I think there's a difference. You can use something else instead of Instagram with Facebook/Twitter. As far as I'm aware nobody goes to Instagram directly to view content, so if you were using something else people could use that instead.
Facebook Buys Instagram for $1Bn
- Thread starter Jokester
- Start date
I think there's a difference. You can use something else instead of Instagram with Facebook/Twitter. As far as I'm aware nobody goes to Instagram directly to view content, so if you were using something else people could use that instead.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 18,423
Lets not forget $1b is not nearly as much as £1b. Still a heck of a lot though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 May 2004
- Posts
- 13,059
- Location
- Sunny Stafford
Now I actually know what Instagram is.
I don't see apple losing their fashion symbolness. Facebook, yes, but apple are in the tech business, they can change their products as technology moves. This is incredibly rare when it comes to social networking.
That's how I see it as well, it's being used as a photo uploader to Facebook for photos taken on a phone, ok it can do some post processing, but that's largely a gimmick.
The idea that Instagram is a social network is fairly laughable, it's no more a photo sharing site than flikr et al.
Looks like they will repeat every mistake of dot com bubble. Buy bad and overvalue. Horrible thing is though - when Facebook bubble bursts (and it will - all social things go out of fashion and have max of decade attention span, this will be no exception) - unlike any previous AOLFriendstersreunitedthingymajiggies they won't just sink peacefully or float as dead carcass for sharks - Facebook will clutch at straws and start flogging all that data they accumulated over the years from all live and dead accounts left right and centre.
In reality I think it's only the social networking side which is gaining large speculative prices.
Google, Apple, Microsoft have had solid revenue for ages. They are spending their massive cash reserves this time, rather than an IPO bubble as such happening.
The supposed market cap of facebook is built on speculative future revenues. Also the recent disguised IPO they had was wasted on Instagram? Just goes to show that there isn't really much room for it to grow imo.
edit:
I forgot about groupon, so I suppose there has been a recent IPO which has failed its initial public investors.
Google, Apple, Microsoft have had solid revenue for ages. They are spending their massive cash reserves this time, rather than an IPO bubble as such happening.
The supposed market cap of facebook is built on speculative future revenues. Also the recent disguised IPO they had was wasted on Instagram? Just goes to show that there isn't really much room for it to grow imo.
edit:
I forgot about groupon, so I suppose there has been a recent IPO which has failed its initial public investors.
Last edited:
Point still stands - while the idea can be copied you still need to attract the users... plenty of people will try - most (if not all) will fail. FWIW I wasn't comparing intagram to facebook but rather highlighting that simply being able to copy instagram isn't anything in itself.
Last edited:
That argument has been banded around in a lot of the news I've read. The growth of instagram was severley hurting facebook's future IPO price to the tune of something much greater than $1bn. I suppose it is plausible and explains the price.
I very much doubt that Facebook will be able to hold their IPO price for longer than 3-6 months. Pinterest seems like a worthy target for after they raise some cash from the IPO...
They've bought a free app for $1bn. If it's 30million users were actively visiting the Instagram website then it may justify it's cost from advertising revenue - but I severely doubt that that is the case. People use it as a free image uploader direct to Facebook.
I just can't see how Instagram can be seriously considered a social site rather than a standard photo sharing site like Flikr.
I thought people use it as easy way to make other people think they possess some kind of artistic value/flair.
The big "added via Instagram" or what ever it says is usually a massive give away
The issue is that if it can get a user base large enough, it can then be leveraged to create a serious rival to facebook. This userbase is also technologically minded, all carrying smartphones.
Why is google+ not seriously rivalling twitter? The problem is that somehow you need the userbase to move together. Exactly what a rapidly growing app like instagram could allow.
This potential alone was damaging facebook's speculated $100bn IPO price, or so the theory goes.
Last edited:
And this is why the whole social network argument goes out the window. Instagram users just aren't using it in that manner, they're using it as a simple tool. As I said Dotcom bubble MkII.
Not so much hate, just awareness of their shocking ruling along the lines of: "you agree to transfer all rights to Facebook for that everything you do, type or upload to the site."