I've never used snapchat either and if you don't mind I have a couple of questions: 1. How long does the image last? 2. Can you take a "screen shot" on your phone and capture the image? I see the appeal but I've not really been in a position to use it. As for the 3billion, well... that's just craziness. I think it's a good rule of thumb that if someone offers you $3bb and you don't take it, you're going to regret it some day.
1. I used it for a week or so because I was curious how it works. As far as I remember you can configure it to your preference between like 3 and 10 seconds. So you have a range you pick you want the receiving end to be able to look at it. 2. Yes you can, but the other person gets a notification about that. If your phone is rooted though, there are maaaany ways of capturing that photo unnoticed. But the vast majority of the users probably don't take screens of the pics, at least not without the other person knowing. Edit: Holy balls I'm tired, I didn't see that there are multiple answers already, lol
No worries, thanks for the response all: eightbitsamurai, T-Dog. 10 seconds is faster than I thought. I was thinking a minute or two. I like that its so fleeting. In a way, this could force people more in to the present moment, forcing them to really absorb what they're taking in. My guess is that most of what they're taking in isn't all that substantive, but the opportunity for it to be exists.
You set the image to last anywhere between one and ten seconds. And yes, you can take a screen shot of the image but the person who sent it will get a notification saying that it was screenshot. I think the main appeal is just for nudes, really. I've never used it in any way that resembles an in-person conversation. I check it sort of absent mindedly at this point...people send pictures of them doing usually trivial stuff and I occasionally respond with pictures of me doing the same. I don't think you're missing much.
I think it depends on the people using it. Meanwhile, I have. In fact, it's the primary/basic/pretty much only way I stay in contact with my TN cousins. We've had longer conversations and we just share snippets of each other's days as well. Yeah.I think the main appeal is just for nudes, really.
I've never used it in any way that resembles an in-person conversation.
people send pictures of them doing usually trivial stuff
Yeah that's one point I forgot to put down - I understand lots of things about Snapchat, now. But I don't understand anything about Snapchat's creators for dropping such an amount of money. Even if it Snapchat ends up being revolutionary, what if it isn't? 3B with the right amount of careful planning could sustain my entire family and extended family for generations.
It's interesting that you wrote about and ended with "value". I have not used it, mostly because when I heard about it last year, my 16 year old niece was the one using it. She of course, gave me that teenager look. That one I used to shoot at people so often. The one that goes, "Ugh. You are old." Anyway, value is interesting. Now, I have just said that I don't use the thing or even know much about it, but the demographic seems to be primarily teenagers and some people in their 20's (correct me if I'm wrong). What's more appealing to that demographic than giving the finger to The Man (or whatever the fuck they call that concept now)? This is pure speculation, but might it be possible, given the ephemeral nature of what the app does and apps in general, that the creators are trying to create greater value for their product? Yeah, if I were offered 3 billion I would take it in an instant.
To me, the thing about turning down 3 billion is, it's not money you ever had in the first place, so you can't miss it if you turn it down. I assume the creators had some reason for turning the money down and they might regret it later, but - and I guess I'm going to sound naive - I don't find turning down 3 billion that big of a deal if you have what you consider good reasons for doing it. Especially if you never got in for the money in the first place and the creators of Snapchat didn't. I guess it could be regarded as a return on time investment, considering I don't think they make money on the app now. There's no advertising and it's free and no one gives you money just because people are using your app. (As far as I understand it.) It depends on what I was offered 3bn for. If I turned it down because maintaining creative control was worth it to me then I would not be upset about turning it down at all. I guess my point is that not having that 3bn does not negatively impact their lives. Having the 3bn could positively impact their lives, assuming they (the Snapchat team) were also responsible, hired money managers, etc. But it could also be dangerous if you're not smart about the money.
My guess: Snapchat's VC structure gives relatively little to the founders (who are currently in control of the company) and their financial position is better in possession of the IP than after the sale of the IP. It makes sense. Facebook has been flailing about lately, throwing cash at anything they see that might preserve their marketshare. So $3b is their "safe" offer, rather than their "pain point" offer. I'd feel dumb passing up on $3b unless I suspected there was $6b on the table.
I don't think they're idiots. If we all think they're idiots, they know something we don't. A finite window? Sure. Then again, how old is Dropbox? six years? Apple offered them "nine digits" in 2009 and by 2011 they were making $250m in revenue PER YEAR. Right now, they might be making a billion a year, they might not. So. If SnapChat figures they could be making $1b a year by 2016, taking $3b from Facebook is a fool's bet. Personally, I don't see SnapChat making $1b a year by the time the sun goes out, but IPOs don't care. Twitter will make about $40m this year but Wall Street values the company at eighteen fucking billion dollars. Amazon, as mentioned, has never really made money at all but has a market valuation of $165 BILLION.