6 ms·

I'm going to be devil's advocate here but the CEO (especially of a troubled company like Snap) needs to take the best decisions for the company and stretch solv

I'm going to be devil's advocate here but the CEO (especially of a troubled company like Snap) needs to take the best decisions for the company and stretch solvency and viability for as long as possible. Of course, it's unpopular to promote someone, then rescind that offer and hire someone else. But in this case, the tradeoff seems reasonable. Hiring a well connected, veteran exec who comes from a company known for its operational excellence seems like the right decision. It appears that this was a poor timing issue. Maybe the handling of the situation was unprofessional and I bet there are ways to avoid these fake start promotion situations, but I think at this stage you gotta play your cards. Either you save face and do the politically correct decision (promoting a good employee, but ultimately an employee with no new insights or inputs) or you take a risk for the company knowing that you're about to make a decision that could be decisive for the company's future but that may have an impact on the impressions people have about your decision-making abilities. Given that Snap is running out of cash and cred, I think it makes sense to do the latter. It also seems that Snap may be looking for a buyer pretty soon and some of their recent moves indicate that they are trying to create a story on why Snap would be a good an asset for Amazon.

harryh 8y ago
It's important to note that Kristen O’Hara was also an outsider who is a "well connected, veteran exec." She had only been with Snap for 2 months. Characterizing her as a "good employee, but ultimately an employee with no new insights or inputs" is probably not accurate.
- whoisjuan 8y ago
  True. But I think the contrast here is who is more capable of adding value to Snap. The Ex-Time Warner marketing executive or the Ex-Amazon Ad executive. Profile wise they are pretty similar but yet they come from very different industries and probably have very different operational philosophies. Also, 2 months is a very short time for everyone but Snap. In a 12 months runway, 2 months is 16% of the time you have before running out of cash.
  - harryh 8y ago
    I love it when people concede that a fact central to their line of reasoning is false, but argue that their conclusion is still true.
    - whoisjuan 8y ago
      I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but my core argument wasn't trying to say Jeremi Gorman is better than Kristen O' Hara for this job. I don't have enough information to factually check that. I was defending Spiegel's decision (hence my devil's advocate opener) and why something that seems wrong for the general public may be what's best for a company like Snap at this point.
      - EpicEng 8y ago
        >I was defending Spiegel's decision (hence my devil's advocate opener) and why something that seems wrong for the general public may be what's best for a company like Snap at this point. And the entire basis of your presumption was that O'Hara wasn't exactly what she is ("a well connected, veteran exec who comes from a company known for its operational excellence" who is also a new employee.) Even if you were right from the start, you're just absolving a CEO of poor decision making. He didn't just "make a decision", he publically promoted someone to an important role and soon after changed his mind. Not exactly grand leadership on display.
        whoisjuan 8y ago
        I don't think you have any facts to validate that either. I'm just going by their resumes. One is a former executive at Time Warner, the other is a former executive at Amazon. This is likely another vapid and factless analysis but it seems that Snap could benefit more from the latter. Either way my original point was that it's hard to understand decisions like this when the company's future is at stake.
        EpicEng 8y ago
steve19 8y ago
That's a charitable way to look at it. A less charitable way would be the CEO is shooting from the hip and doesn't have a clue what the company needs.
- superfrank 8y ago
  > A less charitable way would be the CEO is shooting from the hip and doesn't have a clue what the company needs. - He continued backing the redesign long after it was clear the public hated it - He continued to push spectacles and insist they were a "camera" company, long after the market showed there was no demand from it. - In the last 5 years he's gone from insisting that snap is a "social media company", to "a camera company", to "the fastest way for people to connect". In my mind, he seems like he's pretty out of touch with what the public wants from Snapchat and is just bouncing from one idea to another hoping to get lucky again. I feel like he was a college kid who built an app that he wanted, but as he's aged he no longer identifies with Snap's user base. He's trying to push his idea of what Snap should be (because that worked originally) as opposed to asking users what they want.
  - harryh 8y ago
    just bouncing from one idea to another hoping to get lucky again. Welcome to the world of social software! I'm not convinced that anyone really knows what people want in this market.
    - mbesto 8y ago
      Hey, but he's a product genius no? https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=evan+spiegel+%22product%22+genius&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiww72SvqzeAhVKiqwKHT94Az0Q5t4CMAB6BAgJEAc&biw=1253&bih=1307 https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=evan+spiegel+%22pro...
    - variable11 8y ago
      People want an easy way to text chat and share pictures/video without getting bombarded by ads or having their private lives harvested and sold off by soulless mercenary corporations. Not that hard to understand.
darkerside 8y ago
That's no excuse. If they needed a connected, veteran executive now, they also needed one when they decided to promote someone who didn't have those credentials. So this indicates poor leadership qualities in multiple ways. Not the least of which is treating a valued employee like garbage.
- sampl 8y ago
  Exactly. The issue isn't that he made a choice, it's that he made a different choice first--not too long ago--and made it public. Sure, walk back a commitment if it's the right thing to do--but your employees/investors will be right to ask why you made the commitment in the first place.
fossuser 8y ago
I think you're probably right, but I'd be very surprised if Snap survives - they've been outplayed by Facebook and Zuckerberg is a better CEO. If you're looking for a stock to short Snap seems like a good choice - I'd bet on failure in a few years or some sad acquisition on poor terms. The only other tech company I'm pretty confident will fail is Magic Leap, but unfortunately they're private so hard to bet against.
- seibelj 8y ago
  I’ve made a good amount of cash shorting SNAP, I can’t understand who is buying when they have provided guidance of decreasing DAU’s for at least one more quarter. I hope employees at SNAP are negotiating more stock or salary, they could do so much better at other firms.
  - jowiar 8y ago
    Yeah -- I bought some puts at 5 expiring in January for a nickel apiece in August... It was pretty obvious there was nothing there and would drop like a stone -- the question was when the market would wake up. I honestly don't understand what the longs are betting on here, either.
  - klodolph 8y ago
    Some of them are doing much better at other firms... from what I hear, leaving for SNAP and then coming back two years later at level N+2.
- mrep 8y ago
  Someone in my building has a magic leap and I got to try it yesterday and it was pretty impressive. We played angry birds and you could walk around the bird structure shooting birds at it and it perfectly tracked everything. Granted I haven't tried any other AR or VR device but combine that with some CAD software, google assistant, and some leap motion style hand tracking and you're now Tony Stark building iron man.
  - fossuser 8y ago
nwsm 8y ago
Sure, let's say this new decision is the actual right one to make. It took him only two days to realize his mistake. What could he realize in two days that he couldn't in the (hopefully) weeks it took him to make the initial decision? Either they weren't diligent enough in making the initial decision, or they didn't like how someone (or their stock price) reacted to the decision and turned back. Both are bad.

harryh 8y ago

It's important to note that Kristen O’Hara was also an outsider who is a "well connected, veteran exec." She had only been with Snap for 2 months. Characterizing her as a "good employee, but ultimately an employee with no new insights or inputs" is probably not accurate.

whoisjuan 8y ago
True. But I think the contrast here is who is more capable of adding value to Snap. The Ex-Time Warner marketing executive or the Ex-Amazon Ad executive. Profile wise they are pretty similar but yet they come from very different industries and probably have very different operational philosophies. Also, 2 months is a very short time for everyone but Snap. In a 12 months runway, 2 months is 16% of the time you have before running out of cash.
- harryh 8y ago
  I love it when people concede that a fact central to their line of reasoning is false, but argue that their conclusion is still true.
  - whoisjuan 8y ago
    I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not, but my core argument wasn't trying to say Jeremi Gorman is better than Kristen O' Hara for this job. I don't have enough information to factually check that. I was defending Spiegel's decision (hence my devil's advocate opener) and why something that seems wrong for the general public may be what's best for a company like Snap at this point.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      >I was defending Spiegel's decision (hence my devil's advocate opener) and why something that seems wrong for the general public may be what's best for a company like Snap at this point. And the entire basis of your presumption was that O'Hara wasn't exactly what she is ("a well connected, veteran exec who comes from a company known for its operational excellence" who is also a new employee.) Even if you were right from the start, you're just absolving a CEO of poor decision making. He didn't just "make a decision", he publically promoted someone to an important role and soon after changed his mind. Not exactly grand leadership on display.
      - whoisjuan 8y ago
        I don't think you have any facts to validate that either. I'm just going by their resumes. One is a former executive at Time Warner, the other is a former executive at Amazon. This is likely another vapid and factless analysis but it seems that Snap could benefit more from the latter. Either way my original point was that it's hard to understand decisions like this when the company's future is at stake.
        EpicEng 8y ago

steve19 8y ago

That's a charitable way to look at it. A less charitable way would be the CEO is shooting from the hip and doesn't have a clue what the company needs.

superfrank 8y ago
> A less charitable way would be the CEO is shooting from the hip and doesn't have a clue what the company needs. - He continued backing the redesign long after it was clear the public hated it - He continued to push spectacles and insist they were a "camera" company, long after the market showed there was no demand from it. - In the last 5 years he's gone from insisting that snap is a "social media company", to "a camera company", to "the fastest way for people to connect". In my mind, he seems like he's pretty out of touch with what the public wants from Snapchat and is just bouncing from one idea to another hoping to get lucky again. I feel like he was a college kid who built an app that he wanted, but as he's aged he no longer identifies with Snap's user base. He's trying to push his idea of what Snap should be (because that worked originally) as opposed to asking users what they want.
- harryh 8y ago
  just bouncing from one idea to another hoping to get lucky again. Welcome to the world of social software! I'm not convinced that anyone really knows what people want in this market.
  - mbesto 8y ago
    Hey, but he's a product genius no? https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=evan+spiegel+%22product%22+genius&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiww72SvqzeAhVKiqwKHT94Az0Q5t4CMAB6BAgJEAc&biw=1253&bih=1307 https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&q=evan+spiegel+%22pro...
  - variable11 8y ago
    People want an easy way to text chat and share pictures/video without getting bombarded by ads or having their private lives harvested and sold off by soulless mercenary corporations. Not that hard to understand.

darkerside 8y ago

That's no excuse. If they needed a connected, veteran executive now, they also needed one when they decided to promote someone who didn't have those credentials. So this indicates poor leadership qualities in multiple ways. Not the least of which is treating a valued employee like garbage.

sampl 8y ago
Exactly. The issue isn't that he made a choice, it's that he made a different choice first--not too long ago--and made it public. Sure, walk back a commitment if it's the right thing to do--but your employees/investors will be right to ask why you made the commitment in the first place.

fossuser 8y ago

I think you're probably right, but I'd be very surprised if Snap survives - they've been outplayed by Facebook and Zuckerberg is a better CEO. If you're looking for a stock to short Snap seems like a good choice - I'd bet on failure in a few years or some sad acquisition on poor terms. The only other tech company I'm pretty confident will fail is Magic Leap, but unfortunately they're private so hard to bet against.

seibelj 8y ago
I’ve made a good amount of cash shorting SNAP, I can’t understand who is buying when they have provided guidance of decreasing DAU’s for at least one more quarter. I hope employees at SNAP are negotiating more stock or salary, they could do so much better at other firms.
- jowiar 8y ago
  Yeah -- I bought some puts at 5 expiring in January for a nickel apiece in August... It was pretty obvious there was nothing there and would drop like a stone -- the question was when the market would wake up. I honestly don't understand what the longs are betting on here, either.
- klodolph 8y ago
  Some of them are doing much better at other firms... from what I hear, leaving for SNAP and then coming back two years later at level N+2.
mrep 8y ago
Someone in my building has a magic leap and I got to try it yesterday and it was pretty impressive. We played angry birds and you could walk around the bird structure shooting birds at it and it perfectly tracked everything. Granted I haven't tried any other AR or VR device but combine that with some CAD software, google assistant, and some leap motion style hand tracking and you're now Tony Stark building iron man.
- fossuser 8y ago

nwsm 8y ago

Sure, let's say this new decision is the actual right one to make. It took him only two days to realize his mistake. What could he realize in two days that he couldn't in the (hopefully) weeks it took him to make the initial decision? Either they weren't diligent enough in making the initial decision, or they didn't like how someone (or their stock price) reacted to the decision and turned back. Both are bad.