Hard-won, very much deserved, also a case study for a successful pivot.
" We do know that Twitch investors who participated in past rounds are pleased that they will be getting significant returns that are multiple times the amount they originally invested. "
Suggests that it was one of the investors that leaked the story to venturebeat, pretty classless, and really not-done in those circles.
Twitch really is a phenomenon. There's such a diverse community of game streamers that I can't help but expect someone to enter this space to compete soon. There are millions of viewers, and some shows are super niche. Take for example TheMexicanRunner http://www.twitch.tv/themexicanrunner who is working his way through beating every North American NES game. Sounds impossible, but he's the guy that could do it. Elsewhere, people like Lirik and Sheever have become famous and make a living off of their broadcasting now. Quite an ecosystem!
What made me especially interested in the whole twitch phenomenon is that we always threw out the gamers because it wasn't 'real' content, totally missing out on the opportunity :)
More power to them though for identifying the niche and running with it.
Games are serious business.
Does anyone actually deserve $1,000,000,000? (I know it's shared between investors but assuming he got a chunk of that)
Some country in Scandinavia (Denmark?) at some point had a 100%+ tax rate, which meant that if you earned more than some ridiculous amount of money you lost more than you made.
I think any amount of money over and beyond what you need to live in whatever is considered luxury in the place where you live is probably wasted on you. But I guess for people at that level it's a way to keep score.
As far as Justin and Co having deserved this, they worked harder than most people ever will (especially in the early days), they have been diluted substantially and they'll be paying a fair amount of their take in taxes.
For the longest time it looked like the whole thing could still fold up and this deal is a gigantic pay-out compared to many other acquisitions. Even so, I think they really did build something of actual value, as opposed to some other recent acquisitions (far higher ones than this one) that I fail to see any value at all in. So as far as I'm concerned they deserve some kind of pay-out, and since we're living in a capitalist society that is defined as 'what the market will bear'. In this case that appears to be $1B. So good for them. Wished I had not banned those gamers ;).
When you say this, you mean harder than other people in western based office work?
Sorry not trying to pick on you, you seem reasonable and decent! I just think it's a shame that bestowing incomprehensible amounts of wealth on individuals should be celebrated as a deserved reward. Hard work = lots of rewards is not the reality for the majority of the world.
I agree they deserve a payout of course, that level of wealth just feels wrong to me, like everything feels a bit out of whack. And I know myself I would of course probably keep the majority of it as well.
So I'm well aware of the fact that 'deserved' is a pretty elastic concept. But if you want to start that discussion then you should pick up the Forbes list of billionaires and start petitioning them to abandon the capitalist way, they are most likely as much or more 'not deserving' of their wealth as the people that put together twitch.
I've got a very healthy respect for people that do regular work, farmers, masoners, lathe operators, millwrights, mailmen and so on, if only because I tried my hand at all those professions at some point in my checkered past and have found that each and every one of those takes tremendous dedication and skill to perform with any amount of success. And yet, barring lucky accidents very few people in those professions will ever be wealthy.
It's an unfair world we live in, but that does not stop me from congratulating those that achieve a certain level of success if they played this particular game by the rules that they themselves did not set. That it is possible to envision a better world in which the wealth could be spread better does not detract from their achievement.
Most "highly valued" startups usually disappear in thin air once founders get their payouts as if they had never existed (ahm... Viaweb?).
Viaweb was designed to be sold. Pg didn't want to work on online stores the rest of his life. But it went on to become a profitable part of Yahoo. That seems like a win-win for both Yahoo and the Viaweb team.
now you can argue founders are 100X better in skills to exploit market and make believe everyone that their goods are far more worth than it actually is. Should they be paid 100X for these skills? If you think of benefit to the human kind as a whole, perhaps not.
If someone paid the founders a certain amount of money for those skills, then those skills were worth that amount of money.
What does it mean to "benefit humankind as a whole"? That presupposes humankind has a purpose. Who gets to decide how much benefit something has to humankind? It seems like the answer is "the market."
I love getting paid, do whatever you can do to get paid, but do not
let the money whisper to you that you are worth it, it will be
lying and you will believe it.
That's just made up.
> Well deserved for all the "risks" they took to avoid regular jobs, eat ramen everyday
The "risk" of avoiding a regular job is lost wages (I'm stripping away the experience that could get you into a better paying job after a failure here as well). If they could be earning $50k a year, and worked for 10 years on their startup, their risk is $500k. I'm also sure that most people wouldn't go more than a few years without any traction, so you're probably looking at about $150k risk. Deduct any earnings from that risk in that time frame as well ( they need to live) so the personal risk is actually perhaps nearer to ~$100k. I think you are overstating the risk factor here.
Eating ramen every day is something you've made up as well.
> innovations they contributed to the advancement of mankind?
Hyperbole, it's a website that lets you watch people playing computer games. You're vastly overstating it's contribution to the advancement of mankind.
Who normally leaks this sort of thing? Who would be upset by this? If anything it only makes the other investors look savvy for making a fat return.
Nobody. If you can't trust your investors to keep their mouth shut about a deal in progress or that is under wraps for reasons important enough to the acquirer and the acquiree then investors follow suit and happily count their money.
Such loose lips can sink deals in the worst cases. Very unprofessional.
I can't be excited about this acquisition because all I can think about is how they are about to slowly and painfully destroy the Twitch experience. What can we expect? Forced merge of Twitch accounts? A forced G+ page for every channel? Some kind of horrible Hangouts integration? Real name policy and its reversal in 3 years? Share this stream with your circles? Pervasive ad infestation? Exceptionally annoying wiggling bell on top right that demands my attention just to let me know that some person I've never heard of has invited me to an event I've never heard of on Google+? A new "clean/functional/consistent" interface that changes often and only gets monotonically worse over time?
I know people bitch(ed) about that but come on, it makes a ton of sense from both Google's and end-user's perspective to standardize all Google services under one account. Anybody (here or elsewhere) would have made the same decision.. Their fault is that they waited as long as they did.
Google+ also makes some sense because it does tie services like GDrive, blogs, photos, docs, videos (youtube), and chat together. The problem there was that they got spooked by Facebook and tried to copy it exactly (e.g. the real name policy, which was always stupid but they did it because facebook did it). It was a typical Microsoft thing to do; look where the puck is, and not where it's going.
Wow, I didn't realize Twitch had that much traffic. That's something to be proud of.
We came within a hair of being kicked off the net for consuming too much intercontinental bandwidth in the late 90's. The internet was simply not designed with video in mind so it's testimony to how well it has adapted that something like twitch can even exist.
It's still a ton of bandwidth. I'm sure they'll be happy no longer having to pay that bill.
their ratio of infrastructure cost to revenue will never look good.
The monopoly of Google on video streaming is even stronger now
There's a few other services out there that allow this, but not many.
With something like Netflix you can just put up the content in a CDN, compared to a live stream which can be more difficult to manage.
The only site still competing directly with YouTube in the global market is Vimeo, and, well, I doubt Google has much to fear from them.
The video game companies never initiated it, Google did. In fact the companies support playthroughs on YouTube because it helps with sales and builds communities around their games. They even wrote open letters to Google giving them permission to monetize gameplay videos made using their games.
(though, IIRC, Twitch does those already for pre-release game titles through agreements with various game publishers)
Forced Google+ accounts with realnames. Because no-one uses an alias in gaming scene ever.
Automatic Content ID. Oh you played a bit of music even accidentally on background? Blocked.
Oh nintendo wanted to block your game stream (http://www.zeldauniverse.net/2013/05/16/nintendo-cracks-down...).
This game is not available in your country!
I know these are exaggerations. But at least some of them will be eventually implemented. That means it's time to switch services. Anyone know of any good almost as easy to use one?
Google has this bad habit of deciding something and then forcing it. Real name policy. OpenCL on mobile. The list goes on. If they don't get any traction initially they will at the very least attempt to force it.
It seems like a similar situation to Soylent- a spinoff of a ycombinator company, that is billed as a ycombinator company.
There is no place for Windows Phone in Google's ever expanding empire.
Google's Mission Statement: “To organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
They should tack on a ",except on Windows Phone" to that if they wanted to be truthful.
If the market share increased significantly, I'd be surprised if they chose to continue not to support it. But for the time being, their decision makes sense to me.
Nah. It's not that expensive. They want to ignore the Windows market to stick it to Microsoft. The relatively small Windows Phone market makes it possible for them to do that.
They add up perfectly, though it may be inconvenient for WP users.
You CAN use youtube on WP using the mobile site. You just don't have a native app. They're not denying WP users or content creators anything except a little bit of convenience and battery life.
And as far financial or rational reasons - Microsoft is still extracting patent fees from Android handset makers. It makes a lot of financial sense to hurt them back - so when you come to the negotiation table, you have something to negotiate. Don't you think?
I think that at this moment Microsoft can again build a youtube app both respecting the TOS and using the html5 public api without performance issues
The real killer for me was the lack of a keepass app that supports 1.x DBs. If any of y'all are looking for a project, do that! You would have earned my $1!
Either way, congrats to the team. As a long time user, I can't help but feel that this will only hurt the twitch.tv experience in the long run though. Maybe the improved stability for other regions will be a large enough benefit to offset any other changes.
create a new account. agree to gplus. comment on youtube or use hangouts on device X. pronto, it was so frictionless that you didn't even notice. not it is public that you are using device X and that you commented on some youtube video.
what you say may be true for non-google services, which twitch does not fall under anymore.
Where are you seeing which device you are using shared on Google+? The only place I've seen something like that is if you have someone you've accepted as a Hangouts chat buddy and you've opted into the "share which device I'm on" in the Hangouts settings (all that shows though is if you're on a tablet, phone, or desktop computer though, not specifically which device).
1. how long my mentioned comment on you tube (for example) is tied to gplus
2. when that checkbox was added.
you will surely see its at least a six month difference or more. now some doesnt even have that option yet... but hopefully you will get the point with just example
I'd quit that job. Instantly.
google fought so well the spam on gmail, and then they become the spam equivalent.
i have one gaccount for main gmail, one for gtalk (dead), one for commenting on youtube annoymously, one for gvoice, one to have a different handle when on the phone (because circles do not work as promissed and I want to restrict people that can bug me while i'm mobile)...
all because they can't handle leaving the services work isolated by default.
of course that is good to them, because now they can say "7 new users for gplus! our product is awesome!"
... because that makes no sense. First, because they want to build a cohesive and comprehensive service platform. Second, because a lot of users would prefer to have these services tied together. So what's left, either try to please everyone and complicate the service or provide a common vision for the platform. I think it's obvious that they would go for the latter.
Having said that, they did fuck up in places. Real name policy was stupid. Like I wrote in another post, their great sin was trying to make Google+ a facebook clone, as opposed to a unifying system for gchat, search, youtube, gdrive, gmail, photos, and blogs.
>i have one gaccount for main gmail, one for gtalk (dead), one for commenting on youtube annoymously, one for gvoice, one to have a different handle when on the phone (because circles do not work as promissed and I want to restrict people that can bug me while i'm mobile).
There you go. This kind of insanity is always an option to the insane. What's the difference between this, and 'services isolated by default'?
it is the same with amazon. I don't want to have the same account that i have with 1-click purchase powers on every dumb and insecure TV (that even sends back to LG my files names, who knows about what i type?) just so i can watch amazon prime videos.
oh, you want that in money and not stocks? sorry, it does not work on chrome anymore.