[mritchie712]

I caught myself wondering how Google, Microsoft and Amazon let Snowflake win. You can argue they haven't won, but lets assume they have. Two things:

1. SNOW's market cap is $50B. GOOGL, MSFT, AMZN are all over $1T. Owning Snowflake would be a drop in the bucket for any of them (let alone if they were splitting the revenue).

2. Snowflake runs on AWS, GCP or Azure (customers choice), so a good chunk of their revenue goes back to these services.

Looking at these two points as the CEO of GOOGL, MSFT, or AMZN, I'd shrug away Snowflake "beating us". It's crazy that you can build a $50B company that your largest competitors barely care about.

[hnthrowaway0328]

I agree. The cloud providers are basically the guys who sell shovels in gold rush. Snowflake still needs to build on top the clouds so MAG never lose. I heard that SNOW is offering its own cloud services but I could be wrong -- and even if I'm correct they have a super long way to catch up.

[pm90]

What I heard is that AWS got there first with Redshift but then didn’t really invest as much as was required by users so Snowflake found an opening and pounced on it.

BigQuery in GCP is a pretty great alternative and I know that GCP invests/promotes it heavily, but they were slightly late to the market.

[datadrivenangel]

BigQuery is pretty great. The serverless by default setup works very well for most BI use cases. There are some weird issues when you're a heavy user and start hitting the normally hidden quotas.

[dsaavy]

There are some ways around the heavy user issues that aren't ideal but will work for BI-oriented heavy users.

[riku_iki]

> 1. SNOW's market cap is $50B. GOOGL, MSFT, AMZN are all over $1T. Owning Snowflake would be a drop in the bucket for any of them (let alone if they were splitting the revenue).

FAANG can't utilize their market cap to buy SNOW, they would need to pay cash, and 50B is very large amount for any of these companies (its about annual Google net income).

Also, snow stock is very inflated now, it is heavily income negative, and revenue not that high, stock price is very high on growth expectations.

[mritchie712]

My point is that they wouldn't want to buy it (or have focused much on building a competitive product) if it's only worth $50B.