[turbulentfurball]

Apparently they're going to keep it as a separate brand, and allow 'it to post to rival networks'.

Hmmm.... why are Facebook doing this? It doesn't make much sense to me.

[Wyatt]

I don't understand why they're doing it either, but can someone please explain to me how the hell Instagram is worth a billion dollars?

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Wyatt I don't understand why they're doing it either, but can someone please explain to me how the hell Instagram is worth a billion dollars?

It wasn't.

But hey, good for Instagram (and their investors). They're a famously tiny company; hopefully they can keep their unique culture.

[psmith2.0]

Bet it won't. Small, focused and/or unique things can't ever "go big" and retain what is was that made them popular or quirky in the first place. Damn near impossible. It gets diluted, other voices/agendas slide into the mix, etc.

[nikstar101]

Wow this is a shock... OK its not a huge shock the Facebook has bought Instagram, but it certainly is for that price!! That is one heck of an investment. Especially since from what i understand (having not use Instagram) that it basically shares photos with some cool filters.

But i think FB is paying for the people it brings with Instagram and importantly if it controls Instagram, it means Google doesn't! Yes Fb can improve its photos sharing facility with mobile phones but it could do it for a lot cheaper that a billion bucks. I think Google may have been sniffing around Instagram to maybe help boost G+ so FB took the opportunity and bought them up.

Otherwise i see now reason for this??

[Mac+]

Ugh - I wake up to this? Damn.

[chucker]

Yup; $1B is the value of Google, etc. not owning it, not of it per se.

That said, I'm sick and tired of websites without a proper business model. Pinboard FTW.

[nikstar101]

Originally Posted by chucker That said, I'm sick and tired of websites without a proper business model. Pinboard FTW.

I am surprised how many Apps and websites seem to get startup money without actually having any sort of plan on how to turn a profit?!?! I guess they have in their business plan, "get bought by Google/Facebook/Insert new big thing here"

[Robo]

Originally Posted by nikstar101 I am surprised how many Apps and websites seem to get startup money without actually having any sort of plan on how to turn a profit?!?! I guess they have in their business plan, "get bought by Google/Facebook/Insert new big thing here"

Or, y'know, "run ads." Or "sell premium features." Or any of a dozen other things a popular service can do to earn money.

I'm going to lose startup hipster points for saying this, but I think Paul Graham & Co. have a point. Startups probably should focus on making a product that people love and growing really quickly, not because making money is unimportant, but because making something people actually want is so much harder. Once you do that, figuring out how to monetize it is (comparatively) easy.

Obviously having a great product and a clear road to riches would be best of all, but startups have limited energy, and if I had to choose between investing in a beloved product with a vague business plan or an unwanted product with a well-thought-out business plan, I'd invest in the beloved product, every time. If you make something that people actually want, evidence suggests that the other concerns (like money) will probably work themselves out — I can't think of any examples of a product that was beloved by millions failing because it just wasn't able to be monetized in any way. If you look at TechCrunch's deadpool, the companies there are usually there because they made something that people didn't want, not because they made something that people loved but couldn't make money on it.

(It's interesting that you mentioned Google and Facebook, because those were also startups that launched as money-losers with vague plans for monetization. Early Google especially was criticized for this; a lot of people thought that they didn't have anything in their business plan besides "get bought by Microsoft.")

I do, however, find the smugness commonly found one side of the "debate" wholly off-putting, just as I'm also annoyed by the smugness surrounding bootstrapping, with adherents referring to seeking outside investment as some sort of disease — and one that, they would have you think, didn't exist at all before 2003.

[Robo]

SpecMode pointed out an interesting coincidence on Twitter — if you think Facebook overpaid for Instagram, you'll love that a private equity firm bought the Yellow Pages from AT&T for a billion dollars. The Yellow Pages! Now there's a business with a future!

That's actually a handy illustration of how having a good roadmap for the future is not the same as having a good future. That private equity firm could have the best business plan for the Yellow Pages ever, and I doubt it'd save them — whereas having a seemingly nonexistent business plan didn't hurt Instagram. Making something people truly want isn't all that matters, but it's easily what matters most.

[torifile]

Well said, Robo. There's a lot to be said for having a way to make money immediately but when something like this comes along, it's best to ride out the wave building momentum and letting the money thing sort itself out.

[ezkcdude]

I haven't got into Instagram yet.

But if I had to sum up what it seems like to me:

Instagram: We make your $hitty pictures even $hittier.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude I haven't got into Instagram yet. But if I had to sum up what it seems like to me:

Oh come on. That's harsh. People have always taken shitty photos; it's not the filters that make them that way. Instagram just makes it easier to share them. But at least Instagram makes people interested in the output rather than just leaving them overblown, saturated, exposed, whatever.

[Mugge]

Originally Posted by Robo SpecMode pointed out an interesting coincidence on Twitter — if you think Facebook overpaid for Instagram, you'll love that a private equity firm bought the Yellow Pages from AT&T for a billion dollars. The Yellow Pages! Now there's a business with a future!

Ok, maybe the whole make something people actually like and use is a more attractive option. Suddenly Facebook doesn't seem so clueless.

Btw. Anyone have an opinion how well Microsofts return on investment regarding Skype is going?

[kieran]

I'm not jumping ship like some of the other people that I've seen after this news.

I'm still a fan of Instagram and will use the app.

Still think it's way too much money to pay for this.

[micalhassi]

Obviously this having a great product and a clear road to riches would be best of all, but start ups have limited energy, and if I had to choose between investing in a beloved product.I am surprised how many Apps and websites seem to get startup money without actually having any sort of plan on how to turn a profit !!

[PB PM]

Having rich friends can help you start anything, if they are interested in backing your basic ideas.

[drewprops]

Hello friends!!!
I have not used this beloved app, but find it simple.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by micalhassi Obviously this having a great product and a clear road to riches would be best of all, but start ups have limited energy, and if I had to choose between investing in a beloved product.I am surprised how many Apps and websites seem to get startup money without actually having any sort of plan on how to turn a profit !!

Originally Posted by Robo Obviously having a great product and a clear road to riches would be best of all, but startups have limited energy, and if I had to choose between investing in a beloved product with a vague business plan or an unwanted product with a well-thought-out business plan, I'd invest in the beloved product, every time. If you make something that people actually want, evidence suggests that the other concerns (like money) will probably work themselves out — I can't think of any examples of a product that was beloved by millions failing because it just wasn't able to be monetized in any way. If you look at TechCrunch's deadpool, the companies there are usually there because they made something that people didn't want, not because they made something that people loved but couldn't make money on it.

I'm, er, flattered?

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Robo I'm, er, flattered?

Reading that, I think he meant to quote you on the post. He just forgot the quote tags.

He probably meant to say: "obviously this: "quote""

[turtle]

Sorry, I'm just cynical then I guess. Looking forward to see what they are getting ready to spam us with.

Maybe I should be more welcoming.

[micalhassi]

Originally Posted by micalhassi Obviously this having a great product and a clear road to riches would be best of all, but start ups have limited energy, and if I had to choose between investing in a beloved product.I am surprised how many Apps and websites seem to get startup money without actually having any sort of plan on how to turn a profit !!

Bowel Movement Services

[torifile]

Jackass.

[turtle]

[FFL]

. . .