Slashdot Mirror
Why Snapchat and Its Ilk Face a Revenue Conundrum
Nerval's Lobster writes "Snapchat managed to attract a lot of buzz in 2013—perhaps more than any other app on the market—and it's easy to see why: in these paranoid times, with the NSA allegedly sniffing around the world's collective inbox, and lots of software on the market designed to snoop into people's lives, it's comforting to have an app that'll vaporize your messages within seconds of their opening. Snapchat's executives see the startup's future as so bright, in fact, that they reportedly turned down a $3 billion buyout from Facebook. But whether Snapchat eventually accepts a buyout offer, or tries to parlay its popularity into some sort of IPO, it faces a rather unique problem: how do you make money off a free app that near-instantly vaporizes all content? Snapchat could emulate enterprise-centric vaporizing-message firms such as Silent Circle and start charging for subscriptions, but that would probably kill the service; a multitude of free rivals would likely spring up, with the express purpose of stealing irate customers away. More likely, Snapchat will probably launch some sort of display ad system, similar to what Facebook and Twitter have now—but given how it doesn't store user information on its servers, it'll probably be hard to monetize its users as extensively as those social networks. With that in mind, Snapchat might be left with two options going forward—either expand its services in a radical new (and more profitable) direction, or sell to a Tech Big Fish for a whole lot of money."
... should have taken the offered cash and start a new venture, producing more in long term value.
Why the obsession with money? Seriously.
Why is it, that unless somebody's making fat bank off a thing, the thing is considered to not be worth doing?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
"how do you make money off a free app that near-instantly vaporizes all content?"
The annual payment you're getting from the NSA to make sure they're permanently on the cc list?
-Styopa
Really, who cares if they can make money or not? That wasn't the whole point of Snapchat. Hell, it's not the point of 99% of tech companies these days. The point is to be bought by somebody else, not to make profit. Making profit is hard. Convincing some deep-pocketed sucker to buy you out is much easier.
I don't respond to AC's.
TFA answers its own question. You go IPO or sell the company to some other sucker for billions, then you are set up for life and can do what the hell you like. Making money is someone else's probably, your only goal is to look valuable because you have x billion cattle, sorry users, that someone might one day figure out how to milk.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It's a precurser to a future stock market, where buyers invest their money, the corporation's stock skyrockets, then crashes, and the money disappears without a trace.
Gently reply
How is the content exchanged on Snapchat any more ephemeral ("vaporized") than a phone call? Or isn't it? Just because it's "vaporized" from your perspective doesn't mean it wasn't captured *somewhere*.
Why is it, that unless somebody's making fat bank off a thing, the thing is considered to not be worth doing?
If you are not making money, you can't pay for the infrastructure, help, taxes (like property taxes that you have to pay regardless of your profitability), and other expenses of running the firm - let alone paying yourself so you can pay for rent, food, healthcare, student loans, etc ....
As far as them not taking the 3 billion, that's because they haven't planned and their hubris in thinking that, some how, they can make more on their own.
So, Snapchat's wild success is from people paranoid of the NSA who use it to send messages, even though multiple stories have appeared about how Snapchat messages can be saved without the sender's knowledge, and Snapchat's own website lists conditions under which messages will be preserved. Riiiiight.
Even assuming it doesn't store images (which it does, see above), to use the application, you connect with people as in any other social networking application. This is definitely "user information," and this metadata (some might even call it data) has value.
I tweeted about a snapchat of myself playing farmville. Fame and fortune are sure to follow.
Because people that use Snapchat are people who care about privacy
Please. The majority of users are using it because it's a fad.
Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
The question is not "How can a site make money?", but "how do I prevent a nice site to be bought by an evil company?"
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Why the obsession with money? Seriously.
Because money is important for reasons that should be self evident and having more of it can make your life a lot easier.
Why is it, that unless somebody's making fat bank off a thing, the thing is considered to not be worth doing?
Because the amount of money you can charge for something is a pretty useful proxy for how much it is valued by society once you take scarcity (real or artificial) into account. Furthermore if people are willing to pay a lot for something that means there are potential opportunities to earn a living providing that something. Since we all have to earn a living it is probably in our interest to pay attention to what is likely to be profitable and what is not.
It's simply DRM. The analog hole still exists, and it could probably be trivially bypassed with a root app, like VNC. That's before even touching their super-secure client. The app itself isn't special. Their user base was apparently worth 3 billion dollars. Once FB invests sufficient money into developing and marketing their own version, Snapshat will be worth peanuts.
I Once FB invests sufficient money into developing and marketing their own version, Snapshat will be worth peanuts.
I've heard the internal code name for it is CrotchBook.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.