Unfortunately you still have to write in to cancel your Instagram account.
I just canceled mine five minutes ago with this form: https://instagram.com/accounts/remove/request/
So did I. Thanks for posting that link. It's a sad day for me.
Facebook acquires Instagram
301–310 of 394 posts
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems ominous for Google, which spent $12.5bn for Motorola to stake a shaky claim in mobile I was under the impression that Google paid that price (and, indeed, bought Motorola at all) for patents. Google is doing just fine out of Android. iOS may be better marketed, but there are a hell of a lot more Android phones out there.
The game is scored in profit. Revenue and market share matters only as a means to the end of securing profits. Android has a huge market share (and, dearly bought), but even 1st & Goal doesn't matter unless you actually score. I don't keep super close track, so maybe Apple's commanding profit share lead is eroding sharply. Last I checked, "commanding" was indeed the word for it. Again, all I'm saying is that you can…
The game is scored in total value of the ecosystem. Apple captures a higher % of iOS ecosystem value because it's the only device manufacturer. Google captures a lower % of a larger ecosystem, leaving value on the table for OEM partners. The latter is a stronger long term strategy.
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#303How many people work at instagram?
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#304Earlier quoted context omitted.
The game is scored in profit. Revenue and market share matters only as a means to the end of securing profits. Android has a huge market share (and, dearly bought), but even 1st & Goal doesn't matter unless you actually score. I don't keep super close track, so maybe Apple's commanding profit share lead is eroding sharply. Last I checked, "commanding" was indeed the word for it. Again, all I'm saying is that you can…
The game is scored in total value of the ecosystem. Apple captures a higher % of iOS ecosystem value because it's the only device manufacturer. Google captures a lower % of a larger ecosystem, leaving value on the table for OEM partners. The latter is a stronger long term strategy.
No, the game is not scored in "total value of the ecosystem". The total value of the ecosystem is only relevant if you control the whole ecosystem. Google is making far less profit on mobile than Apple is. If its strategy of growing the ecosystem out and skimming less profit from it is a good one, we should see it in their bottom line. We aren't, nor do we seem to be trending that way.
Maybe someday soon Google's strategy of letting a thousand Android devices bloom will pay off. But that is still a "maybe". Apple has tens of billions of "definitely's" to counter that maybe.
Meanwhile: I think people are getting hung up on this whole Apple vs. Google point, and getting away from my real point, which is that:
(i) Google's bids for a stake in mobile have been hugely expensive and not particularly profitable,
(ii) Apple's bids for a stake in mobile have been hugely expensive and hugely profitable, and
(iii) Facebook's bids for a stake in mobile have been expensive but orders of magnitude cheaper than Google's or Apples, and could end up hugely profitable in the long term.
Facebook will end up looking pretty smart if that's what happens. They didn't even have to buy a cell phone manufacturer or write their own OS!
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
For 2 main reasons that I can think of: a) You don't know if the acquisition will actually happen. Therefore if it doesn't, you aren't left with nothing. b) It gives you a stronger bargaining chip to increase the price of the acquisition because you literally have a strong alternative. Instagram could tell FB to screw off, they are already getting $50M.
I wonder if the investors (Sequoia, Greylock) knew of the pending acquisition offer from FaceBook when they put forth the 50M investment? If they did, that was the easiest investment ever.
I believe I read that Marc Andreessen is an investor (and board member?) in both companies. Seems painfully unlikely they did not know. And why wouldn't Instagram TELL them?
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, but they paid $1 BILLION dollar for a company with NO business model. This buy was just another way for connected Silicon players to cash out on the facebook IPO, since the IPO window for web 2.0 is closed.
You could have said the same about Yahoo acquiring Facebook itself for $1 billion, if that deal had happened. It's clear now who would have got the better deal there. Certainly that doesn't mean every large acquisition is justified (e.g. Bebo) but it also means you can't just automatically apply the "company X has no clear business model today and so shouldn't have been bought for Y" argument to every such acquisitio…
I am actually wondering if the value was too low. They are crossing the chasm so to speak and moving toward mainstream very quickly. I don't know where they would have ended up, but if they could have negotiated an upround with the founders and VCs taking some cash off the table it may have been a better move.
I fully understand that if I had a $1B offer for a company that I would literally be sick turning them down, but the potential was there for something really big. If I could keep going with $10m in the bank, I would like to think I would try.
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is very reminiscent of Google/YouTube circa 2006. In that it was a startup acquired by a big company? Yep. > When Google bought YT it was a small team of people and a pretty nascent product that people really loved, and the usage numbers were out of control. Like most startup acquisitions, the team size is relatively small and there is significant traction in the market with headroom to mature their footprint.…
Instagram is a photo service in a sea of other photo services. You're mischaracterizing Instagram. It's not "a photo service," it's the photo service. 30M iOS users plus 1M new Android users in 12 hours. [0] Instagram is the main mobile photo app. With this purchase, Facebook strengthens their mobile position the way Google strengthened their content position with YT. The acquisitions are very similar. (edited for a…
It isn't the photo service: Facebook. Flickr. Picasa. Imageshack. Twitpic. Imgur... To name a few.
Instagram doesn't have more users than Facebook. Hell, it doesn't even have more users than Flickr (51m) or Photobucket (50m).
Instagram is a small part of the web photo ecosystem.
It's a very peculiar play by Facebook, and not at all comparable to Google & YouTube other than the fact that Google acquired YouTube, and Facebook acquired Instagram. Instagram represents a diversification of Facebook's offering, and one which says "it's cheaper for us to spend $1bn acquiring Instagram than it is to make a compelling mobile photo app to usurp them".
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like everyone else already said, VCs can't reinvest so they dont really want 2x returns. Anyways, there's a excellent blog post that explains this very clearly. It is written for founders to understand the VC's perspective when investing. Does anyone know what I"m talking about?
http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/08/vc-insanity-economics...
Wow that is an awesome article, so one wonders if a fund is nearing its 10 year expiration, can they spend the 'reserve' on a fast exit like this?
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah, but they paid $1 BILLION dollar for a company with NO business model. This buy was just another way for connected Silicon players to cash out on the facebook IPO, since the IPO window for web 2.0 is closed.
You could have said the same about Yahoo acquiring Facebook itself for $1 billion, if that deal had happened. It's clear now who would have got the better deal there. Certainly that doesn't mean every large acquisition is justified (e.g. Bebo) but it also means you can't just automatically apply the "company X has no clear business model today and so shouldn't have been bought for Y" argument to every such acquisitio…
I'm not convinced Yahoo buying Facebook for $1 billion would have been a good deal for Yahoo. Yahoo never would have been able to make Facebook nearly as successful as it is today. I have my doubts Facebook would be worth even a $1 billion today. Yahoo has an awful track record of making the worst out of their acquisitions and I don't see how this would have been any different.
Re: Facebook acquires Instagram
#310HN is full of haterpraise today.
http://www.davidpcheng.com/post/20808337202/instagram-and-th...