3 ms·
Their finances look horrible; worse than Twitter. Unlike Twitter, however, they make almost 0 Gross Profit (not even counting admin expenses and R&D). It looks
by jondubois 10y ago
Their finances look horrible; worse than Twitter. Unlike Twitter, however, they make almost 0 Gross Profit (not even counting admin expenses and R&D). It looks like they're counting entirely on growth but the revenue numbers still look very small. Twitter's revenue is $2 billion+, Facebook is $27 billion+. Snap's $400 million looks measly by comparison especially when you consider the expenses incurred.
- iaw 10y agoTheir growth figures look really bad relative to Facebook at the same stage.
- adventured 10y agoIt should, they're not the next Facebook. No social network is going to be. Facebook managed their growth rates, in a mostly open field, while not having to compete with another social network quasi-monopoly with 1.2 billion daily actives.
- 2_listerine_pls 10y agoWho even compares Facebook with Snap? gooby pls
- dxbydt 10y ago> Twitter's revenue is $2 billion+, Facebook is $27 billion+. Snap's $400 million looks measly Apples to apples etc... TWTR revenue 665M in 2013 (the year they went public) TWTR revenue 316M in 2012 (the year before) FB rev 5.09B in 2012 (the year it went public) FB rev 3.7B in 2011 (the year before) SNAP rev ??? in 2017 (the year it went public) SNAP rev 400M in 2016 (the year before)