5 ms·

Compared to recent other aquisitions, 1 billion somehow seems like a bargain. Twitch has clear potential to play an important role in the future in TV and enter

Compared to recent other aquisitions, 1 billion somehow seems like a bargain. Twitch has clear potential to play an important role in the future in TV and entertainment. Compare that to i.e. Snapchat...

joosters 12y ago
$1 billion but all in cash. Sensible sellers...
- Maarten88 12y ago
  Well, the buyer also happens to have plenty cash laying around in offshore locations, waiting to be used for things like this.
  - arjunnarayan 12y ago
    Can offshore cash be used for acquisitions without being taxed on repatriation?
    - notatoad 12y ago
      it'll be taxed on repatriation, but it doesn't have to be repatriated to be used. if you buy something with foreign cash, it's the seller's job to get it into their country.
relampago 12y ago
Yes I agree totally. Not to mention the crazy growth of eSports.
jonathansizz 12y ago
How much of a bargain does the original Google acquisition of YouTube, for $1.65 billion, seem today? Less than one tenth of what Facebook are paying for WhatsApp!
- kibibu 12y ago
  YouTube wasn't super huge when Google bought them though, I'd suspect twitch has bigger brand recognition now than YouTube had then.
  - Cookingboy 12y ago
    YouTube was THE online video site back then. Twitch is pretty much unheard of these days by the general public other than people following the PC gaming scene.
    - kibibu 12y ago
      In 2006 it was competing with DailyMotion and Vimeo at least.
      - josefresco 12y ago
        Besides the two mentioned, the other main competition in 2005-6 for YouTube was Google Videos.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- vezzy-fnord 12y ago
  Presently, yes. However, it does not have the same long-term potential as Twitch. Snapchat is ephemeral, a trend.
  - dublinben 12y ago
    It also has no revenue.
  - Jonovono 12y ago
    I don't think it not having long term potential is a fact. Let's wait and see what they are planning before making those claims.
  - omarhegazy 12y ago
    Glad to see you're the leading authority on this matter. Tell me, from whence did you judge that Snapchat is "ephemeral"? How did you manage to outplay the dozens of very smart, very experienced, and very successful VCs and investors that have spent dozens of man-hours thinking about whether they should or should not dump millions of dollars into Snapchat? You are aware, that, as of now, Snapchat has raised more than $100M total in funding, from initial seed to it's Series C, and that some of the biggest players in SV have offered to buy it for upwards of $4B? I'm quite shocked to see that your little quip regarding it's long-term potential has somehow out-qualified all of this money and time and thought that went into it's current state. Especially since investors value long term potential over everything else : the whole deal with economics is finding value before anyone else does, otherwise you're just a bandwagoner. Early bird gets the worm, so the most successful early birds are those that look the furthest for the worms with the highest long-term potential. They berated Google for making a bad decision when they acquired YouTube and they called Facebook a trend that was just "MySpace for college kids". Maybe you're not in the right demographic for using Snapchat, so that's why you don't see it's long-term potential?
    - 12y ago
tomasien 12y ago
I agree actually. I hate it when people compare things to Snapchat like Snapchat is silly (it's not) but Twitch could be HUGE. Like huge huge huge.
- Maarten88 12y ago
  That's what I mean. It's not a stretch to imagine average people watching Twitch for hours every day, and happily paying for it. And (e)Sports organizers using Twitch to stream/monetize their events worldwide, bypassing the networks. There is, of course, that network neutrality issue in the US.

joosters 12y ago

$1 billion but all in cash. Sensible sellers...

Maarten88 12y ago
Well, the buyer also happens to have plenty cash laying around in offshore locations, waiting to be used for things like this.
- arjunnarayan 12y ago
  Can offshore cash be used for acquisitions without being taxed on repatriation?
  - notatoad 12y ago
    it'll be taxed on repatriation, but it doesn't have to be repatriated to be used. if you buy something with foreign cash, it's the seller's job to get it into their country.

relampago 12y ago

Yes I agree totally. Not to mention the crazy growth of eSports.

jonathansizz 12y ago

How much of a bargain does the original Google acquisition of YouTube, for $1.65 billion, seem today? Less than one tenth of what Facebook are paying for WhatsApp!

kibibu 12y ago
YouTube wasn't super huge when Google bought them though, I'd suspect twitch has bigger brand recognition now than YouTube had then.
- Cookingboy 12y ago
  YouTube was THE online video site back then. Twitch is pretty much unheard of these days by the general public other than people following the PC gaming scene.
  - kibibu 12y ago
    In 2006 it was competing with DailyMotion and Vimeo at least.
    - josefresco 12y ago
      Besides the two mentioned, the other main competition in 2005-6 for YouTube was Google Videos.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

vezzy-fnord 12y ago
Presently, yes. However, it does not have the same long-term potential as Twitch. Snapchat is ephemeral, a trend.
- dublinben 12y ago
  It also has no revenue.
- Jonovono 12y ago
  I don't think it not having long term potential is a fact. Let's wait and see what they are planning before making those claims.
- omarhegazy 12y ago
  Glad to see you're the leading authority on this matter. Tell me, from whence did you judge that Snapchat is "ephemeral"? How did you manage to outplay the dozens of very smart, very experienced, and very successful VCs and investors that have spent dozens of man-hours thinking about whether they should or should not dump millions of dollars into Snapchat? You are aware, that, as of now, Snapchat has raised more than $100M total in funding, from initial seed to it's Series C, and that some of the biggest players in SV have offered to buy it for upwards of $4B? I'm quite shocked to see that your little quip regarding it's long-term potential has somehow out-qualified all of this money and time and thought that went into it's current state. Especially since investors value long term potential over everything else : the whole deal with economics is finding value before anyone else does, otherwise you're just a bandwagoner. Early bird gets the worm, so the most successful early birds are those that look the furthest for the worms with the highest long-term potential. They berated Google for making a bad decision when they acquired YouTube and they called Facebook a trend that was just "MySpace for college kids". Maybe you're not in the right demographic for using Snapchat, so that's why you don't see it's long-term potential?
  - 12y ago

tomasien 12y ago

I agree actually. I hate it when people compare things to Snapchat like Snapchat is silly (it's not) but Twitch could be HUGE. Like huge huge huge.

Maarten88 12y ago
That's what I mean. It's not a stretch to imagine average people watching Twitch for hours every day, and happily paying for it. And (e)Sports organizers using Twitch to stream/monetize their events worldwide, bypassing the networks. There is, of course, that network neutrality issue in the US.