
Snap: Too Soon to IPO - ckelly
https://medium.com/@timothyconnors/snap-too-soon-to-ipo-38f0934d4f44#.q44p505mw
======
mehrdada
> Going public now isn’t fair to other founders

How is this relevant, like _at all_?

> and isn’t fair to those who would buy the stock on the IPO.

You can declare something overvalued or undervalued relative to a specific
price, but I do not know how giving someone an _option to buy_ via an IPO or
otherwise can be "unfair". You can choose to stay out. Why is it not _fair_?
It seems to portray an IPO as something you one-sidedly decide to do and
somehow you magically get money, and there is no choice on the other side of
the market to buy or not buy.

[I stopped reading right there.]

~~~
im2nguyen
I feel like you should have read further into the article, where the author
attempts to back their claim, instead of jumping to conclusions.

" >Roughly $2.50 to acquire and monetize a new user (and getting more
expensive fast with v low and slowing growth) >Each user generates $3 in ad
revenue per year >Each user costs them $3.25 in Google data center costs per
year to store their pictures (so negative gross margin still at 150M users)
>Plus another $1+ per user a year in R&D costs >Plus another $1+ per user a
year in G&A costs

Today the more users they get, the more money they lose. If they can double
revenue per user, they are making profits. They need to more than quadruple
the revenue per user to have the future profit stream to add up to $25B."

