5 ms·

Though this seems obvious in retrospect, this is an interesting insight: VC dollars are being spent on user acquisition despite unknown LTV of users ... I

Though this seems obvious in retrospect, this is an interesting insight: VC dollars are being spent on user acquisition despite unknown LTV of users ... I think some of the tech "bubble" is being driven by speculation in what customer lifetime value could be. There would need to be some pretty devastating event for investors to no longer believe that having millions of users doesn't have potential for a lot of value. It would have to be a fairly counter intuitive epiphany.

Mandatum 12y ago
As soon as FB Messenger or WhatsApp introduce a "view once" feature to their products I'd instantly stop using Snapchat.
- dkrich 12y ago
  I'd wager that that'd only hold if all (or a lot) of your Snapchat contacts did the same. I think people often overestimate people's unwillingness to use multiple apps while underestimating their unwillingness to switch to a different version of the same app.
- qq66 12y ago
  Do you use Facebook Poke?
  - vxNsr 12y ago
    See that's a seperate app that exists on one platform, while FB Messenger is cross platform and already used by most people, so adding one feature (while anathema to the way companies are doing this atm, opting to make each feature an app) would instantly overtake a lot of the value of snapchat.
applecore 12y ago
There doesn't have to be any material change, “devastating event,” or even an underlying reason for people to change their views. Reflexivity theory contends that user acquisition costs and other prices are just as influenced by the perception of other people's thinking as anything else. Since participants in the market usually have a distorted view of reality, prices are pretty much indeterminate and unpredictable.
Animats 12y ago
There would need to be some pretty devastating event for investors to no longer believe that having millions of users doesn't have potential for a lot of value. Myspace. Yahoo. AOL. Next, Twitter? You can get lots of users by giving stuff away. That doesn't always result in company value. Especially when it starts out free and is followed by heavy-handed attempts to "monetize" the users.

Mandatum 12y ago

As soon as FB Messenger or WhatsApp introduce a "view once" feature to their products I'd instantly stop using Snapchat.

dkrich 12y ago
I'd wager that that'd only hold if all (or a lot) of your Snapchat contacts did the same. I think people often overestimate people's unwillingness to use multiple apps while underestimating their unwillingness to switch to a different version of the same app.
qq66 12y ago
Do you use Facebook Poke?
- vxNsr 12y ago
  See that's a seperate app that exists on one platform, while FB Messenger is cross platform and already used by most people, so adding one feature (while anathema to the way companies are doing this atm, opting to make each feature an app) would instantly overtake a lot of the value of snapchat.

applecore 12y ago

There doesn't have to be any material change, “devastating event,” or even an underlying reason for people to change their views. Reflexivity theory contends that user acquisition costs and other prices are just as influenced by the perception of other people's thinking as anything else. Since participants in the market usually have a distorted view of reality, prices are pretty much indeterminate and unpredictable.

Animats 12y ago

There would need to be some pretty devastating event for investors to no longer believe that having millions of users doesn't have potential for a lot of value. Myspace. Yahoo. AOL. Next, Twitter? You can get lots of users by giving stuff away. That doesn't always result in company value. Especially when it starts out free and is followed by heavy-handed attempts to "monetize" the users.