311–320 of 369 posts
Can someone comment as to what kind of payday this IPO translates to for say the 30th engineer hired by Snap? (I realize that this is impossible to answer accurately, and that there is still a 4 month lockup)
Looks like engineers were offered 10k-35k shares at a $9.90 strike price in Jan of 2014.
So $250k - $875k. Not bad, but also not millionaire status. Also ISO's will be taxed heavily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's quite right. Snapchat does have a chat feature which allows you to essentially send feedback on peoples snaps/stories, so you could absolutely tell people they're wrong for making some statement.
I think it was a joke.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, "wait a year" fixes most of these problems.
Well no, it depends on what you are waiting on. Some of the worst horror stories are from people that exercised their options and then waited a year to sell the stock to qualify for long term capital gains. Then the stock subsequently crashed so they owed a massive AMT tax for the difference between strike price and price on exercise and got almost nothing from the actual stock sale.
This $27.8 billion dollar valuation tells me that somewhere along the line, my job and lifestyle have caused me to detach from a significant chunk of society. I've never used Snap or their platform. I don't even really know what the benefit of their service. I am curious if I'm in the minority or if there's lots of developers like me who aren't able to comprehend these valuations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Snap has potential to be huge… anything that wins the race to replace TV is going to be big. Whether they can do it before FB clones them/leverages their network is a big open question. That said, despite the fact that I love Twitter more than any other network, almost none of my friends use it maybe ~a dozen people I know closely in real life still post to it. Almost all of my friends use Snapchat and compla…
Snap is the last thing that would replace TV. Nobody sits down and spends a consecutive hour on Snapchat
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's not their only product: Bitmoji has been the #1 iPhone app overall since January 11, and it was already the #1 iPhone Utility app since July 22, 2016 (Log in to see) - https://www.appannie.com/apps/ios/app/bitmoji-keyboard-your-... https://www.appannie.com/apps/ios/top/united-states/overall/... And yesterday on eBay, 22 pairs of Spectacles were sold, with one pair went for $229 and 2 others went for $200 e…
to me this all sounds like a company with little revenue and no focus and too much money that they are just trying everything to see what sticks to get them to bigger revenue
The SNAP thesis I like the best is - "Twitter-like growth with FB ARPU". The monetization potential of this company is massive (geofilters, sponsored content, hardware with spectacles, etc.) and there's no direct comp for that. Pokemon Go showed us the bleeding of digital to physical, and Snap has the potential to be the first company to unlock value from it (ex. geofilters). Plus you can view SNAP as a call option o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was my sentiment five years ago for Instagram. 9 Apr 2012 2008:Sun buys MySQL for $1B. 2012:Facebook buys Instagram for $1B. DB tech running half the web+revenue vs hipster photo filter app+no rev.
I saw pretty easily how Instagram could be worth a billion to FB, who has a social network and wants to expand their user base / stop competition from rising. I don't understand how these shares that pay no dividend and give no voting power are worth $24 each. They are basically "SnapChat Fun Bucks." Anyone buying it just hoping another person down the line will pay more for it. On top of that, we know there's a larg…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Snap is the last thing that would replace TV. Nobody sits down and spends a consecutive hour on Snapchat
Neither does anyone an hour watching TV anymore? Everyone within the age range 18-30 in the US definitely spends more time on Snapchat than TV right now.
Economics novice here. How did we get such a huge difference (40%!) between the IPO price and the current price, when both sides had $3.4 billion at stake on getting that price "right"? Is there some huge information disparity here? Moreover, if investors feel that $24 a share is a fair price, why weren't they swooping in before the IPO and, say, offering $20 a share for the whole chunk? Sorry if this seems like a ri…
If they priced the stock accurately, there would be a 50% chance the stock would go down on the first day. They want it to go up and thus under price it.
If I own something, I want to sell it for as much as the market will bear. I don't want to sell it and have someone flip it for a huge margin almost immediately.
How is a large first-day bump not considered a failure for an IPO? What is it about the situation that reverses a common sense understanding?