[berz01]

Spreadsheet warrior kinda shit. CFO needed 500M for a stock-buyback. CFO wrote down some napkin math, let go 1/5 of the team. Murdered all innovation into the ground. Wallstreet loved it. Snapchat is a cashcow on a spreadsheet. CFO knows he needs another 20% layoff in Q1 of 2023 to drive his cost of capital down further. Expect more pain from the suits.

[treis]

I think it's just really hard for a company to keep innovating like that. Once you get to a certain size about the best you can do is refinement on your existing product or muscle into adjacent products.

[ginger2016]

Are they doing a buy back? Didn’t Steve Jobs say trading cash by buying back stock the worst idea ever?

[ssharp]

For Snap? Probably. For Apple? Steve Jobs was never sitting on $100+ billion in cash. Though, Apple's buy backs + dividends made more sense given how profitable they were and how much cash they had on hand. Snap has never had positive operating income.

[advisedwang]

https://techstory.in/snapchat-announces-a-new-500-million-sh...

Both of these take a few months to plan, so from the timing of that story they must have been planning them simultaniously.

[htrp]

Depends on when the options of the executive team were issued..... and whether a buyback gets them back into the money?

[maerF0x0]

but the stock jumped 9% so wouldnt that be counter productive for buyback? (ie now you get less consolidation of ownership than before)

[robocat]

They don’t need more ownership: “The result is that Spiegel and Murphy own a whopping 99.5% voting control of the company.” - https://www.marketwatch.com/story/as-snap-melts-down-its-fou...

[maerF0x0]

my point is if the stock price jumps then the buyback occurs at a greater price per share, making the effect of the buyback less effective (fewer shares are eliminated)