10 ms·

Facebook

144 points by CoachRufus87 13y ago

pearjuice 13y ago
Am I the only one upset with this? I don't use Facebook - haven't and never will - because I hate how I and all my data will become their product on registration. Sure, Whatsapp has its quirks being proprietary and all, but now, I am basically doomed. Whatsapp says they will stick to their core and stay independent, but I have 16 billion reasons to believe otherwise. The sad part is that due to Whatsapp, I can't escape my doom because EVERYONE I contact daily uses Whatsapp. I would basically kill myself socially if I were to delete Whatsapp. I really, really hope Whatsapp stays Whatsapp but knowing Facebook we are fked either way.
circlingthesun 13y ago
Thats unfortunate.
namenotrequired 13y ago
Glad to see nothing will change, I hope that will be true on the long run.
- csbrooks 13y ago
  Is it ever true, though, in these situations?
  - grinich 13y ago
    Instagram is pretty much the same.
- psbp 13y ago
  Except for any promise of privacy.
GuiA 13y ago
I ask, cause I'm not sure- do anybody make real companies anymore?
- jmduke 13y ago
  What's your definition of a real company which excludes WhatsApp?
  - jackbravo 13y ago
    One that generates revenue?
    - skj 13y ago
      They charge $1/year/user, though the first year is free. One year ago they had 200m users. That number has not shrunk.
      - nolok 13y ago
        There is a free year, and then it seems like "everyone" gets a free year renewal. I would not be surprised if 10% of their userbase or less had ever paid. Which is still a good number, but not the one you make it out to be.
    - michaeleloftis 13y ago
      Revenue is a part of it, but also remember that it's only a proportion of generated value. The fact that so many people use the app to communicate indicates that it's providing them with substantial value, even if the company chooses not to capture more of that value.
- gagaga 13y ago
  Having close to a half a billion MAU isn't a real company?
- return0 13y ago
  Yes, Whatsapp does.
monsterix 13y ago
That's splendid news! I firmly believe that it is consumer apps, and consumer apps alone, that can give blazing home runs like this one. Despite the risk, numerous deaths, blood and corpses all over the place. Somehow valley since last September had been running after enterprise junk but that's not where the gems lie (My opinion of course!). There is money in enterprise but no home run possible over there. Edit: I like the way the edited title of this thread: Facebook (whatsapp.com).
- k-mcgrady 13y ago
  It depends what you consider a 'home run'. I consider building a sustainable business that will generate revenue and create products for the next 10/20/30 years a home run. I would consider building an app, having no business model (admittedly Whatsapp app was generating revenue although I doubt it was much), and being lucky enough to get acquired by a company willing to pay stupid amounts of money to kill a competitor and keep you away from other competitors the furthest thing from a home run.
  - scg 13y ago
    "the furthest"? :) Really, that's "the furthest thing" from a home run that you could think of?
  - monsterix 13y ago
    Agreed. But a home run for most VCs would likely be 10X+ return stories than a revenue generating machine that would mature up in 10+ years.
  - shawabawa3 13y ago
    > admittedly Whatsapp app was generating revenue although I doubt it was much I imagine they made ~$100m last year (400m active users, I'm guessing 100m of which using for more than a year), which is almost guaranteed to go up. For a company with ~50 employees how is that not sustainable?
  - dualogy 13y ago
    > It depends what you consider a 'home run'. I consider building a sustainable business that will generate revenue and create products for the next 10/20/30 years a home run. 10/20/30 years? Look those aren't the days of Henry Ford or J.D.Rockefeller.. tech is changing ever-faster at an exponential rate. You wanna create products for 30 years, none of which will live on their own much longer than 3-4 years (if lucky/successful in their market) because everything is constantly changing? I agree: flipping a messenger toy to FB is a "lottery win", but "a sustainable business that will generate revenue" for 30 years, what is that supposed to be in today's environment? That's a bit of a pipe dream too, just the "nobler" one.
pcocko 13y ago
After this message they raise their glasses and make a toast
UVB-76 13y ago
Assuming this is an acquisition, it's a poor one. Facebook undoubtedly paid too much for this.
- s3r3nity 13y ago
  From Techcrunch: " In a staggering comparison, Facebook also notes that the messaging volume of WhatsApp approaches the SMS volume of the entire global telecom industry — and that it’s adding 1M users a day." It's a super fast growing messaging app, mostly used internationally, that is a legitimate competitor to Facebook; it's only a timeline/profile page away from being essentially another Facebook. Don't discount the power of messaging apps -- whether they be aimed towards younger folk (a la Snapchat) or aimed towards international audiences (a la Kakao Talk.) I think it's not an acquisition Facebook WANTED to do, but HAD to.
flashfabrixx 13y ago
Despide the fact that everybody got a strange feeling when reading the name "Facebook" in combination with WhatsApp: Congrats to the team of WhatsApp to build such a successful product in five years with a team of 32 engineers (~ $500 million/engineer). Reminder: They nearly replaced the SMS service worldwide. Let's hope that the words by Mark Zuckerberg will be the truth and WhatsApp will be kept as an independent product in the future.
- k-mcgrady 13y ago
  >> "a team of 32 engineers (~ $500 million/engineer)" Only if you consider the other employees worth/value to be $0.
  - rahij 13y ago
    An article mentions that Whatsapp spent $0 on user acquisition and marketing. If that's true, then yes, it's around $500 million/engineer.
    - jaredsohn 13y ago
      Even if the company had nonengineers, it doesn't affect the ratio between revenue and engineers. The statistic usually does not imply that engineering is solely responsible for the success. Further, it generally can be hard to determine what portion of revenue is due to engineering versus marketing/sales, since the functions work together in a dependent way to make money.
    - gagaga 13y ago
      Good luck creating an app used by so many without having a stellar support team.
- code_duck 13y ago
  Clearly this team has been quite successful! I can't agree say that they have almost replaced SMS, as many people communicate with me through SMS or iMessage. I have never used whatsapp nor has anybody a requested that I use it with them. As far as other messaging, everybody I know uses kik or Skype.
KevinAtHome 13y ago
Today I started using Threema. Secure, group chat, picture stuff, and privacy seems alright.
- hershel 13y ago
  If you really want secure , TextSecure is the best in that regard - according to crypto guys.
  - new_test 13y ago
    Telegam FTW!!!
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- elwell 13y ago
  I think that's pretty blatant plagiarism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7266768 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7266768
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
gz5 13y ago
~$40/user. Skype, second time, sold for ~$15/user. Time Warner just sold for ~$4/user. Good thing for FB bank account that "OTT messaging" is just a fad while the carriers get their acts together ; )
- jahewson 13y ago
  This purchase is large enough that the carriers might notice it but they will be completely unable to follow through on doing anything about it.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  Is it even possible to monetize the app to such extent? I tried to use it a few times but never managed to see any hard money potential inside.
  - dualogy 13y ago
    You "monetize an app like that" by selling it to FB or the stock market.
    - Diamons 13y ago
      Aka bubble
d99kris 13y ago
Relevant article Why Selling WhatsApp To Facebook Would Be The Biggest Mistake Of Jan Koum's And Brian Acton's Lives (2012): http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/12/03/why-selling-whatsapp-to-facebook-would-be-the-biggest-mistake-of-jan-koums-and-brian-actons-lives/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/12/03/why-selli...
- banachtarski 13y ago
  Well, it makes them billionaires instantly, so they have that going for them.
- debt 13y ago
  It took FB 10 years to get to where it is today. Is that a process that WhatsApp wants to go through? I mean the finality usually ends in either an acquisition or an IPO; having shareholders on your mind constantly seems pretty stressful. I suppose they could've stayed private and seen what's possible. Either way the Forbes website is visual chaos and I'm still nauseous and disoriented after reading that article.
  - stevelaz 13y ago
    Update for you! Hahaha, I love that you said that about Forbes.Com. Hate that site...
  - stevelaz 13y ago
    Update for you! Hahaha, I love that you said that about Forbes.Com. Hate that site...
- ruswick 13y ago
  Selling anything for billions of dollars has never been and never will be a mistake for anyone.
  - toomuchtodo 13y ago
    Unless money wasn't driving your exit. WhatsApp isn't Tesla or Spacex though.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
Looking at Whatsapp's legal info some notable info, nothing too surprising: * "You expressly acknowledge and agree that in order to provide the Service, WhatsApp may periodically access your contact list and/or address book on your mobile device [...] You hereby give your express consent to WhatsApp to access your contact list and/or address book for mobile phone numbers in order to provide and use the Service. We do not collect names, addresses or email addresses, just mobile phone numbers." * Section 3C concerning not hacking them and giving a list of tools you definitely can't use under the agreement. * "If you are under 16 years of age, you are not permitted to use the WhatsApp Service." * "If another user has your mobile phone number stored in their mobile phone address book or contact list, they will be able see your status information unless you have chosen to block such user." * "The WhatsApp Site and Service are hosted in the United States and are intended for and directed to users in the United States. If you are a user accessing the WhatsApp Site and Service from the European Union, Asia, or any other region [...] you are transferring your personal information to the United States and you expressly consent to that transfer and consent to be governed by California law for these purposes." * "In the event that WhatsApp is acquired by or merged with a third party entity, we reserve the right to transfer or assign the information we have collected from our users as part of such merger, acquisition, sale, or other change of control." [they go on to say that they may not be able to control use of information in cases which include "reorganization"] http://www.whatsapp.com/legal/ http://www.whatsapp.com/legal/ Reading between the lines it seems you can hack them with fiddler (or the like) and that the legal info is saying "your info is definitely being monitored by USA governmental groups"?
tomphoolery 13y ago
Ah yes, this reminds me of that old joke... > Why did Facebook buy WhatsApp? Because Snapchat isn't for sale.
- dpiers 13y ago
  Or because the daily messaging volume through Facebook-owned services now surpasses global SMS volume.
  - alixr 13y ago
    Was WhatsApp really that successful? I can't imagine it caught on with many young adults or older who have no trouble paying for SMS given the convenience. Is their demographic comprised of kids?
    - acmecorps 13y ago
      Not in US, but it's absolutely big in Asia. http://gigaom.com/2013/11/26/study-facebook-messenger-still-reigns-in-the-u-s-but-other-countries-look-to-whatsapp/ http://gigaom.com/2013/11/26/study-facebook-messenger-still-...
habosa 13y ago
The fact about WhatsApp that blew me away is that they have 72% DAILY active users. I can't think of any other service with that kind of engagement. Even Facebook must be impressed at how often people come back to WhatsApp.
- qq66 13y ago
  Facebook is around 60% DAU I think.
- ulfw 13y ago
  It's just the nature of the service. It's a text messaging app. When you get a text you open it. I bet gmail has a similar active user ratio.
  - habosa 13y ago
    Of course, but it's amazing that a start up with such basic features has gotten to the point where you can compare it to texting or email as far as engagement.
    - ulfw 13y ago
      What do you mean? IT IS TEXTING! It's texting via a TCP connection and with the help of Apple's and Google's push messaging servers instead of going through the SMS channel of a GSM network. As a product it's the exact same as SMS/MMS. Just the technical implementation is different.
      - habosa 13y ago
        Well that different technical implementation made it much more attractive to millions of people worldwide. Sounds like a win. Also I don't think they use Apple and Google's push servers since this also runs on J2ME devices, Windows phone, Symbian, etc.
        ulfw 13y ago
fhd2 13y ago
So much about not selling ads and collecting personal data then I suppose? I actually thought they meant it. [1] Now I'm really excited about heml.is. [1] http://blog.whatsapp.com/index.php/2012/06/why-we-dont-sell-ads/ http://blog.whatsapp.com/index.php/2012/06/why-we-dont-sell-...
bigje54 13y ago
Viber has 200M users as of May 7, 2013. Rakuten purchased them for $900M on Feb. 14, 2014. Very similar apps. Although WhatsApp does ask for $0.99 after 1 year usage. Not sure that is worth the $18.1B difference in price?
- loceng 13y ago
  WhatsApp is dominant player, and so they can leverage a higher ask. Not sure it's going to save Facebook in the end though.
nighthawk24 13y ago
Aand there goes my 3 years advance payment for service to waste.. Just Deleted WhatsApp account
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
dredmorbius 13y ago
Interesting to note that WhatsApp had started circulating some overly broad and ill-formed "DMCA takedown" notices a few days back: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-02-12-WhatsApp.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-02-12-WhatsA... By this email, please accept this formal notice and takedown request for the following content on the GitHub site. I am starting with these requests to ensure you will take action on our request. We will have follow-on requests, as the list of infringing content below is not exhaustive. Specifically: The following URLs use of the WhatsApp name and logo, use of other WhatsApp content, unauthorized use of WhatsApp APIs, software, and/or services, and provision of software and services related to WhatsApp infringes on WhatsApp's copyrights and trademarks, including those related to WhatsApp's name and logo. WhatsApp's trademarks are registered in the United States and countries throughout the world. Note that: • Trademarks aren't subject to the DMCA. • APIs aren't copyrightable. • TOU violations aren't subject to the DMCA. Given that the letter isn't clearly formatted as a DMCA takedown (though it uses some sample language) the effect is ... curious.
soup10 13y ago
Here’s what will change for you, our users: nothing. Here's what will change for us: http://i.imgur.com/3Px9d9K.jpg http://i.imgur.com/3Px9d9K.jpg
- yaeger 13y ago
  That's what I don't get. If nothing will change for the users, then why did Facebook acquire them? Why did they bother? Just so that they can run statistics and include WhatsApps numbers in there as well because they now belong to the same organisation?
  - ryanSrich 13y ago
    Diversification. Aquire as many relevant products as you can to stay, well, relevant. If Facebook.com is losing users then it makes sense for them to use the money they have now to buy a company that's gaining users.
    - eevilspock 13y ago
      Then why WhatsApp over thousands of other companies they could have acquired? No, there has to be another reason and there is no way WhatsApp is not going to change because of this. Their saying it won't change is like the like a corporate VP stepping down "to spend more time with his family".
heifetz 13y ago
19bn, 16bn of which is inflated Facebook stock. Zuckerberg knows what he is doing, he's playing the AOL tactic, better use that stock to make some acquisitions before it tanks.
CmonDev 13y ago
"Almost five years ago we started WhatsApp with a simple mission: building a cool product used globally by everybody. Nothing else mattered to us. Today we are announcing a partnership with Facebook that will allow us to continue on that simple mission." Should be followed with this then: "This is why we are not going to keep any money to ourselves and invest in our infrastructure and employees." Hate CEO bullshit, just be frank.
flomm 13y ago
What could be the purpose of this aquisition if nothing changes? I suspect WhatsApp won't change immediately but after some time they do small changes towards a facebook integration.
fiatjaf 13y ago
"Almost five years ago we started WhatsApp with a simple mission: building a cool product used globally by everybody. Nothing else mattered to us." That's probably a lie. That wasn't the first thing they thought before starting WhatsApp.
- fiatjaf 13y ago
  This blog post is pure bullshit. They built a new version of ICQ, luckly people joined and network effects made them big -- not their competence or the quality of the product. They shouldn't be proud of their work.

144 points by CoachRufus87 13y ago

Am I the only one upset with this? I don't use Facebook - haven't and never will - because I hate how I and all my data will become their product on registration. Sure, Whatsapp has its quirks being proprietary and all, but now, I am basically doomed. Whatsapp says they will stick to their core and stay independent, but I have 16 billion reasons to believe otherwise. The sad part is that due to Whatsapp, I can't escape my doom because EVERYONE I contact daily uses Whatsapp. I would basically kill myself socially if I were to delete Whatsapp. I really, really hope Whatsapp stays Whatsapp but knowing Facebook we are fked either way.

circlingthesun 13y ago

Thats unfortunate.

namenotrequired 13y ago

Glad to see nothing will change, I hope that will be true on the long run.

csbrooks 13y ago
Is it ever true, though, in these situations?
- grinich 13y ago
  Instagram is pretty much the same.
psbp 13y ago
Except for any promise of privacy.

GuiA 13y ago

I ask, cause I'm not sure- do anybody make real companies anymore?

jmduke 13y ago
What's your definition of a real company which excludes WhatsApp?
- jackbravo 13y ago
  One that generates revenue?
  - skj 13y ago
    They charge $1/year/user, though the first year is free. One year ago they had 200m users. That number has not shrunk.
    - nolok 13y ago
      There is a free year, and then it seems like "everyone" gets a free year renewal. I would not be surprised if 10% of their userbase or less had ever paid. Which is still a good number, but not the one you make it out to be.
  - michaeleloftis 13y ago
    Revenue is a part of it, but also remember that it's only a proportion of generated value. The fact that so many people use the app to communicate indicates that it's providing them with substantial value, even if the company chooses not to capture more of that value.
gagaga 13y ago
Having close to a half a billion MAU isn't a real company?
return0 13y ago
Yes, Whatsapp does.

monsterix 13y ago

That's splendid news! I firmly believe that it is consumer apps, and consumer apps alone, that can give blazing home runs like this one. Despite the risk, numerous deaths, blood and corpses all over the place. Somehow valley since last September had been running after enterprise junk but that's not where the gems lie (My opinion of course!). There is money in enterprise but no home run possible over there. Edit: I like the way the edited title of this thread: Facebook (whatsapp.com).

k-mcgrady 13y ago
It depends what you consider a 'home run'. I consider building a sustainable business that will generate revenue and create products for the next 10/20/30 years a home run. I would consider building an app, having no business model (admittedly Whatsapp app was generating revenue although I doubt it was much), and being lucky enough to get acquired by a company willing to pay stupid amounts of money to kill a competitor and keep you away from other competitors the furthest thing from a home run.
- scg 13y ago
  "the furthest"? :) Really, that's "the furthest thing" from a home run that you could think of?
- monsterix 13y ago
  Agreed. But a home run for most VCs would likely be 10X+ return stories than a revenue generating machine that would mature up in 10+ years.
- shawabawa3 13y ago
  > admittedly Whatsapp app was generating revenue although I doubt it was much I imagine they made ~$100m last year (400m active users, I'm guessing 100m of which using for more than a year), which is almost guaranteed to go up. For a company with ~50 employees how is that not sustainable?
- dualogy 13y ago
  > It depends what you consider a 'home run'. I consider building a sustainable business that will generate revenue and create products for the next 10/20/30 years a home run. 10/20/30 years? Look those aren't the days of Henry Ford or J.D.Rockefeller.. tech is changing ever-faster at an exponential rate. You wanna create products for 30 years, none of which will live on their own much longer than 3-4 years (if lucky/successful in their market) because everything is constantly changing? I agree: flipping a messenger toy to FB is a "lottery win", but "a sustainable business that will generate revenue" for 30 years, what is that supposed to be in today's environment? That's a bit of a pipe dream too, just the "nobler" one.

pcocko 13y ago

After this message they raise their glasses and make a toast

UVB-76 13y ago

Assuming this is an acquisition, it's a poor one. Facebook undoubtedly paid too much for this.

s3r3nity 13y ago
From Techcrunch: " In a staggering comparison, Facebook also notes that the messaging volume of WhatsApp approaches the SMS volume of the entire global telecom industry — and that it’s adding 1M users a day." It's a super fast growing messaging app, mostly used internationally, that is a legitimate competitor to Facebook; it's only a timeline/profile page away from being essentially another Facebook. Don't discount the power of messaging apps -- whether they be aimed towards younger folk (a la Snapchat) or aimed towards international audiences (a la Kakao Talk.) I think it's not an acquisition Facebook WANTED to do, but HAD to.

flashfabrixx 13y ago

Despide the fact that everybody got a strange feeling when reading the name "Facebook" in combination with WhatsApp: Congrats to the team of WhatsApp to build such a successful product in five years with a team of 32 engineers (~ $500 million/engineer). Reminder: They nearly replaced the SMS service worldwide. Let's hope that the words by Mark Zuckerberg will be the truth and WhatsApp will be kept as an independent product in the future.

k-mcgrady 13y ago
>> "a team of 32 engineers (~ $500 million/engineer)" Only if you consider the other employees worth/value to be $0.
- rahij 13y ago
  An article mentions that Whatsapp spent $0 on user acquisition and marketing. If that's true, then yes, it's around $500 million/engineer.
  - jaredsohn 13y ago
    Even if the company had nonengineers, it doesn't affect the ratio between revenue and engineers. The statistic usually does not imply that engineering is solely responsible for the success. Further, it generally can be hard to determine what portion of revenue is due to engineering versus marketing/sales, since the functions work together in a dependent way to make money.
  - gagaga 13y ago
    Good luck creating an app used by so many without having a stellar support team.
code_duck 13y ago
Clearly this team has been quite successful! I can't agree say that they have almost replaced SMS, as many people communicate with me through SMS or iMessage. I have never used whatsapp nor has anybody a requested that I use it with them. As far as other messaging, everybody I know uses kik or Skype.

KevinAtHome 13y ago

Today I started using Threema. Secure, group chat, picture stuff, and privacy seems alright.

hershel 13y ago
If you really want secure , TextSecure is the best in that regard - according to crypto guys.
- new_test 13y ago
  Telegam FTW!!!

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

elwell 13y ago
I think that's pretty blatant plagiarism. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7266768 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7266768
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

gz5 13y ago

~$40/user. Skype, second time, sold for ~$15/user. Time Warner just sold for ~$4/user. Good thing for FB bank account that "OTT messaging" is just a fad while the carriers get their acts together ; )

jahewson 13y ago
This purchase is large enough that the carriers might notice it but they will be completely unable to follow through on doing anything about it.
venomsnake 13y ago
Is it even possible to monetize the app to such extent? I tried to use it a few times but never managed to see any hard money potential inside.
- dualogy 13y ago
  You "monetize an app like that" by selling it to FB or the stock market.
  - Diamons 13y ago
    Aka bubble

d99kris 13y ago

Relevant article Why Selling WhatsApp To Facebook Would Be The Biggest Mistake Of Jan Koum's And Brian Acton's Lives (2012): http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/12/03/why-selling-whatsapp-to-facebook-would-be-the-biggest-mistake-of-jan-koums-and-brian-actons-lives/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/12/03/why-selli...

banachtarski 13y ago
Well, it makes them billionaires instantly, so they have that going for them.
debt 13y ago
It took FB 10 years to get to where it is today. Is that a process that WhatsApp wants to go through? I mean the finality usually ends in either an acquisition or an IPO; having shareholders on your mind constantly seems pretty stressful. I suppose they could've stayed private and seen what's possible. Either way the Forbes website is visual chaos and I'm still nauseous and disoriented after reading that article.
- stevelaz 13y ago
  Update for you! Hahaha, I love that you said that about Forbes.Com. Hate that site...
- stevelaz 13y ago
  Update for you! Hahaha, I love that you said that about Forbes.Com. Hate that site...
ruswick 13y ago
Selling anything for billions of dollars has never been and never will be a mistake for anyone.
- toomuchtodo 13y ago
  Unless money wasn't driving your exit. WhatsApp isn't Tesla or Spacex though.

pbhjpbhj 13y ago

Looking at Whatsapp's legal info some notable info, nothing too surprising: * "You expressly acknowledge and agree that in order to provide the Service, WhatsApp may periodically access your contact list and/or address book on your mobile device [...] You hereby give your express consent to WhatsApp to access your contact list and/or address book for mobile phone numbers in order to provide and use the Service. We do not collect names, addresses or email addresses, just mobile phone numbers." * Section 3C concerning not hacking them and giving a list of tools you definitely can't use under the agreement. * "If you are under 16 years of age, you are not permitted to use the WhatsApp Service." * "If another user has your mobile phone number stored in their mobile phone address book or contact list, they will be able see your status information unless you have chosen to block such user." * "The WhatsApp Site and Service are hosted in the United States and are intended for and directed to users in the United States. If you are a user accessing the WhatsApp Site and Service from the European Union, Asia, or any other region [...] you are transferring your personal information to the United States and you expressly consent to that transfer and consent to be governed by California law for these purposes." * "In the event that WhatsApp is acquired by or merged with a third party entity, we reserve the right to transfer or assign the information we have collected from our users as part of such merger, acquisition, sale, or other change of control." [they go on to say that they may not be able to control use of information in cases which include "reorganization"] http://www.whatsapp.com/legal/ http://www.whatsapp.com/legal/ Reading between the lines it seems you can hack them with fiddler (or the like) and that the legal info is saying "your info is definitely being monitored by USA governmental groups"?

tomphoolery 13y ago

Ah yes, this reminds me of that old joke... > Why did Facebook buy WhatsApp? Because Snapchat isn't for sale.

dpiers 13y ago
Or because the daily messaging volume through Facebook-owned services now surpasses global SMS volume.
- alixr 13y ago
  Was WhatsApp really that successful? I can't imagine it caught on with many young adults or older who have no trouble paying for SMS given the convenience. Is their demographic comprised of kids?
  - acmecorps 13y ago
    Not in US, but it's absolutely big in Asia. http://gigaom.com/2013/11/26/study-facebook-messenger-still-reigns-in-the-u-s-but-other-countries-look-to-whatsapp/ http://gigaom.com/2013/11/26/study-facebook-messenger-still-...

habosa 13y ago

The fact about WhatsApp that blew me away is that they have 72% DAILY active users. I can't think of any other service with that kind of engagement. Even Facebook must be impressed at how often people come back to WhatsApp.

qq66 13y ago
Facebook is around 60% DAU I think.
ulfw 13y ago
It's just the nature of the service. It's a text messaging app. When you get a text you open it. I bet gmail has a similar active user ratio.
- habosa 13y ago
  Of course, but it's amazing that a start up with such basic features has gotten to the point where you can compare it to texting or email as far as engagement.
  - ulfw 13y ago
    What do you mean? IT IS TEXTING! It's texting via a TCP connection and with the help of Apple's and Google's push messaging servers instead of going through the SMS channel of a GSM network. As a product it's the exact same as SMS/MMS. Just the technical implementation is different.
    - habosa 13y ago
      Well that different technical implementation made it much more attractive to millions of people worldwide. Sounds like a win. Also I don't think they use Apple and Google's push servers since this also runs on J2ME devices, Windows phone, Symbian, etc.
      - ulfw 13y ago

fhd2 13y ago

So much about not selling ads and collecting personal data then I suppose? I actually thought they meant it. [1] Now I'm really excited about heml.is. [1] http://blog.whatsapp.com/index.php/2012/06/why-we-dont-sell-ads/ http://blog.whatsapp.com/index.php/2012/06/why-we-dont-sell-...

bigje54 13y ago

Viber has 200M users as of May 7, 2013. Rakuten purchased them for $900M on Feb. 14, 2014. Very similar apps. Although WhatsApp does ask for $0.99 after 1 year usage. Not sure that is worth the $18.1B difference in price?

loceng 13y ago
WhatsApp is dominant player, and so they can leverage a higher ask. Not sure it's going to save Facebook in the end though.

nighthawk24 13y ago

Aand there goes my 3 years advance payment for service to waste.. Just Deleted WhatsApp account

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

dredmorbius 13y ago

Interesting to note that WhatsApp had started circulating some overly broad and ill-formed "DMCA takedown" notices a few days back: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-02-12-WhatsApp.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2014-02-12-WhatsA... By this email, please accept this formal notice and takedown request for the following content on the GitHub site. I am starting with these requests to ensure you will take action on our request. We will have follow-on requests, as the list of infringing content below is not exhaustive. Specifically: The following URLs use of the WhatsApp name and logo, use of other WhatsApp content, unauthorized use of WhatsApp APIs, software, and/or services, and provision of software and services related to WhatsApp infringes on WhatsApp's copyrights and trademarks, including those related to WhatsApp's name and logo. WhatsApp's trademarks are registered in the United States and countries throughout the world. Note that: • Trademarks aren't subject to the DMCA. • APIs aren't copyrightable. • TOU violations aren't subject to the DMCA. Given that the letter isn't clearly formatted as a DMCA takedown (though it uses some sample language) the effect is ... curious.

soup10 13y ago

Here’s what will change for you, our users: nothing. Here's what will change for us: http://i.imgur.com/3Px9d9K.jpg http://i.imgur.com/3Px9d9K.jpg

yaeger 13y ago
That's what I don't get. If nothing will change for the users, then why did Facebook acquire them? Why did they bother? Just so that they can run statistics and include WhatsApps numbers in there as well because they now belong to the same organisation?
- ryanSrich 13y ago
  Diversification. Aquire as many relevant products as you can to stay, well, relevant. If Facebook.com is losing users then it makes sense for them to use the money they have now to buy a company that's gaining users.
  - eevilspock 13y ago
    Then why WhatsApp over thousands of other companies they could have acquired? No, there has to be another reason and there is no way WhatsApp is not going to change because of this. Their saying it won't change is like the like a corporate VP stepping down "to spend more time with his family".

heifetz 13y ago

19bn, 16bn of which is inflated Facebook stock. Zuckerberg knows what he is doing, he's playing the AOL tactic, better use that stock to make some acquisitions before it tanks.

CmonDev 13y ago

"Almost five years ago we started WhatsApp with a simple mission: building a cool product used globally by everybody. Nothing else mattered to us. Today we are announcing a partnership with Facebook that will allow us to continue on that simple mission." Should be followed with this then: "This is why we are not going to keep any money to ourselves and invest in our infrastructure and employees." Hate CEO bullshit, just be frank.

flomm 13y ago

What could be the purpose of this aquisition if nothing changes? I suspect WhatsApp won't change immediately but after some time they do small changes towards a facebook integration.

fiatjaf 13y ago

"Almost five years ago we started WhatsApp with a simple mission: building a cool product used globally by everybody. Nothing else mattered to us." That's probably a lie. That wasn't the first thing they thought before starting WhatsApp.

fiatjaf 13y ago
This blog post is pure bullshit. They built a new version of ICQ, luckly people joined and network effects made them big -- not their competence or the quality of the product. They shouldn't be proud of their work.