I see 0 value in Snapchat. Besides, how is it even being monetized?
Edit: I meant 0 value as in 0 added value. See mrweasel's comment below for more details on the second point.
Edit: I meant 0 value as in 0 added value. See mrweasel's comment below for more details on the second point.
I won't suggest that that one could'nt turn a profit on Snapchat, but one false step and those 300 million users will leave faster than they came. They've already been taught that Snapchat is a free service, that will be hard to change. And VCs are ready to fund the next Snapchat the minute that the IPO hits, so the users won't have to wait long for their new free alternative.
Snapchat is a fun opportunity, if the price where $10-20 million.
Get a few big celebrities using the snapchat glasses courtside at an NBA game or from backstage at a concert or something and watch snapchat explode. I was at a wedding with those glasses and you should have seen how much everyone of all ages loved the glasses.
If their valuation was <$10B I'd be all over this IPO, just $24B seems way too high to me (I also think the whatsapp $19B was ridiculous). Their only risk is being replaced the way I think snapchat will replace Facebook (although I don't think Facebook will completely die), which as the evolution of websites and smartphone apps has shown no one can predict.
Facebook also IPOd with minimal profits, 300 million users who would never be willing to pay for the service, and hordes of VCs ready to fund their competitors. Snapchats mileage may vary, but facebook now generates lots of ad revenue.
Sure that's a reasonable opinion, one that I agree with.
> Snapchat is a fun opportunity, if the price where $10-20 million.
This is just out of touch. Show me another platform with the level of reach, engagement and usage that SnapChat has that's worth less than $5B. You realize Snap have generated $400mm in revenue last year right? I think you just have a fundamental misunderstanding of the product, the company, and their place in the market.
> There is no clear way of injecting ads into Snapchat, and in many markeds users could just revert back to SMS at no cost, so charging for the service will only work in some markeds.
There is a very very clear way of injecting ads into SnapChat and that's what they've generated the $400mm in revenue from. In fact, it's the same method that Instagram stories uses - sponsored story ads placed between organic stories amongst other media centric partnerships.
A lot of people think there will be a big shift in brand advertising away from TV and towards the internet (brand advertising is aimed at general awareness about a brand and forming positive or desirable associations with that brand in people's minds). Snapchat is very well poised to capture a lot of brand advertising money if this shift happens in the next several years. Not only do they have a large, highly-engaged user base, but also brand advertisers are often especially eager to reach younger consumers who are just beginning to form impressions of brands.
Of course, there are a lot of "if"s in all of that. But they do have a clear path to bringing in massive revenue if everything goes well.
Say what you will about valuations in general, but Snapchat is rare in that they've produced a physical product and set some sort of future goal in hardware (specifically cameras). So If everyone else gets a C, I'd at least give them a C+.
The last Uber I ever took was a 20 minute drive that cost me $3.75 — I had a conversation with my driver about his cut of the fare, and tipped him because I felt guilty about how absurd it had become.
Uber's recent losses are unparalleled and largely stem from driver subsidies because they aren't actually charging a sustainable fare for the service they contract.
I honestly don't think they're a real company. It's all a farce.