Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Overeager Investors Seeking Snap Buy Snap Interactive Instead (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the weird-story-of-the-day dept.

Stephen Shankland, writing for CNET: Investors eager to cash in on the initial public offering of Snap, makers of the popular Snapchat app, have instead been buying shares of Snap Interactive, maker of the Paltalk video chat app and FirstMet dating app. Snap Interactive stock, traded over the counter and not on major exchanges like Nasdaq, has slid below $6 per share in recent years, according to Google Finance. On Monday, after Snap detailed its IPO plans, though, its stock surged to $15 and remained between $8 and $10 per share Wednesday.

55 comments

  1. Oh snap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What else?

  2. Overeager = dumbass by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >> Overeager Investors Seeking X Buy Y Instead

    "Overeager" is the nicest euphemism for "complete dumbass" I've ever heard. I can't wait to use this in the office.

    1. Re:Overeager = dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      especially when you consider that they filed for an IPO, meaning their stock isn't available yet; if you don't understand that, but are still buying stocks, you need to get a broker.

    2. Re:Overeager = dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The entire system runs on asymmetrical intelligence.

    3. Re:Overeager = dumbass by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the investors who first made the mistake have potentially doubled their money though?

      There's probably a lesson there about the financial industry and possibly world as a whole there...

    4. Re:Overeager = dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have an overeager president in the oval office.

    5. Re:Overeager = dumbass by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Only if they can sell the shares they bought. Every sale requires a buyer, and if all the buying to get it up to $15 was really just mistakes, it's likely no one will buy them off you for that amount.

      --
      Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
  3. Retarded headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Overeager Investors Seeking Snap Buy Snap Interactive Instead"

    Absolute gibberish. Start capitalizing only the words that should be capitalized.

    1. Re:Retarded headline... by TWX · · Score: 1

      Headlines historically have been written with capitalized first letters for all of the words.

      You're right that it's gibberish, but that gibberish could have been corrected by writing a better sentence.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Retarded headline... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Absolute gibberish. Start capitalizing only the words that should be capitalized.

      Headline capitalization has been a special case in the English language for centuries, so what the editors did here is appropriate, but even if you were to capitalize it normally it would still be "Overeager investors seeking Snap buy Snap Interactive instead", which doesn't do much to help you understand the situation.

    3. Re:Retarded headline... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Headlines historically have been written with capitalized first letters for all of the words.

      Except for works like is, the, and, or, of, etc., unless they are the first word of the sentence.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    4. Re:Retarded headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different AC, but it helps a little. With "buy" using a lowercase "b", it better indicates that "Snap" and "Snap Interactive" are two different entities. Not as good as the quotation marks I just used (which I've no frigging idea if that is a grammatically-acceptable use), but better than it is now.

    5. Re:Retarded headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everybody here is autistic.

    6. Re:Retarded headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Yet another AC; no relation to thread start.)

      There are those who have seen the light and abandoned this principle a long time ago:

      The convention followed by many British publishers (including scientific publishers, like Nature, magazines, like The Economist and New Scientist, and newspapers, like The Guardian and The Times) and also U.S. newspapers, is sentence-style capitalisation in headlines, i.e. capitalisation follows the same rules that apply for sentences. This convention is usually called sentence case. It may also be applied to publication titles, especially in bibliographic references and library catalogues. An example of a global publisher whose English-language house style prescribes sentence-case titles and headings is the International Organization for Standardization.

      From Letter case > Headings and publication titles.

      There is no coherent reasoning apart from "it has always been done like that" (which is not even true) that work in favor of Slashdot-style title casing.

      Slashdot headlines are a lot closer to newspaper headlines than book titles, so in my mind they should abandon this practice and never look back.

    7. Re:Retarded headline... by Calydor · · Score: 1

      Nope, just you.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    8. Re:Retarded headline... by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      With "buy" using a lowercase "b", it better indicates that "Snap" and "Snap Interactive" are two different entities. Not as good as the quotation marks I just used (which I've no frigging idea if that is a grammatically-acceptable use), but better than it is now.

      Officially grammatical or not, putting the quotes around the two company names is how I'd have done it. It nicely clarifies the boundaries of the multiple-word names, making the meaning of the sentence obvious.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    9. Re:Retarded headline... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Which of those words do you see in the headline?

      Pro-tip: the answer is none.

  4. There's a saying for that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A fool and his money are soon parted.

    1. Re:There's a saying for that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A poor fool is still a fool.

    2. Re:There's a saying for that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A poor fool is still a fool.

      Yes, but he's not as dangerous as a rich fool.

  5. Not for the first time by Sun · · Score: 1

    When Check Point Software Technologies (a company that produces Internet security products, such as FireWall-1) had its own IPO, some investor gladly bought Checkpoint Systems's stock (at the time, producing store exit security systems for preventing theft). Shachar

    1. Re:Not for the first time by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder if anyone's done intentional stock market "typosquatting" yet. Anyone know if it's illegal? I'm, uh, asking for a friend...

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:Not for the first time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly legal. When you register your new company, it has to be named sufficiently different from other companies. Apparently, "Snap" and "Snap Interactive" are sufficiently different.

      So go ahead, look for high-profile companies that has not yet had an IPO, and typosquat. Keep the first word of the name the same, add a second word that seem vaguely relevant. "Interactive" certainly goes well with "Snap".

    3. Re:Not for the first time by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly legal. When you register your new company, it has to be named sufficiently different from other companies. Apparently, "Snap" and "Snap Interactive" are sufficiently different.

      So go ahead, look for high-profile companies that has not yet had an IPO, and typosquat. Keep the first word of the name the same, add a second word that seem vaguely relevant. "Interactive" certainly goes well with "Snap".

      Well, it has to be "sufficiently" different that you can avoid a trademark dispute. "Snap" and "Snap Interactive" likely never heard of each other (until now) and thus had really no reason to dispute the other's listing.

      Not that it matters anyways. You don't buy stock on a company's name, you buy it based on their ticker symbol, which has to be unique when combined with the exchange it uses (which is why they are prefixed like NYSE and such).

  6. We seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    When Nintendo brought out their first Mario game for the iPhone, investors bided up the stock price until they found it was a different company partially owned by Nintendo that did the game. Nice run up for those who were ready to sell.

    1. Re:We seen this before... by Calydor · · Score: 1

      I think you mean when Pokemon GO came out.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:We seen this before... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      I think you mean when Pokemon GO came out.

      I stand corrected. Thank you.

  7. Re:Being able to read is a good thing by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

    And do just as much in due diligence.

  8. That's news? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Piranhas going into a feeding frenzy as soon as they smell blood. That's noteworthy now?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. The real question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which of the two options is worse? The overhyped snap they wanted to buy (going down sooner or later like all of them), or the one that has already partially gone, but still somewhat exists, but likely valued without much hype-inflated price.

    My bet is on equally bad, just on different time-scales.
    (unless facebook buys them, but even they are going to go away at one point or another.)

  10. Snap is already old and busted by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    All the teens and 20 somethings I know have migrated from Snapchat to Whatsapp. Snap has jumped the shark already.

    I hear Hillary Clinton likes Snapchat though, the messages you type automatically disappear! Maybe they can cater to the over 60 crowd.

    1. Re:Snap is already old and busted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, that's a Facebook property.

      I hate to see them own everything...

    2. Re:Snap is already old and busted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the teens and 20 somethings I know have migrated from Snapchat to Whatsapp.

      Many apps that are popular with teens / 20-somethings tend to go out of style just in time for that app's developer to have an IPO. It seems that the "features" added (or removed) in apps that are designed to attract investors also drive away that particular segment of the user base. Funny that.

      I hear Hillary Clinton likes Snapchat though

      Teens and 20-somethings are also attuned to knowing when jokes have gone stale.

      Maybe they can cater to the over 60 crowd.

      The over 60 crowd loves mortgaging the future of 20-somethings. Evolving into something that Millenials don't want in the name of profits is the most important selling point for 60-something investors.

    3. Re:Snap is already old and busted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many apps that are popular with teens / 20-somethings tend to go out of style just in time for that app's developer to have an IPO. It seems that the "features" added (or removed) in apps that are designed to attract investors also drive away that particular segment of the user base. Funny that.

      You are so right. And the thing they add that both drives away youngsters and also attract investors, is "ads". Simple as that.

      Ads are everywhere so they think that's ok, but it is incredibly annoying when they show up in a place where there didn't use to be any. Ads kill the "cool" factor of anything. Using something with mandatory ads is like hanging out with a gang of beggars. But there is inertia. It takes some time for the masses to jump ship. In that time some ad money rolls in, letting investors see the company's "potential". Investors buy, while users migrate to "some other cool thing".

  11. More to the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Obviously these people are idiots, but has anyone actually liked at Snapchat IPO fillings, fob what I've read get have a huge deficit and no real mechanism for revenue generation and they say they are a $25 B company, I think the execs are cashing out and that it will fail as Twitter has.

  12. Reminds me of Twitter's IPO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twitter's stock symbol is TWTR.

    There is another company called "Tweeter Home Entertainment Group" that trades under TWTRQ. Lots of people bought TWTRQ by mistake:

    http://www.theverge.com/2013/1...

  13. Selling opportunity? by Walter+White · · Score: 1

    Seems like a good opportunity to short sell Snap Interactive.

    Just don't short Snap by mistake. ;)

    1. Re:Selling opportunity? by magarity · · Score: 1

      In theory you can short an OTC but in practice it costs as much as just buying it and hoping.

  14. misread that as... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    ... maker of the Paltalk video chat app and FistMe dating app

    oh my.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:misread that as... by TroII · · Score: 1

      Many moons ago I mis-dialed some vendor's 800 number, in the office, on speaker. A recording came on that started out "Thanks for calling 1-800-2-FIST-ME" and got nasty really quickly. Haven't thought about that in years, thanks for bringing that laugh back!

      --
      "If there was a gay Afro-Puertorican Linux distribution, I'd give it a try" ~lucm
    2. Re: misread that as... by mmell · · Score: 1

      Sounds like misdialing IBM's server support number. If you dial with the 877 area code, you get IBM server support. If you dial with the 800 area code, you get something vastly more entertaining (if you have a credit card, it costs $4.99/minute).

  15. Is this another case of by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    'A fool and his money are soon parted"?

    1. Re:Is this another case of by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Are you referring to Snap or Snap Interactive? It's hard to tell in this case.

  16. Remember Twitter and Tweeter? by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 2

    A foolish investor and his money are soon parted.

  17. Pokemon Go all over again... by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    I hate these "investors" with a passion, and stories like this and the deal last year with Pokemon Go further back up my point. We've got these companies that are run by "Shareholders" and yet, as we can see here, it seems like shareholders have no fucking clue what it is they're buying... they just nab shit up that sounds related to something that's gone popular. 0 research done. I'm pretty comfortable to likening investors to cancer.

  18. Re:Being able to read is a good thing by Dishevel · · Score: 1

    Hmm.
    I wonder. What percentage of people who bought the wrong Snap stock voted Trump?
    My guess is that the number is lower than you would like.

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  19. Hell yeah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time to short that bad boy!

  20. Re:Being able to read is a good thing by murdocj · · Score: 1

    I suspect it's pretty high... it's the same mentality... "sounds like easy money I'll just jump in... oops".

  21. Re:Being able to read is a good thing by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1, Troll

    I wonder. What percentage of people who bought the wrong Snap stock voted Trump? My guess is that the number is lower than you would like.

    Trump voters are poor and ignorant. Trump students — those who bought the books and/or went to Trump University — are poor and gullible.

  22. In other news... by lactose99 · · Score: 1

    Many investors are dumb

    --
    Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    1. Re:In other news... by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      And that they've probably put more thought into this stock purchase than they did voting.

  23. Programmers are more autistic than gen pop by tepples · · Score: 1

    True, but software engineering employment and autism spectrum disorder are still correlated.

  24. Oh Snap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh Snap!

  25. How did the fool get his money in the first place? by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

    That's the real question.

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user