Snapchat: Puberty Over, Drama Ensues

by / 5 Comments / 670 View / August 3, 2014

[section_title title=part2]

Out of all the major apps that dominate the critical mobile stores, Snapchat may well be the most notorious.  With its comedic ghost and yellow square logo, Snapchat has prevailed as the photo messaging app with a self-deleting feature.  It has also amassed many critics, who have blasted the app for its lack of security, vague user and privacy policies, and the concept in and of itself.  By the same token, it has many lovers: often daily users composed of young adults and teenagers.One of Snapchat's interfaces

Snapchat has had, no matter how much you like or hate it, a successfully awkward story.  When Facebook offered Snapchat $3 billion in order to acquire it, many individuals were left shocked when the founding protégé behind it, Evan Spiegel, blatantly rejected the deal.  But that wasn’t all.  In an interview with Forbes, Spiegel, revealed an arrogant touch to his nature; he indicated that if Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s CEO worth over $20 billion, wanted to talk to him, the billionaire would have to come to him.  And while that may seem arrogant to a certain level, the drama was accentuated by disbelief at leaked photos, showing screenshots of Spiegel’s email conversation with Zuckerberg that displayed a more polite manner.  A satirical letter full of arrogant hyperboles also bombarded internet tech news following the rejection of the deal.  The tech world, to a reasonable degree, seemed somewhat obsessed with the interaction between these two young entrepreneurs.

But why?

Snapchat has long been the picked-on child in the technology world.  Anti-bullying campaigns often target the app as being dangerous to immature youth.  Its privacy policy was under fire by the Federal Trade Commission.  Its entire username database was hacked and leaked in one humiliating sequence, only to be worsened by a lack of an apology from the company headquarters.

Facebook meanwhile has a recognizable fame and prestige in the tech world with its model being extraordinarily, financially successful (save a few crashes a few days ago that cost the company $20,000 a minute).  It seems natural that Zuckerberg, being a social media tycoon, would have a vested interest in Snapchat like he did with Instagram years ago.  And at first glance, it would seem Spiegel, who isn’t making much from Snapchat right now, would be inclined to accept the billions for one app.

And it isn’t just Facebook that has been trying to buy Snapchat off an auction Spiegel refuses to have.  Google was rumored to up the bid made by Facebook by a complete billion, amount to a $4 billion proposal.  But Spiegel remained resolute that Snapchat was not going to be sold.  Yet for a company still not bringing in a dime from general app-related interactions, Spiegel’s answer remains more than intriguing.

Was three or four billion dollars not enough?  That may have been part of the reason: Snapchat has lately been quoted to be worth at least 10 billion dollars by Alibaba Group Holding, a Chinese e-commerce firm.  With many eager buyers eying the monetized possibilities of Snapchat, Spiegel has long been battered with options that could change the faith and ownership of an application that transfers over 700 millions snaps a day.


Facebooks new app that rivals Snapchat: Slingshot

It seems somewhat obvious that Snapchat has left its puberty-like stage: the app is no longer just a startup.  Just a year ago, Snapchat was often mocked as being an overrated short lived project.  With offers now being thrown at the ghost, Snapchat has earned a certain degree of respect among its competitors.

Competitors?  That may not have been the right term to describe Facebook and alike a few months ago.  Facebook for a long time sported just a messenger app that was weaved into its website application.  But since Snapchat clearly isn’t interested in being bought, at least for the prices afforded to it, Facebook has responded with something new.

  • Josh Buckley

    Meh. After a couple of pages, all that I seem to have gathered is some obvious information (Snapchat has been criticized), some less obvious information (Evan Spiegel doesn’t want to sell Snapchat), and some irrelevant information (there are other apps trying to compete but failing, and they both lack fundamental features of Snapchat so they can barely be classified as competitors). Other than that, from a writing perspective, there was some awkward phrasing. “I, personally, think this is almost intentional” (in reference to Facebook’s relative lack of advertising Slingshot) doesn’t make much sense and is just a cop-out. Something is pretty much intentional or not, especially when talking about a company’s actions. The only way Facebook’s advertising campaign (or lack thereof) could be almost intentional is if they somehow accidentally advertised too much or too little, and did nothing to rectify that difference. Also, I never quite understood what Snapchat’s “puberty” meant in this context, some clarification about that would have helped. All in all, an okay article, I learned some things, not much analysis though. I give it 4.5/10.

    • Josh Fuckley

      And you, my friends, are the definition of an a$$h0le.

      Learned about 2 new apps. Good enough for me. Analysis is fine and one sentence is one sentence. Plus, not everyone knows abotu Snapchat’s past like you do. it’d be awk if the article didn’t address it and just assumed we were all snapchat geniuses

      • Josh Ugley

        I agree that Josh Buckley is being mean but you, Mr. Fuckley, are a whole new definition of mean, son

        • Josh Pretty

          You are all so mean to one another! JUST ACCEPT EACH OTHER AND ALL BE FRIENDS <3 <3 <3 ps im da besssssssssssss

      • Josh Buckley

        I do agree that I can sometimes come across as abrasive or harsh, but that’s the way that I try to provide the most honest feedback. I hold writers to a very high standard, and I thought that this article was a little bellow average, and I voiced that opinion. Not every article can be great or groundbreaking, and I didn’t think that this one was.