Facebook到底會不會收購Secret？
|
????Secret是一款允許手機用戶匿名與聯系人共享信息的手機應用。這家公司目前不應該成為收購的對象。它的產品登陸應用商店才只有短短幾個月，在下載排名方面還要面臨老對手Whisper的沖擊。它絕對沒有產生收入，而且員工也還不到一打。 ????但我依然認為，馬克?扎克伯格會給出一個Secret無法拒絕的要約價格。 ????最先出現Facebook有意收購Secret的傳聞是在上周，當時有傳言稱Facebook開出了1億美元的價格。獨立科技新聞網站Re/Code的邁克?艾薩克很快就否定了這個傳聞，他表示兩家公司共同探討了“合作”的可能。有知情人士支持這種解釋，同時告訴筆者，這兩家公司之間沒有進行任何與收購有關的磋商。 ????或許我的想法并無新意，但除了能夠幫助Facebook給出更合理的收購價格外，它還想從對方了解什么信息呢？Secret不會披露自己的核心機密，而且，Facebook對社交網絡效應的理解無人能出其左右（更不用說如何將相關數據貨幣化了）。我同意艾薩克的觀點，1億美元的“要約”純屬謠言，但并不是因為硅谷的謠言找對了對象。我只是認為，如果Facebook確實選擇出價，實際價格可能會更高。 ????首先，Facebook有合理的理由獲得Secret。扎克伯格一直希望將移動應用作為重心，而且他還說過：“我們沒有必要一直只從事涉及真實身份的事情。”事實上，他甚至更進一步，將始終使用真實身份看成一個“負擔”。而Secret恰好能滿足他的需要。此外，扎克伯格工作生活都在硅谷，而到目前為止，Secret在整個硅谷產生的影響力遠遠大于它在全球的影響。有人或許會反對砸錢跟進這種帶有鮮明地域性的時代主義產物，但硅谷人肯定會把它視為一次巨大的增長機遇。 ????此外，從Facebook之前的收購中可以看出，沒有盈利并不是收購的障礙。Facebook以10億美元收購Instagram時，后者也沒有賺錢。虛擬現實公司Oculus VR獲得了20億美元，但它甚至沒有推出一款產品。還有WhatsApp，盡管這家公司最高峰時擁有4.5億用戶，但依然沒能給它帶來收入。 ????綜上所述，我同意艾薩克的觀點，1億美元的“要約”純屬謠言。因為這個價格太低。 ????首先需要說明的是，如果按照傳統的估值模型計算，筆者并不認為Secret的市值應該超過1億美元。筆者的意思是，1億美元的價格不可能完成交易，主要有三條理由： ????1. Secret并非井底之蛙，它很清楚Facebook在一系列高調收購中的出價。 ????2. 許多人都聲稱Secret將成為下一個Twitter，而且它自己似乎也相信了這種說法（至少在一定程度上）。 ????3. Facebook可能認為谷歌（Google）也對Secret感興趣，而競爭的威脅必將推高價格。谷歌創投（Google Ventures）是這家初創公司的主要投資人，另外一位投資人是凱鵬華盈（Kleiner Perkins）。 ????因此，如果Facebook提出收購價格，肯定會給Secret一個巨大的驚喜。在傳達收購價格之前，扎克伯格或許會與Secret進行長時間的交流。扎克伯格將解釋Facebook如何讓大規模收購的對象保持獨立運營。Facebook如何幫助Secret利用它收集的個人數據（雖然用戶不會注意到）來提高服務質量。之后，雙方將以讓外界震驚的價格完成交易，不會給泄密行為留下哪怕一點時間。即使在Secret上也不會。（財富中文網） ????譯者：劉進龍/汪皓 ???? |
????Secret, a mobile app that lets users share messages anonymously with their phone contacts, isn't the sort of company that should be getting acquired right now. Its product has only been in the app store for a few months, and is still getting clobbered in the download rankings by (slightly) older rival Whisper. It has absolutely no revenue and fewer than a dozen employees. ????But I still think that Mark Zuckerberg may make Secret an offer it can't refuse. ????The first rumblings of Facebook's (FB) acquisition interest in Secret came last week, with widespread talk that a $100 million offer was on the table. Mike Isaac of Re/Code quickly shot that down, saying instead that the two companies had met to explore how they could "work together." A source close to Facebook seconded that explanation, telling me today that there have been no acquisition-related talks between the two companies. ????Maybe I'm not thinking creatively enough, but what exactly is Facebook hoping to learn outside of things that could help it better price an acquisition? Secret isn't going to reveal any of its special sauce, and Facebook already understands social network effects better than anyone (not to mention how to monetize its related data). I agree with Isaac that the $100 million "offer" was bunk, but not because Silicon Valley gossips are barking up the wrong tree. I just think that if Facebook does choose to make a bid, the actual number will be much, much higher. ????For starters, Facebook has real reason to want Secret. Zuckerberg already is on record as wanting to focus on mobile apps, and for saying that "we don't need to keep on only doing real identity things." In fact, he even went a step further, referring to constant real identity usage as a "burden." Secret clearly falls into that wheelhouse. Moreover, Zuckerberg lives and works within Silicon Valley, where Secret so far has gained much more traction than with the world at-large. Some might argue against buying into such geographic zeitgeistism, but those within Silicon Valley could simply view it as a large growth opportunity. ????Moreover, lack of revenue has not proven to be a barrier to Facebook's prior acquisitions. Instagram wasn't making any money when it was acquired for $1 billion. Oculus VR garnered around $2 billion without having ever shipped product. And then there's WhatsApp, which still hasn't begun recognizing revenue for most of its 450 million users. ????All of that said, I agree with Isaac that the $100 million "offer" was bunk. Namely because the number was much too low. ????To be clear, I'm not suggesting that Secret should be worth more than $100 million, if you're going by any sort of traditional valuation modeling. I'm simply saying that a deal won't get done at that price, for three primary reasons: ????1. 1. Secret hasn't been living under a rock, and knows what Facebook has been paying for high-profile acquisitions. ????2. 2. Secret is being told by all sorts of people that it could be the next Twitter, and may (at least sort of ) believe them. ????3. 3. Facebook likely believes Google (GOOG) also has some interest in Secret -- beyond the fact that Google Ventures is one of the startup's primary investors, alongside Kleiner Perkins -- and even the threat of competition drives up prices. ????So if Facebook is going to make an offer, it will be for the sort of number that blows Secret's socks off. And it probably will be conveyed after a long walk with Zuckerberg, who will explain how Facebook lets its large acquisitions do their own thing. And how Facebook could really help Secret become a better service by leveraging all of that personal data it's collecting (even though users don't notice it). And then a deal will be done at an outwardly-shocking price, without any time for leaks. Not even on Secret. |
最新文章