SNAP IPO

>These 26 year-olds are now worth over 6 Billion a piece.

What are you doing with your life Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/1476861/miranda-kerr-confirms-shes-getting-married-again-model-says-yes-to-snapchat-ceo-evan-spiegel/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Sucks to peak that young and still be beholden to king Zuckerberg

Whats Snap Inc.?

Company that made snapchat.

That guy is literally raising his wife's son and "saving himself for marriage"
thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/1476861/miranda-kerr-confirms-shes-getting-married-again-model-says-yes-to-snapchat-ceo-evan-spiegel/

Nobody cares this product is for 13 year old girls.

These grown men should be ashamed of themselves.

The fuck is Yik-yak?

>snapchat
>worth anything
that woman who made that phony "blood testing" device comes to mind

I wonder how many kids they had to rape to get in good with the wall street jews.

It's literally worth about $400,000

>generate hype
>idiots buy stocks because they have high confidence in your company due to persuasion
>sell your company and run

Is there anything stopping people from doing this?

>posting on an ephemeral board.
>not believing in ephemeral social media
>being this retarded.

second dot com bubble burst when?

snapchat really does look like facebook, not that many real assets, the value people place in it is in it's intelligence capability.

people may say those cunts are worth that much, i don't see it that way.

The founder was offered 3 Billion from Facebook, the next day 4 Billion from Google. If he wanted to take the money and run, he would've long ago.

Have to give the kids credit for holding tight.

I'm talking hypothetically though, not just specific to snapchat

If you were somehow able to generate hype and confidence in your company despite the fact that you have no plan for making profit, and due to people buying stocks you were worth several million, and a larger company was willing to buy your company, are there any laws being broken? You're effectively just scamming people by persuading them that your company has some theoretical value when it literally doesn't do anything. But does that break any laws?

I wonder what their plan to expand their business territory is. Like Google and Facebook, both started out as a service serving exclusively one function, but each has since expanded into many territories now, such as robotics and virtual realties.

What are these guys' plans? You can't just be a temporary photo taking company forever.

replace 'several million' with 'billion' or some relatively high amount that conveys the point I mean

>snapchat really does look like facebook, not that many real assets, the value people place in it is in it's intelligence capability.

Seems like legitimate value, truth be told I don't know if SC datamining value could equal that of FB but who knows. Also, FB is by all means a successful company, so I don't know how comparing snap to that is bad.

Literally how are they going to monitize Snapchat? Ad inventory? Pay for filter overlays? Top fucking kek.

>If you were somehow able to generate hype and confidence in your company despite the fact that you have no plan for making profit,

They had 400 million in revenue last year. with a 500 million dollar loss. I.E. they spent 900 million.

They still brought in 400 million, thats still very impressive even if they have a negative cash flow. That's how businesses expand.

Where did you think all that money the fed has been printing would go? To the poor? Ha!

The stock market bubble is being supported by massive monetary expansion by the fed, and they can keep printing as long as they want.

Just wait for the Uber IPO. The company has never made a profit, never will, but the market will value them at over $100 billion.

it's legitimate value as long as the company is still used, which is why i don't trust it.

if suddenly a company like Intel had all of it's employees drop dead, i'd still be able to go down to Intel facilities, pick out good chips, and sell them for a decent value. even if the company is no longer operating i can still make a good amount of money by salvaging what's left. i can even sell the chip fabs to other companies for a LOT of money (AMD would probably start killing puppies on an industrial scale if they were offered Intel's chip fabs).

snapchat? what do they have? do they even run their own servers? i wouldn't be surprised if i could get a few billion by selling their buildings, the time they have purchased on various servers, and i could probably get a lot of money by selling their data on users... but that would be it. a chip fab can continue operating long after the company that purchased it dies, some old cat pictures can't.

So in case you missed something, tech companies go through financial moves backwards. They go public after they have already made money and it's basically a last ditch attempt to make an extra boost and then they spiral downwards. They go public at their climax basically instead of going public and then hitting the climax.

Protip: if a tech company does public it's already hit its peak. Don't invest

>They had 400 million in revenue last year. with a 500 million dollar loss. I.E. they spent 900 million.
>They still brought in 400 million, thats still very impressive even if they have a negative cash flow. That's how businesses expand.

They're spending at a ridiculous rate

>snapchat? what do they have? do they even run their own servers? i wouldn't be surprised if i could get a few billion by selling their buildings, the time they have purchased on various servers, and i could probably get a lot of money by selling their data on users... but that would be it. a chip fab can continue operating long after the company that purchased it dies, some old cat pictures can't.

...Snapchat has patents on its ephemeral technology. It has value in its intellectual property. Which is probably where the majority of Intel's worth is as well.

The chips themselves aren't worth anywhere near the I.P. it takes to make them...

I am sure those 6B dollars help to wash away the same

Is it really that impressive if you had to spend twice that much in order to make it?

Eesh sounds like kryptonite to me

SNAP will be a 10 dollar stock in a year

Amazon brought in 136 Billion last year, with 4 Billion net income. They spent 132 Billion.

Are they spending at a ridiculous rate as well?

Pretty sure it's popular with college kids too. Also, women are more inclined to send tit pics over Snapchat, so we should thank those fine young gentlemen.

Your financials are open to public scrutiny if you're doing an IPO. At that point, your worth is more or less objectively determined by the market as a whole. If you stay private, it's much easier to bullshit investors. See for instance the recent scandal with Theranos.

>Pretty sure it's popular with college kids too
I've seen college kids without FB use SC frequently. FB is like their parents and grand-parents shit now. SC is whats hip and with it.

>Having less than a .5 ROI is some how impressive.

>ephemeral technology

M02cnQ51Ji97vwT4. as of 2016, that is the hardcoded encryption key used by snapchat for it's "self-destructing messaging". i do not know if snapchat is still using this key, but up to at least 2016 you could capture any snapchat message, save it, apply this key to it, and save it unencrypted for your own purposes without alerting the sender or the recipient.

i am sorry, but i do not buy for a second that bullshit. if you're dumb enough as a company to hardcode an encryption key, nothing you say regarding security should be trusted.

>intellectual property
i do give you this. the problem i have however is that it's very hard to value IP with a company like snapchat.

>majority of Intel's worth is as well
that is correct, but to make microprocessors you need billions of dollars in equipment. that's what the "chip fab" comment was about. snapchat's IP can be used with a few hundred thousand dollars worth of equipment.

again, how do i valuate snapchat's IP? with intel i can place a lower bound on their worth by just taking their chip fabs and accounting for deprecation. how do i do that for snapchat?

What was FB's ROI at the time of their IPO?

You're just being retarded and not understanding economies at scale.

I don't believe Amazon has turned a profit it the majority of its years. Is it not a successful business?

They're even dumber than that. Ever wonder why snapchat pictures are really low-res? it's because those literal retards just save the image from the display buffer instead of actually using the phone camera directly. Friend of mine worked there as an intern and said the app is built on bullshit spaghetti code and every time they change anything it breaks like 3 other things and they just patch it up as they go. It uses 3x as much memory as it should because they copy the image every time you apply a filter instead of doing it in place and then don't even bother optimizing it.

Pretty much sounds like typical Silicon Valley to me. Everyone slapping shit together trying to be the most creative hoping they get noticed by established industry giants.

>that is correct, but to make microprocessors you need billions of dollars in equipment
Probably more like millions without the IP.

You value Snapchats IP as much as Facebook's or against it. To say it has no value is retarded. Google offered 4 Billion for the IP so I suppose your valuation could start around there?

Amazon also pretty much built a distribution chain last year, though.

>millions
no. billions.

>Intel has broken ground on its first dedicated facility for 450mm wafer production. The new foundry – D1X Module 2 – is scheduled to come online in 2015, with Intel committing to roughly $2 billion (£1.3 billion) in bring-up costs through the end of the year. Foundry costs have continued to balloon in recent years – the 450mm facility will likely set records in this area due to the cost of the new manufacturing equipment.

that's a 14nm fab.

even if i had literally all of the information required to build a modern 14nm intel processor, i would still need a fabrication facility that would cost insane amounts of money. if i had all of the information required to make a perfect clone of snapchat, i could probably do that with a few million dollars.

>You value Snapchats IP as much as Facebook's or against it.
no i didn't. i was making a comparison between facebook and snapchat, because both of them rely on selling users information and without users they are useless.

Snap has run like shit since I've had it and it has only run slower and slower, while visually, changing nothing except making the interface somehow shittier. Snapchat won't exist in years.

>Sup Forums
>profitable

It's because I post on a Mongolian Basket Weaving forum that I know ephemeral content is a shit money maker.

is this why Gabe will never make Valve public?

The value is in intellectual property and branding and user data. That is it. That can be worth several billion.

git was a mistake

THIS

Most trading is done by super computers owned by big banking. None of the trading makes sense because none of it is sensible, it's all built on hyper speculation done in micro second time frames not reality. Eventually these companies crash and a lot of rich people lose their shirts

>because both of them rely on selling users information and without users they are useless.
I do not disagree.

But you are making some sort of assertion there that FB is a poor/risky company? It is worth multiple times its IPO. With a positive cash flow after having not having one for so many years.

FB seems like it performed flawlessly.

Riding a speculation wave is fine so long as you understand that it's all fake money and the company is truly worthless

>Have to give the kids credit for holding tight.
4 billion isn't enough? Why hold tight? so many companies, like Live Journal are worthless now, because they "held tight". Fuck that. Sell, sell, sell.

Why would you need more than a billion dollars in a lifetime? It's a fucking insane amount of money, especially for something as baseless as these stupid ass "app" companies.

yes, to me, facebook is risky.

with a company like intel, i can take the worth of their assets, discount them by even up to 20%, take away liabilities, then come to a "worth" that i find satisfactory. if the porn industry or whatever implodes tomorrow and we go into another bear market, i can look at anyone who tells me intel is worth nothing and firmly tell them to get fucked. i can also buy more of intel.
the key idea is that i have a baseline of which i can be certain that the stock market will, over the long term, return to.

facebook however, the vast majority of it's worth comes from the information it can gather on it's users. i can draw a baseline based on the value of it's servers, the value of it's buildings, etc, but i can't account for the massive amounts of money that it gains through selling information. this is a very big problem since if a bunch of people decide to leave facebook, the worth of facebook can plummet very quickly.

facebook may not be going away very soon, but i'm not willing to put my money into something with that much risk. it's just a personal decision.

>It's not about making billions it's about keeping it

lmao. It's worthless trash, bloated after .com bubble and the housing crash, this shit was combined with /gov in the market takeover. The only real value is the connection to CIA interests.

Just takes one breakthrough to create considerable wealth. Is the gamble worth it at 17 US dollars a share? A lot of big institutions seem to think so. Besides there is still money to be made in the mean time on trading the paper(stock). Hell the ability to influence the youth politically is worth trillions to the big institutions that have invested in SC.

>Why would you need more than a billion dollars in a lifetime? It's a fucking insane amount of money, especially for something as baseless as these stupid ass "app" companies.

Some people care more about their legacy in this world than the amount of money they die with.

this. These pure internet app tech companies have fucking nothing. It's like investing in the idea of the smell of some Jew's farts.

If I'm going to invest in tech, it'll be robotics, self-driving cars, drones, etc. Not some social media platform where idiots share pictures of their buttholes with the whole fucking world.

ONLINE ADVERTISING IS IN A DUOPOLY STATE CURRENTLY

WITH SMALLER COMPANIES SUCH AS TWITTER, YAHOO, VERIZON/AOL, APPNEXUS ETC. FIGHTING FOR THE SCRAPS

SNAPCHAT BELIEVES THAT IT CAN CHALLENGE ALPHABET AND FACEBOOK AND BECOME THE THIRD HORSEMAN THAT TWITTER HAS FAILED TO BECOME. TWITTER FAILED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SUCK ADVERTISER/BRAND DICK AND FAILED TO CREATE A MEDIA COMPANY. NOW THEY ARE SCRAMBLING TO CREATE A VALUE PROPOSITION TO SWAY AGENCIES TO INCREASE SPENDING, BUT INSTEAD BRANDS ARE JUST REJIGGERING THEIR BUDGETS OVER TO MORE INSTAGRAM ADS, OR SNAPCHAT ADS, OR EVEN FACEBOOK LIVE ADS. TWITTER DIDN'T HIRE MTV'S HEAD OF ADVERTISING LIKE SNAP, THEY DIDN'T SIGN SWEETHEART DEALS WITH ALL THE MAJOR TV CHANNELS.

THESE BRANDS DON'T WANT COMPLEXITY, THEY WANT SIMPLICITY.

VIDEO ADVERTISING IS GREAT FOR BRANDS BECAUSE IT LETS THEM REPURPOSE THOSE 15/30S COMMERCIALS THAT ARE PRODUCED FOR TV IN A FRIENDLY ONLINE MODEL WITH MINIMAL EFFORT. THIS IS WHY YOUTUBE HAS BEEN SO SUCCESSFUL, AND WHY YOU HAVE SEEN A HUGE SHIFT IN FACEBOOK'S BUSINESS MODEL TOWARDS VIDEO.

VIDEO CPMS ARE ALSO WAY HIGHER THAN TRADITIONAL, BULLSHIT GOOGLE SEARCH ADS OR BANNER ADS, SO YOU CAN CHARGE MORE. ADVERTISING COMPANIES AND BRANDS ARE REALIZING THAT NOONE READS ANYMORE SO HAVING ADS WITH TEXT IS A LOSING PROPOSITION.

SNAPCHAT ALSO HAS LOCATION BASED 'FILTERS' OR STUPID FACES THAT COMPANIES CAN CREATE/BUY, AN ANALOGOUS IDEA TO GOOGLE ADWORDS IN THAT A PERSON WILL SEE THIS IF THEY ARE ACTIVELY USING THE PRODUCT IN A CERTAIN LOCATION. THIS PART OF THE BUSINESS IS TINY COMPARED TO VIDEO.

ADVERTISERS REALLY ONLY CARE ABOUT SCALE, AND AT THE CURRENT VALUATION IF SNAPCHAT DOES NOT REACH 300M++ DAUS, NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY INCREASE THEIR ARPU THEY ARE FUCKED. FACEBOOK MAKES APPROXIMATELY $20 PER USER.

THE MOMENT SNAPCHAT'S USER GROWTH STALLS (IT ALREADY HAS) ITS FUCKED. AND WITH THEIR FIRST EARNINGS REPORT'S PROOF, IT WILL PLUMMET.

chan
>>profitable
I am actually surprised George Soros hasn't thrown 10 million at the gook to buy this place yet.

Revenue 400 million. Company loses 500 million annually. Market cap is 28 billion. Seems legit.

>Some people care more about their legacy in this world than the amount of money they die with.
>"In this solid platinum mausoleum lies Saul Greedberg, the most savage, baby-blood drinking rich dickhead Jew to ever live."

>I am actually surprised George Soros hasn't thrown 10 million at the gook to buy this place yet.
Hiroshima is a "nip" or a "Jap", sir.

Daily Reminder Candy Crush IPO is a thing and will be the face of the collapse.

The US government spends trillions. Having influence on the youth politically is worth several billion. Then there is the millions made on trading fees. Then there is the chance of a breakthrough technology which can generate well Trillions and a new industry. Is it worth the gamble of 17 US dollars to own a stake in that when you are a bank or large institutional investor?

You think small and practical like a protestant you have to think like a globalist to see SC value. Even if the company never turns a dime in profit it can be used as a tool for other ventures that make a lot of money. Kinda like News papers never make money but they are still worth something even to (((them))).

>What are you doing with your life Sup Forums?

masturbating to cute anime girls

Lol...Jews jewing jews.
In 18months Sapchat will be dead.
>inb4 Vine
>Screencap this goyimpaitachi

>SNAPCHAT BELIEVES THAT IT CAN CHALLENGE ALPHABET AND FACEBOOK AND BECOME THE THIRD HORSEMAN THAT TWITTER HAS FAILED TO BECOME. TWITTER FAILED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SUCK ADVERTISER/BRAND DICK AND FAILED TO CREATE A MEDIA COMPANY. NOW THEY ARE SCRAMBLING TO CREATE A VALUE PROPOSITION TO SWAY AGENCIES TO INCREASE SPENDING, BUT INSTEAD BRANDS ARE JUST REJIGGERING THEIR BUDGETS OVER TO MORE INSTAGRAM ADS, OR SNAPCHAT ADS, OR EVEN FACEBOOK LIVE ADS. TWITTER DIDN'T HIRE MTV'S HEAD OF ADVERTISING LIKE SNAP, THEY DIDN'T SIGN SWEETHEART DEALS WITH ALL THE MAJOR TV CHANNELS.

okay first, leaf, all-caps? really?

But I dunno you kinda made good arguments for SC. They're video based(higher cpms as you say). and not completely retarded like twitter. They appeal much more to a wider demographic.

>Even if the company never turns a dime in profit it can be used as a tool for other ventures that make a lot of money.
Found the Jew. Tell us your tricky tricks. We already know usury.

>miranda-kerr
>kerr
>cur
It's one less social media alternative on the playing field. Monopoly of social data is likely their goal.

shorting like a muther yo

This is what he looks like.

And he's not even having sex with Miranda.

i dont give a shit about some faggots who made an app for women to destroy themselves with

on the day of the rope there will be something else snapping

Kek

>"In this solid platinum mausoleum lies Saul Greedberg, the most savage, baby-blood drinking rich dickhead Jew to ever live."

I mean, yeah, pyramids and that kinda shit. The majority of the time the size of your tomb doesn't mean shit for your legacy. I very much doubt jews spend that much on it as well. Is acquiring every schekel a more worthy pursuit than something else (if so, you might have a long nose).

The Einstein's of the world will be remembered far greater than the Rockefellers.

So they're only worth a couple million then? These retarded IPOs for apps and social media that are impossible monetize effectively are nearly tantamount tonfraud.

I'm helping develop drug delivery systems and microfluidic sensors for use in Alzheimer's treatment and rapid heart attack treatment (think an epipen but for heart attacks).

My family had very little growing up and I still found happiness just spending time with them and learning about the world. I envy the money he has because I know I'd be able to open a private lab with billions of dollars and do more robust research.

I'm studying engineering.

It's worth noting that these guys had an idea and worked towards making it happen. Don't let their age intimidate you. You all have the ability to make great things too. I believe in you

Stop trying to raise money for your mega-mosque

Coincidentally, I fuck around on the internet all day and I bet I could do that much more effectively if I had billions at my disposal.

>implying I'd need to do anything
Jihad Justin is well on his way to constructing a mega-mosque over all of Canada.

What type of engineering? I did an engineering degree 14 years ago, lol.

Goy we own the alt-right. Creating or owning your own opposition highly lucrative. A 10K donation to a hate group can generate 1M in donations to your group to fight hate. Drug dealers wish they could returns like that. That is how profitable that market is. Plus you get government muscle on your side for nothing.

Why have you not created false liberal groups goys is beyond us. That is how we know you are cattle you can't even think you just march from feeding ground to feeding ground.

I don't understand this post

Mechanical

I would honestly prefer my simple life in Australia than having to deal with all that bullshit.

>worth $5.5B
>raising 2 of another man's children

I bet Orlando Bloom is having a strong laugh right now.

It made me kek audibly. What was there not to get?

Faster ISPs, maids, chefs, masseues, could all make shitposting more easy.

Ah nice. I'm unemployable now due to assault charges.

Actually, according to the lawsuit, the third founder had the idea, he then shared it with Evan and Bobby.

However, the third founder allegedly wasn't working hard enough so Evan and Bobby changed all the passwords and cut him out.

He successfully sued for what was then a third of the company's value, about $137mil.

There are only so many of us who can come up with new ways for self-absorbed Millennials to post pictures of their tits online, man.

>implying Vietnamese know anything about economics.

>There are only so many of us who can come up with new ways for self-absorbed Millennials to post pictures of their tits online, man.

True that man, however, that should be taken into account in its valuation. millennial tits certainly have value and have augmented its growth substantially.

What other Social Media service can as readily provide you with the bare breasts of young women?

SCs valuation is definetly part pornographic. Yet more socially friendly than pornographic companies.

>known for my dick pic sexting app and my supermodel fiancée who I am unable/unwilling to fuck despite having to care for my wife's son.

He will be remembered for generations to come.

How does this even happen? What a cuck!

It's hard to believe this is even true. Could it be propaganda like, "Look billionaire (((Evan Spiegel))) is cuck you should be too." If not, our elites are seriously weak.

>Never been to drunk to fuck.
It's okay Mr. Lee. I understand the chinese are unable to properly process alcohol.

Fugg, man, I've been an online merchant (not the hook nosed type) for almost 20 years, and I can't even wrap my head around the fuckery going on for internet retail now these last few years, much less can I grasp the potential for billion-dollar monetization of Millennial tits.

I wish I did, but I'm neither technologically-inclined enough nor horny enough to figure that equation out. Best of luck to those who can, I'm just trying to hold my own business together in an era where those who actually warehouse and sell physical goods that are consumables are getting ass-raped trying to compete against the mega-corps.

Apparently he doesn't fuck Miranda for religious reasons. His Stanford emails tell a different story.

Also I'm a lot less Asian than you lol. I'm actually American...

That's still nothing to scoff at. But damn... all these tech development stories seem to have the common theme of betrayal. When I start my idea to bring down tinder, I'll have to watch out and try to get family involved.

myspace

You know what's cooler then 3 billion. 35 billion suck it zuckerburg.