Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"server costs" (Google Cloud) is an affordable $450 million per year commitment.

They apparently have 2,360 employees doing who knows what (not growing the user base).

My favorite part:

"Spiegel laughed out loud when asked if he was worried about Facebook copying his features. “Just because Yahoo has a search box doesn’t mean they’re Google.""

We'll check back in a year to see if he feels the same way.




> They apparently have 2,360 employees doing who knows what (not growing the user base).

I don't understand what all these people do all day. Same with Twitter, they have 3860 employees according to their website. It seems like 10X as many as needed. I've worked in a few offices with less than 100 employees total, and while I have no idea what it takes to run a service with that much traffic, Snapchat runs on Google's cloud service.

> “Just because Yahoo has a search box doesn’t mean they’re Google.""

Maybe it will be a classic in the same genre as Ballmers answer to what he thought about Apple's new product the iPhone.


A large % of that number is in sales.

Unfortunately B2B sales is still very much people driven. Lots of calls, emails, meetings x 10 until you close.


Also, Yahoo had the search box before Google. So, his analogy is actually perfect: Facebook will wreck him.


snapchat is yahoo v2?

snapchat rejects 3bn buyout... yahoo rejects 45bn buyout. how far can it go?


Yahoo!'s market cap is above $45B and Snapchat is far above $3B and will be for years.


$450M/year to support 160M daily actives seems insane. That's $2.81 per user per year.

That's like paying $234/month in hosting alone for 1K daily actives. What is all that computing power used for?


>"server costs" (Google Cloud) is an affordable $450 million per year

That's interesting. I was curious how their choice to use Google App Engine would work out. It's reputation is easy to start with but expensive to run and some other issues. https://www.recode.net/2017/3/1/14661126/snap-snapchat-ipo-s...

I wonder if they would have done better with a stack like WhatsApp - Erlang running on their own servers. Or even switching over to that in the future. I think WhatsApp at 500m users had about 35 engineers and 550 servers and so costs maybe 10% of Snap's. http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/3/31/how-whatsapp-grew-...


Bandwidth will almost certainly be their dominant economic input.

It's funny, a lot of people think you exit AWS/GCE to rack your own machines, but I was on a datacenter tour in SV a few years back and was reminded that having fine-grained control of your network is just as a big a reason to do it. Adtech/finance do this all the time to control latency, I imagine it's also a consideration for Snap.

I wonder if they'll ever build a CDN. It's probably not the right traffic pattern without a lot of re-sharing, but still, I could see it.


What are all those employees doing if Google is solving most of their scaling problems?


How many people does it take to make a photograph disappear?

2360 if you're Snapchat!


Streisand and Beyonce could've used them.


Don't forget that they also signed a contract with AWS for a billion over the next 5 years: https://www.geekwire.com/2017/snap-commits-spend-1b-amazon-w...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: