261–270 of 831 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was using active users as a metric in my parent comment, using the same measure Facebook has 750M active users for a cost of $227USD per user. [0]: http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=821954
That only strengthens my argument: market values at ~225 / active user
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatsapp has virtually no market share in the US. In basically all markets outside of the US, however, they are dominating the messaging space. Text messages in major EU countries like Germany and France have been almost completely supplanted by WhatsApp.
Is that because SMS costs a fortune in Europe? As an American with unlimited SMS/MMS, I don't see the point of WhatsApp at all. I guess maybe if I wanted to send a text to somebody in Europe.
400,000,000 active users [0] 16,000,000,000 USD ---- $40 per user That's an incredible cost. We can assume Facebook is paying for the userbase, the app itself and it's infrastructure would basically run itself. It's less appealing when you realise that there's probably a miniscule fraction of WhatsApp users that don't have a Facebook account. > WhatsApp will remain autonomous and operate independently. You can contin…
Can anyone put in numbers what the benefit is for FBK in paying so much for whatsapp? I just don't understand how a messaging company can be "worth" so much, even after extrapolating the expansion in user base. Don't get me wrong - WhatsApp is a great product and very easy to use on top of that (using phone number as id is a great idea to onboard users in a very intuitive way). But I fail to see where this valuation…
It's pretty much fear in my opinion. The main platform Facebook is already not cool anymore, so they have to buy cool things to stay cool. Only problem is, if you're not cool and you acquire cool things, these things automatically become not cool. But we'll see.
Kids won't read the small print, and if you read the small print then you don't see ads anyway, you're just a cost to them.
Damn, Zuck is far more paranoid than I thought. He's going to have to come up with a better strategy than buying every company that presents a potential existential threat though. Especially at these prices! I actually think it wasn't such a bad idea to buy Instagram. He paid 1% for something that really could have killed him. But paying $16 billion here is pretty much surrender as far as I'm concerned.
Even if its a rope-a-dope its potentially a smart move. He needs to roll-with-the punches and keep in the lead. Once evaporative cooling kicks in, its not going to be a good ride. So its really best to do whatever is possible to stay ahead...even if that means being the borg of social networking. He has enough of a lead and can accept enough dilution that it remains worth it to continue to layer the next generation o…
It's a bubble. I don't beleive it can sustained over time. So simple apps sold for huge quantity of money
I can't believe it either. Few miles from FB and Whatsapp is Tesla, people consider it massively overvalued at 25Billion. It is almost laughable. When you are a compulsive liar, people catch up to it, and you will all live in a lie world. This is very close to how Ponzi schemes work. Billion is a lot of money. Since FB lied through their teeth, considered themselves demigods and levied idiot tax on poor investors, it…
400,000,000 active users [0] 16,000,000,000 USD ---- $40 per user That's an incredible cost. We can assume Facebook is paying for the userbase, the app itself and it's infrastructure would basically run itself. It's less appealing when you realise that there's probably a miniscule fraction of WhatsApp users that don't have a Facebook account. > WhatsApp will remain autonomous and operate independently. You can contin…
Or facebook is trying to trivialize and destroy the startup market.
400,000,000 active users [0] 16,000,000,000 USD ---- $40 per user That's an incredible cost. We can assume Facebook is paying for the userbase, the app itself and it's infrastructure would basically run itself. It's less appealing when you realise that there's probably a miniscule fraction of WhatsApp users that don't have a Facebook account. > WhatsApp will remain autonomous and operate independently. You can contin…
I don't think they want anything. They just don't want WhatsApp to compete with Facebook chat. The nominal fee charged to users will pare down the userbase and perhaps pay off a portion of the cost of purchasing.
I'm sure like many, I'm blown away at that price tag consider Motorola went for 12B and the recent TWC/Comcast is valued at 45B with both having hard assets. But after some reflections, I can see some positives that grounds my disbeliefs a bit.
1) As someone has already calculated $40/user is really not that bad (though how many overlap with fb already?)
2) You have trusted groups with WA, something you don't really have with FB (facilities are there but I doubt many use it).
3) With trusted groups, you tend to be a bit more open about your dialog so fb could gleen yet more, arguably better, information about you.
The other question in my mind are what other features are of value to WA? Video (facetime-esq) seems like a no brainer...