3 ms·

Except both companies had deep pockets in this scenario.

• underwater 7y ago
  Facebook was further along than Snapchat, but there was still a 10x disparity in headcount and market cap. This was before Facebook had IPO'd. Google had around 1,000 engineers dedicated to Google+, plus the entire company had KPIs based on the success of the project. Facebook had less than 1,000 engineers in total.
• skinnymuch 7y ago
  Facebook was nowhere near where it is today. It doesn’t even make money the same way with the majority of revenue and profits coming from mobile, with IG being a bigger and bigger factor. And it’s much more international (and monetizing international) now. Google was the giant when they tried Google+.
  • monkeydreams 7y ago
    Before google+ launched Facebook had over 750 million users. It was hardly a small fish. In either case, though, using market supremecy to crush competition should not be rewarded.
    • skinnymuch 7y ago
      During that time period FB’s growth was meteoric and unprecedented. That’s the only reason Google likely took so long as to launch when FB is at 800M users. Because at beginning of decade they were at half that. Go back to beginning of 2009 and they are close to a third from beginning of decade. They weren’t small in terms of users. But they were small in that just a few years prior, their user amounts were a fraction of what they were during Google+‘s launch. With Friendster, Mysapce, and all the me too social networks losing, there was no way to know for sure Facebook would win out and last as a huge company in the early 00s. In early 00s, their revenue and profits hadn’t caught up to user growth either. The mobile explosion hadn’t fully happened yet. As well as Instagram now being a key part of their growth and solid part of their revenue and profit.