Slashdot Mirror
SnapChat Turns Down $3 Billion Offer From Facebook
Dr Herbert West writes about a reported $3 billion offer from Facebook that Snapchat CEO Evan Spiegel turned down. "Snapchat, a rapidly growing messaging service, recently spurned an all-cash acquisition offer from Facebook for close to $3 billion or more, according to people briefed on the matter. The offer, and rebuff, came as Snapchat is being wooed by other investors and potential acquirers. Chinese e-commerce giant Tencent Holdings had offered to lead an investment that would value two-year-old Snapchat at $4 billion. Evan Spiegel, Snapchat’s 23-year-old co-founder and CEO, will not likely consider an acquisition or an investment at least until early next year, the people briefed on the matter said. They said Spiegel is hoping Snapchat’s numbers – of users and messages – will grow enough by then to justify an even larger valuation, the people said."
~nt~
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Zynga, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, Skype, and the list keeps on growing.
Investors know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Snapchat specializes in ephemeral mobile messages, including text or photographs, that disappear after a few seconds. The service has not generated any revenue, but is especially popular among teenagers and young adults, who use the app to send messages to friends.
- I like the use of word 'ephemeral' to describe all three, the services that this company offers, the supposed customer base for it and the actual value of the company.
I see that it was just offered 3,000,000,000 USD and declined it, which while might be height of arrogance, does not surprise me. I would not be surprised to find out that tomorrow this very company gets picked up for 5,000,000,000 USD. I also would not be surprised to find out 2 years from now that it still is not generating any revenues and 3 years from now that its valuation is down to a few million ephemeral dollars (which by that time could be ephemeral all on their own).
Pretty much can't be surprised about anything in this age of rampant inflation and destruction of actual productive economy by the largest government and government manipulation of money in history.
You can't handle the truth.
Snapchat my ass, your billions mean nothing to me Zuckerberg. Nobody likes you, even if you could buy them with your windfall.
They must really hate Zuckerberg.
the minute they monetize Snapchat with ads kids will stop using it
I know that if I was offered 3 billion dollars for some fade chat program, I'd take it! Even if it was from arch-evil FaceBook. Of course, maybe they think they can get more. And more to the point, that 3 bil is not going just to one person, it's being spread out over the shareholders and vulture capitalists, as well as the founders (if they are still around). But still!
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
When someone offers you $3B for a company with no revenues and a product that could be duplicated in a week, take the money and RUN.
FB must be brain-dead to offer that much, and Snapchat is insane to turn it down.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Snapchat, a rapidly growing messaging service, recently spurned an all-cash acquisition offer from Facebook for close to $3 billion or more, according to people with a vested interest in the company's valuation.
.. an honest company that says "sorry, we're aren't worth so much"
I really don't understand how the "new" tech companies command such a high price point for such worthless products. Somehow Twitter is worth more than Redhat, FB is worth more than MS, and Zynga is worth more than EA? I get that there is value in novelty, and that some of the older companies may not be innovating the way they used to, but how is it possible that something trivial like Snapchat is worth more than a couple mil?
real papers, or the onion.. only time will tell..
mark zukerberg, asshole that he is, will rage over this and get arrested by the fbi after paying a group of hackers to "kill snapchat and make it as worthless as myspace". an effort that will largely succeed in its original goal; however, a long, drawn-out legal battle will result in huge settlement costing zukerberg and facebook even more than that three-billion offer.
captcha: weeping
awww, poor marky.
they want their bubble back as your offer sucked.
WTF has happened to the world. how the fuck can a chat service be worth 3 billion. You could equip every being in Africa with a generator, gas and the tools to create a new life with that much money,
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Snapchat valued is more than $3 billion as many users have smartphones. It was a wise decision by Spiegel. So why he will sell snapchat for ONLY $3 billion if he knew that the company value is more than that and getting valuable in the future.
If they turned down $3 billion, they eventually will learn that it was a really stupid mistake.
They could be replaced tomorrow by the next new fad thing. Their business model is a fucking joke...
Someone offers you 3 billion for an easily replaceable not unique app.. YOU FUCKING TAKE IT!
The greed made them stupid.
Images you can't forget but can't see after 30 seconds.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Never heard of SnapChat before
I've heard of it because my children are using it
It's basking in it's 15-minute worth of glory
If that guy isn't selling now, I don't think he will have a lot of time left before someone deflate that 3Billion price tag
Do SnapChat own a patent for the whole "self destructing message" thing?
FB have been trying to make their service THE ONLY way to communicate with friends. Wouldn't suprise me that FB might think its worth that much just to incorporate another hook for kids to compete with bigger competitors like Twitter going forward.
In this scenario, the brand SnapChat would be turfed and their IP used.
The average guy will never earn that kind of money (with a legal job that is). Next year, he missed it and crashed and burned ?
I've got better things to do tonight than die.
Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PointCast_(dotcom)
Reminds of the time when Yahoo turned down $47.5B from Microsoft in 2008. They have regretted it since.
At its height in January 1997, News Corporation made an offer of $450 million to purchase the company. However, the offer was withdrawn in March ... James Murdoch said it was due to PointCast's inaction
[A failed IPO and half a dozen aborted purchase offers later]
Instead, they sold out for about $7 million in May 1999 to Launchpad Technologies, Inc., a San Diego company founded and backed by Idealab, and the PointCast network was shut down the next year.
Taking this numbers for reference, is Snapchat even worth ~$45M it'll probably end up selling for?
Google reportedly offered Groupon $6B and was turned down; the company's probably worth about $6 by now.
Facebook offered SnapChat $3B? As long as it's in cash, not Facebook stock, there's only one right thing to do, which is to take the money and run. (Or take the money and stick around, if that's the deal, but take the money. Do not play Go, Do not pass up $3B.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
They must really hate Zuckerberg.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
. to flood SnapChat with $3 Billion to get them out of the market and under their growing conglomeration. Believe it or not, these guys might be onto something that will knee cap Facebook, and they know it.
What saddens me is not that they refused because they want to stay in control of their own company and product, but because they're holding out for a higher offer.
Apparently that's the only reason you'd need to run a company: get noticed for a buyout.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
If it really is true that Facebook offered them this much money (this is by no means certain, it could just be an attempt to inflate valuation) and they actually turned it down, it could well be that they feared that a due dillegence may cause Facebook to turn away, something which would hurt their floatation if they decided to do an IPO.
If your company isn't worth nearly as much as you like to present to the outside world, you don't really want close scrutiny.
some years ago, there was a video chat thing that let you connect with random people and chat via video.
a large cash amount was offered and they turned it down.
then it got filled with guys showing their junk to everyone/anyone.
now nobody can even remember its name.
Personally, I don't see the value of SnapChat other than the large and increasing young user base it has. According to Evan Spiegal (SnapChat), the software is on a quarter of all UK smartphones (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24925932). From my understanding, the software's main purpose is to allow a user to send a photo or video to someone else which then gets deleted immediately after viewing leaving no trace. A nice idea, but it is a false sense of security - the 'no trace' feature can not be guaranteed due to software that can intercept these pictures or videos or even another device recording what is displayed on screen. I would guess that the NSA are already 'backing-up' these pictures for anti-terrorism analysis.
Idiots. SnapChat for rejecting, and Facebook for offering.
reminds me of chatroulette
If Snapchat has any value at all (given how poor their software seems to be), it's that they are not part of Facebook or Google.
Of course, what this is really about is that Facebook is afraid that people will start communicating using some other platform, so they are trying to buy up and kill any potential competitor.
ephemeral dick pictures?
jaysus ... we're doomed.
I'm also pretty sure you could buy a number of companies with actual tangible assets and much more interesting IP for a lot less than 3 billion dollars, too.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
If FB controls another chat service the NSA would love all of that info they would recieve from them. Personally I don't care because I don't really use the FB service, but I would like FB to continue to spend their money in huge lump sums like this help bleed them so death.
But wait, why make billions when you can make.... millions?? bwahahahahhaa~
... Believe it or not, these guys might be onto something that will knee cap Facebook...
Snapchat is onto something. So was Instagram. Facebook's problem is that they are Facebook, you know, that place where a lot of OLD people hang out. Kids are moving on and FB wants to follow them. Maybe FB has the cash to buy out every new social media competitor but I doubt it. And Snapchat thinks they can get more than 3 billion. Funny old world, innit?
Seriously, an ALL cash offer ... and you turned it down? You're an idiot. You're product isn't special or even that unique. Self deleting images that don't actually self delete? Come on.
With 3 billion in cash, they could have started over and had 10 years to beat Facebook at its own game, which is trivial since the Facebooks first move would have been to end the deletion part or just shut them down completely on purchase.
I totally understand not wanting to sell out, but if your price for something like SnapChat is higher than 3bn, you're just an idiot who's principals are cutting off his nose to spite his face. You might have made a stand, but it was a stupid stand to make and could have been far more beneficial to its users had they made the stand another day and walked off with the cash today.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
I don't understand : why would anyone buy snapchat ? Isn't the whole purpose of SnapChat that they don't keep any data ? And since they don't how can you monetize the service ? Apart from ads inside the chat which would lead to a rapid decline in usage and ultimately the end of this (quite nice) fad.
I mean I suppose SnapChat keeps metadata about users that could be used for targeted advertising, but i don't see why facebook would need yet another way to get partial data about people whose entire life is already documented on their servers.
A nearly worthless no-revenue software company gets a $3 billion offer? Sounds like the 1990's again.
I need to have a look at dumping all my tech stocks, hopefully _before_ the crash this time.
So $3 billion offer for a website/app, some paintings sell for $142 million, and people moaned about India spending $75 million on sending a rocket to fucking Mars. What the fuck is wrong with some people.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Now we can stalk/bully each other without leaving any evidence!
Hurrah for snapchat!
Now, where's my perimeter blacklist...
This reminds of a line in the movie, "Entrapment".
In this case, the line would be: What can you buy with $6.68 Billion that you can't buy with $6 Billion. It was dumb for Groupon not to sell out. Just as it was dumb for the Snapchat guys not to sell out.
When you're in billion dollar territory, you've made it. You can spend the rest of your life trying to grow a $3 Billion company into a $10 Billion company, but the odds and history are greatly stacked against you. You can invest and grow that money into the same target amount, all while spending your time on other pursuits. How much innovation is left in Snapchat? How much more work is there to do with it? It's a simple, single-purpose app that does one thing very well and that's what makes it successful. Once you start tacking on features, you start losing customers and momentum. It probably reached 80-85% of its utility right out of the gate.
Take the money and go invent something else. Or buy a basketball team. Or help bring an end to disease in a developing corner of the world. But don't waste your time and talents trying to milk one good idea for a few more bucks.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
Good. Hopefully Facebook and Google will have more competition, this time from someone that doesn't give a crap what you ate for lunch 3 wednesdays ago.
Varius articles have said snapchat image files may not be erased, but just hidden from the file system. (I have not verified this myself.)
SnapChat owners must have missed some of life's basic money lessons.
1. A fool and his money are soon parted... (They had a sucker ready to give away lots of money!)
2. "Opportunity knocks but once", (however, when you hear that knock answer the fucken door!)
3. Open your wallets, did you have a extra billion or three? If not see item 2 above.
4. And finally, WTF is wrong with those guys? Isn't three billion not enough for life-time pizza and beer money?
Listen up SnapChat owners... stop being dumb and go kiss ass and beg for that deal again.
Three billion dollars is trully more fucken money than you can ever imagin spending in several life-times!
... if I was in his position, I'd take the money and run even if there was a possibility of (more)... the possibility of the bubble bursting,,,, and the company losing 90% of its value is a real possibility.
Exactly! What's the utility of more than $3 billion? How much more could you do with say $6 billion, than you could do with 3? (A dick waving, mine-is-bigger-than-yours, display?) Why risk the bimbo-populated-island that you are offered? Take your big dick and enjoy it instead of risking it all with additional penis enlargement operations.
These companies does not have to make money, in fact, the faster it burns cash, the merrier. The last bubble was because of high valuation of companies associated with the word "i"nternet. This time around, it is about association with the word "s"ocial.
Obviously, I don't mean Snapchat is the same as Digg, but rather that they are making the same mistake as Digg. After all, Digg did turn down $200 million from Google and was eventually sold for only $500k only 4 years later.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
There is nothing that special about Snap Chat and ways around it to defeat the purpose are coming out. 3-4 Billion is a nice take for a 23 year old CEO. I think they might be letting greed blind them to the opportunity before them.
Most won't, because it no longer exists. They sold when offered a ridiculous amount. Sold to Yahoo in 1999 for $5.6 Billion. Out of its employees, over 100 were millionaires and two of the founders, Mark Cuban and Todd Wagner, became billionaires.
15 years from now, no one will know Snapchat. Whether or not the founders are rich will be up to them. From the looks of it... they won't be.
SnapChat is shiny. Girls like it. It's worth what people are willing to pay for it. Why... it's... GOLD.
There's no way it can bubb.... umm.... hey, let me get back to you.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Who's going to believe a talking head? Get a job in a sideshow.
It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
Dear Evan:
Don't be a stupid douchebag. Take the 3 billion dollars and run.
The sad, sorry but valid truth of the matter: Chinese money is better than US money. They are more generous. The term sheets are less burdensome. It's all round a better deal for start-ups. We have Chinese money now after spending several years pitching to US VC, Angels and other source. It was the easiest pitch we'd ever done and they asked all the right questions that actually meant anything for our product and industry. US finance is utterly clueless when it comes to technology.