5 ms·

How the HELL did Everpix die? No, seriously. Everpix DOMINATED WhatsApp on every possible metric: social networks/sharing, user commitment, revenue, advertisin

How the HELL did Everpix die? No, seriously. Everpix DOMINATED WhatsApp on every possible metric: social networks/sharing, user commitment, revenue, advertising information, and long-term potential. Anyone can (and will) switch instant messenger networks on a whim. There's literally no barrier to keep me from telling friends to contact me on Hangouts from now on. A photo site tells you where people go, what they do, who they hang out with, how they spend their money, and also requires a huge commitment from users since it's a burden to re-upload photo libraries to other sites. Plus they enjoyed a steady revenue stream of $50/year or whatever, AND they could rely on the diminishing cost of storage and bandwidth over time. To say nothing that Facebook has no photo library feature beyond selected individual uploads (which yield relatively little information about location, habits, friends, etc). They really could have used Everpix. (Or Apple could have finally obtained a usable web service.) But Facebook already has a messenger application. Hell, they have several depending on how you count their properties. What the hell does WhatsApp add to their portfolio, beyond a crappy name and a whimsically unattached user base? I'm just baffled at this point. I guess $20b for Snapchat will be tomorrow's acquisition. Then $50b for AIM, why not.

mmanfrin 13y ago
430mil of network-affect attached users is not 'whimsically unattached user base'.
- nilkn 13y ago
  230 million of those users didn't exist nine months ago. Why are you so sure they'll still be there in another nine months?
  - zhaodaxiong 13y ago
    Why not saying: another 230 million may be added in the next nine months... If you know qq or wechat, you will understand IM has serious market value...
    - objclxt 13y ago
      You've kind of illustrated the argument against you - I do know qq and wechat. What's to stop wechat from growing at the expense of WhatsApp?
- gobbluth 13y ago
  Of course they're unattached. It's just another instant messenger. Or are people still loyal to ICQ, AIM, MSN Messenger...? (Even worse, WhatsApp relies on teenagers. How many social circles endure beyond high school? Do you still IM people you knew back then... or even as recently as two years ago?) Maybe adults will fall back on the best messenger based on technical merit (probably Hangouts?), but WhatsApp is neither sophisticated nor particularly appealing for the long term. I'll put down money that it'll be forgotten within the decade. What the hell was Facebook thinking?
  - bsder 13y ago
    > What the hell was Facebook thinking? Existential threat combined with huge non-US userbase. What happens if Google buys WhatsApp? Or if Microsoft buys them? Facebook has saturated the US market and is, in fact, losing people. I suspect Europe is close if not already there. So, the battle has shifted to other countries.
- JetSpiegel 13y ago
  How many are already using Facebook? Almost all!
gamblor956 13y ago
You're comparing apples and oranges. Everpix is an instagram competitor--it is a photo sharing app--and should be compared to instagram. BTW, in case you haven't noticed--Facebook bought instagram last year, and even before that it allow users to attach meta data (location, etc.) to their photo uploads. Whatsapp is a text messaging app, and should be compared to iMessage, Google Talk, Skype, and SMS. In that regards, its clear why WhatsApp succeeded--it was the default messaging app in dozens of countries. The price is baffling, sure, but the reason that Whatsapp survived and Everpix did not is pretty clear. Whatsapp scaled, and Everpix did not. Text messages take up a few bytes; pictures take up a few megabytes. They could probably fit multiple users' entire messaging histories in the space that a single photo took up. Bandwidth costs--also a fraction of Everpix's. Rent and other fixed costs--definitely a fraction of Everpixs, which chose to situate itself in one of the most expensive locations in the world for a business with minimal revenue.
nly 13y ago
> How the HELL did Everpix die? Dropbox? It's a place to store photos. Who cares really?
rgbrenner 13y ago
No, seriously. Everpix DOMINATED WhatsApp on every possible metric: ... revenue WhatsApp has a few hundred million people paying $1/year Everpix had 250k in revenue, total over the company's entire existence.

mmanfrin 13y ago

430mil of network-affect attached users is not 'whimsically unattached user base'.

nilkn 13y ago
230 million of those users didn't exist nine months ago. Why are you so sure they'll still be there in another nine months?
- zhaodaxiong 13y ago
  Why not saying: another 230 million may be added in the next nine months... If you know qq or wechat, you will understand IM has serious market value...
  - objclxt 13y ago
    You've kind of illustrated the argument against you - I do know qq and wechat. What's to stop wechat from growing at the expense of WhatsApp?
gobbluth 13y ago
Of course they're unattached. It's just another instant messenger. Or are people still loyal to ICQ, AIM, MSN Messenger...? (Even worse, WhatsApp relies on teenagers. How many social circles endure beyond high school? Do you still IM people you knew back then... or even as recently as two years ago?) Maybe adults will fall back on the best messenger based on technical merit (probably Hangouts?), but WhatsApp is neither sophisticated nor particularly appealing for the long term. I'll put down money that it'll be forgotten within the decade. What the hell was Facebook thinking?
- bsder 13y ago
  > What the hell was Facebook thinking? Existential threat combined with huge non-US userbase. What happens if Google buys WhatsApp? Or if Microsoft buys them? Facebook has saturated the US market and is, in fact, losing people. I suspect Europe is close if not already there. So, the battle has shifted to other countries.
JetSpiegel 13y ago
How many are already using Facebook? Almost all!

gamblor956 13y ago

You're comparing apples and oranges. Everpix is an instagram competitor--it is a photo sharing app--and should be compared to instagram. BTW, in case you haven't noticed--Facebook bought instagram last year, and even before that it allow users to attach meta data (location, etc.) to their photo uploads. Whatsapp is a text messaging app, and should be compared to iMessage, Google Talk, Skype, and SMS. In that regards, its clear why WhatsApp succeeded--it was the default messaging app in dozens of countries. The price is baffling, sure, but the reason that Whatsapp survived and Everpix did not is pretty clear. Whatsapp scaled, and Everpix did not. Text messages take up a few bytes; pictures take up a few megabytes. They could probably fit multiple users' entire messaging histories in the space that a single photo took up. Bandwidth costs--also a fraction of Everpix's. Rent and other fixed costs--definitely a fraction of Everpixs, which chose to situate itself in one of the most expensive locations in the world for a business with minimal revenue.

nly 13y ago

> How the HELL did Everpix die? Dropbox? It's a place to store photos. Who cares really?

rgbrenner 13y ago

No, seriously. Everpix DOMINATED WhatsApp on every possible metric: ... revenue WhatsApp has a few hundred million people paying $1/year Everpix had 250k in revenue, total over the company's entire existence.