or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general - Page 704

post #10546 of 11160

Seems everyone is dropping out of purchasing TWTR.  It makes sense because why would you buy the company when you can partner with it.  I wonder how lucrative the NFL live streaming deal was?  There has to be some way to profit from the platform but I doubt it users are clicking on ads but it could profit from other sorts of deals.

post #10547 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

Seems everyone is dropping out of purchasing TWTR.  It makes sense because why would you buy the company when you can partner with it.  I wonder how lucrative the NFL live streaming deal was?  There has to be some way to profit from the platform but I doubt it users are clicking on ads but it could profit from other sorts of deals.

I think the reason support for buying TWTR is low is because it can't make money. Why partner when you can subsume it's profits? And otherwise why partner with a sinking ship?

Someone will buy it, I sure hope they 're confident that they can unwind all the crappy decision making.
post #10548 of 11160
Thoughts on SnapChat IPO?

http://reut.rs/2dPw61W

I usually veer away from the hot stock du jour but was curious what others here thought.
post #10549 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by stimulacra View Post

Thoughts on SnapChat IPO?

http://reut.rs/2dPw61W

I usually veer away from the hot stock du jour but was curious what others here thought.

Depends on the final valuation.

 

I wouldn't touch it with a 20' pole. 

post #10550 of 11160
I'd look into shorting it after the inevitable post IPO bump.
post #10551 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchapiro View Post

Their accounts of working life at a bank sounds just like what most people will describe working at a bank branch like. It's an awful job.

Here we agree. It's probably as bad as working for Amazon.
post #10552 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post


Here we agree. It's probably as bad as working for Amazon.

Warehouse or corporate? 

post #10553 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchapiro View Post

Warehouse or corporate? 
Assume he meant warehouse. I have a cousin who works on the corporate side, smart guy, been there forever and is pretty high up the executive chain. I really only chat with him at weddings and funerals these days, but he seems to like his job and is hella hella rich.
post #10554 of 11160
Bezos should be jailed. Just saying.
post #10555 of 11160
Mostly warehouse but also corporate, there are folks that seem to love working there, but I've encountered a couple of people that detest it, especially at the lower rungs of white collar. They're a bit of a meat grinder in terms of how they treat their staff and one confirmed that NYT expose was pretty accurate. She said the office was the same as the warehouse minus the running.
post #10556 of 11160

I have quite a few friends who work at Amazon in corporate and the warehouse side.  Some work like dogs while others have a work life balance.  The same can be said for any company though as I work with people who put in 12hr days and are horribly inefficient but won't take advice to speed up their day.  Amazon puts the golden handcuffs on everyone so salaries never get very high but the RSUs are big.

 

I don't use Snapchat so I don't know how they make money.  Ads I would assume.  The only probably I see with ads is that everyone and their mom uses Google and Facebook.  We have mentioned Twitters interface can be tough to navigate so they won't get the volume of users that Facebook has.  Add to that Snapchat takes it another step with video messages which I don't see my mom or other older people ever using.  My mom has clicked through and bought items via Facebook ads but how many of the younger generation buy through ads?  I don't.

post #10557 of 11160

I know a few people at Amazon corporate in various functions.  The programming side burns through a lot of people.  I can also confirm what jbarwick is saying.   They basically cap salaries and everyone above that get it through stock bonuses.

post #10558 of 11160
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I know a few people at Amazon corporate in various functions.  The programming side burns through a lot of people.  I can also confirm what jbarwick is saying.   They basically cap salaries and everyone above that get it through stock bonuses.

Which means you have to linger around to vest and get your money, which may mean that once you decide to leave that you also leave shares on the table. In one of various forms this means you make very little (relative) monetary income for several years until your shares vest, then you are always on the treadmill.

I'm not sure why this is of value to anyone. Especially since how I understand it, Amazon makes this type of thing take an inordinately long time. It's a risky model since anything can tank that stock, and you're going to have a lot of unhappy employees in that event.

Also, if you get shown the door... all that equity goes with it.

I'm sure there are details I'm leaving out, and that I'm not aware of, but more or less you get hosed on salary with some future promise of stock rewards. Seems like dangling that stock carrot is what keeps people around. In my view, when it comes to employment income you don't trade future promises for cash on hand.
post #10559 of 11160
Yes, heaven forbid one negotiates some deferred income, it must all be on this week's paycheque or you're getting screwed. I think Burns was writing to many people, as much as he was to the "wee beastie," when in his poem To A Mouse he said:
Quote:
Still, thou art blest, compar'd wi' me!
The present only toucheth thee:

Not all deferred income schemes are mutually beneficial to both employee and employer but it's hard for me to think all of them are bad and that I need 100% compensation this week.
post #10560 of 11160

There are pros and cons to both sides, obviously.  I know people there on the programming side, and my wife knows people in non-technology roles.  It is certainly odd for mid-level individual contributors to have such a high percentage of their income in stock options that vest over like three years.  I think it plays off people's loss aversion and creates golden handcuffs.

 

I wouldn't work at Amazon because I don't want to take a cut in guaranteed income to move to a higher cost of living area, but to each their own.  I will say that a lot of my college classmates went to places like Google or other established Silicon Valley based tech companies and did get stock options or stock as bonuses, but it wasn't 50% of their income.  I also know people who went to startups and equity was the largest part of their income.  It worked out for some, others not so much.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Business, Careers & Education
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Business, Careers & Education › Talking stocks, trading, and investing in general