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

What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 148 posts

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#71

Post by gramsey »

pathy wrote: post #63
Skibb wrote: post #38

Ugh this is linkbait and upvote-bait if I ever saw one. The whole tone of the article is so contrived and fake-mysterious that it's kind of digusting. Basically the whole thing can be tracked down to a rich privileged white kid doing what rich privileged kids do. NOTHING worth reading about here. And the shitty app could maybe start about thinking of getting some cash flow.

You appear to be very jealous of their success. This is Hacker News, we should celebrate the entrepreneurial spirit and look at the lessons that can be learned from success stories like this. If I could build Instagram and sell it for $1b I sure as hell would. Might not be saving the world but people appear enjoy using it so who cares. They did manage to sell a company for $1b, a feat which practically all of us neve…

Oh please. Spare us the jealousy insinuations, and stop perpetuating the myth that if entrepreneurs are actually worth anything and work hard, it is guaranteed that they will swiftly become inundated with success.

Sometimes there are no "lessons that can be learned from success stories like this". Believe it or not, for every Instagram, there's a hundred startups with founders that are just as smart and try just as hard, but don't make the cut. Do the founders of Instagram deserve their success? Sure! Should we pat them on the back and "celebrate the entrepreneurial spirit"? Absolutely. But let's not fall over ourselves praying to the success gods while we forget to work on our own products.

> If I could build Instagram and sell it for $1b I sure as hell would

Bullshit. Maybe you could! All you need is hard work, the skills to get there, and yes, a good amount of luck. But let's not pretend you, or the founders of Instagram, are destined for success because you're special or you "knew" your ideas would kick off. Look up hindsight bias in the dictionary.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#72

Post by subsystem »

kmfrk wrote: post #66
Skibb wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, writing is vapid at best.

Vapid is too strong a word, but it nothing but glorifies successful start-ups, and provides no caution for people who'd like to learn something from this. The only conflict described is agonizing over which multi-gazillion offer to take(!). It's also fairly thin on new insights into the history and acquisition.

I think it has to do with the intended audience and the format of the publication, more than anything else.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#73

Post by logicallee »

dasil003 wrote: post #61
logicallee wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not jealous at all. Talent is one thing, but do you honestly think you can have a professional team working on the payroll that (I assume) Instagram had? I just don't see it happening. one thing is you are right, I don't have detailed payroll figures. I was going on the prevailing wind and the fact that the employees were 20-somethigns.

You're just piling one assumption on top of another.

yep, these are my assumptions and experience.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#74

Post by jahansafd »

Kiro wrote: post #55
SandB0x wrote: post #31

You may as well be reading about a rock band here. This story does not and will not apply to you. This is the one in a thousand/million fairy-tale of the frivolous app dreamed up in coffee shops, fuelled by rapid investment and sold for vast sums to a tech giant without so much as a whiff of a business model.

What's with the negativity? Are you telling inspiring musicians to stop trying as well?

in order to pursue anything abnormal you need to keep looking for validations. A good validation for musicians is if listeners like and share their music. If there is potential then there is a way.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#75

Post by virtualwhys »

maceo wrote: post #50

"Rags to riches?" What a bunch of BS. Dude never experienced a moment of poverty in his life, and I doubt he would deny that.

Well, the article does mention that he was born in Brazil. Perhaps he was a glue sniffing Sao Paulo street kid who was adopted by a caring American WASP family that got him on the fast track to old/new money success.

Seriously, boarding schools are choc full of uber achievers; the notion that wealthy kids are lazy is a myth (assuming trust-afarians are taken out of the equation).

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#76

Post by paprika »

So Instagram was sold for $750m and not $1bn. Majority of $300m went to investors.

It's a great story to read (and maybe Ashton Kutcher can play Systrom as well, or at least Nicholas Hoult... Hunter Parish to play Krieger and it's time that Michael Cera debuts at Zuckerberg) but I can't help but think it would've been so much better for us, users, that Twitter bought them.

I see it as a perfect social network - Vine for video sharing, Instagram for photo sharing, Twitter as a connecting platform with numerous additions - Radio, ...

I just don't get Facebook anymore. Sure, a few years ago we were mad about it, spending days on it but I sense that hype is gone. Honestly I don't know why I'm still on it - stories from liked pages are the same as on my Twitter feed, I use Instagram to share my photos. Surely if you're serious about keeping in touch with people from the past, you already have their email or phone number.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#78

Post by ok_craig »

logicallee wrote: post #67
SandB0x wrote: post #31

You may as well be reading about a rock band here. This story does not and will not apply to you. This is the one in a thousand/million fairy-tale of the frivolous app dreamed up in coffee shops, fuelled by rapid investment and sold for vast sums to a tech giant without so much as a whiff of a business model.

I see. Let's say I see a big incumbent who's UNIQUE selling point is 'we have everyone's private photos. people have to come to us if they want to see their friend's photos.' I start threatening them. They pay and buy us. I get rich. The incumbent gets to keep everyone's photos. At what point in the above do we not have a business model? Oh, you mean it can't possibly WORK! Except that it just did. Well, I'm sorry, b…

Planning on a very specific other company wanting to buy you out isn't actually a business model. A business model is something that will keep the business self-propelled.

Re: What Really Happened When Facebook Bought Instagram

#80

Post by logicallee »

dasil003 wrote: post #62
logicallee wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me put it to you this way. Can you hire a talented CEO in London within the next month, who will work for you for below half the median wage in London and be able to build a company with you and a cofounder that is worth $10M within a year? In the valley, this is easy. You do have to give up equity though. In London, the above will get you shown the door, with a grin. Haha, good luck.

I'll ignore the fact that hiring a CEO is something that startups pretty much do not do and ask you this: why do you think it's so easy to hire top talent on primarily equity?

It's not easy to hire top talent with either primarily equity or primarily salary anywhere in the world: in the valley, the former is at least possible.
Post reply on HN