!
Post reply on HN