Is Twitter More Valuable Than Dish Network, SiriusXM or Netflix?

[dfergie]

Wall Street says it is shortly after the social media company went public this morning. Twitter's valued at $24.6B with its stock price hovering around $46 a share. That makes it less valuable than Discovery Communications ($30.2B) — but more valuable than Dish Network ($22.3B), SiriusXM ($22.2B), and Netflix ($19.5B)

deadline.com

 

[foghorn2]

No, its all hot air. How many people does it employ? There's your answer. Creates no real value to the economy.

 

[Scherrman]

https://about.twitter.com/company

Looks like 2,000 employees.

 

[rvvaquero]

You don't take Wall Street's opinion, but you'll believe a bunch of geeks on a satellite forum? Hmmm.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

How much money has Twitter made since its been in operation?

Has it ever made a profit?

Think about that before buying. #dontbeasucker

 

[empiretc]

How much money has Twitter made since its been in operation?

Has it ever made a profit?

Think about that before buying. #dontbeasucker

#wedontmakemoney

Yep- same things with regards to fb.

How can anyone realistically invest in a company that produces absolutely nothing? What is going to happen when some faction finally goes after any of these companies for enabling bullying and being a gateway for all types of other malicious activity?

 

[wallyhts]

Another reason why i'm on the side lines with cash the market is over bought in my eyes. Except for my baby "gsat"

 

[Scherrman]

#wedontmakemoney

Yep- same things with regards to fb.

How can anyone realistically invest in a company that produces absolutely nothing? What is going to happen when some faction finally goes after any of these companies for enabling bullying and being a gateway for all types of other malicious activity?

Insurance companies do not produce anything. Banks do not produce anything. A lot of them seem to be profitable. Just because a company like Facebook doesn't produce anything doesn't mean it isn't making a ton of money. Companies pay Facebook and Twitter a lot of money to advertise and be seen by millions of people. If you have something that millions of people will see daily then companies want to be seen there.

 

[sethwell]

#wedontmakemoney Yep- same things with regards to fb. How can anyone realistically invest in a company that produces absolutely nothing? What is going to happen when some faction finally goes after any of these companies for enabling bullying and being a gateway for all types of other malicious activity?

Nothing? 2,000,000,000 sets of eyeballs staring at screens filled with pictures, words and ADS. That is the product produced by FB.

Nothing will happen by those groups, have they sued Georgia pacific, Bic, AT&T or Verizon. Pretty sure all of those technologies have been used for the same thing over the years.

 

[empiretc]

Insurance companies do not produce anything. Banks do not produce anything. A lot of them seem to be profitable. Just because a company like Facebook doesn't produce anything doesn't mean it isn't making a ton of money. Companies pay Facebook and Twitter a lot of money to advertise and be seen by millions of people. If you have something that millions of people will see daily then companies want to be seen there.

Insurance companies provide protection against risk (still no love for them here). Banks are financial institutions...... Not sure why you would even attempt to compare them.

Twitter makes no money, as of right now, but that will change. whether it is a good change or not is yet to be seen.

They are popular and people like popular.

 

[whatchel1]

#TwitterIPO Give a F, give a F, care, care, care, NOT. I use it a little, but the limitation on 140 is a PITA. I use FB more. FB isn't making money only because they keep plowing the money back into it.

 

[rvvaquero]

Since when does a company have to be in manufacturing or produce a product to have value. We live in a service oriented society. Banks, brokerage houses, money managers, etc. are a good comparison for Twitter or Facebook. They provide a service, in this case a social service.

Of course, I have no intention of investing in Twitter or Facebook. And, I dang sure don't participate on either. But, then, I'm anti-social.

 

[mike123abc]

The valuation of Twitter is based on what people think it will make in the future. I do not own the stock directly (I am sure some of my broad market mutual funds have bought into it, or will do so soon just because it is now a top stock), and do not plan to buy directly in the future. Facebook has had a hard time monetizing its service (i.e. selling ads), and I am suspect that twitter will be able to grow earning in line with expectations after a couple years.

 

[empiretc]

The valuation of Twitter is based on what people think it will make in the future. I do not own the stock directly (I am sure some of my broad market mutual funds have bought into it, or will do so soon just because it is now a top stock), and do not plan to buy directly in the future. Facebook has had a hard time monetizing its service (i.e. selling ads), and I am suspect that twitter will be able to grow earning in line with expectations after a couple years.

This is true, but there is nothing that really protects them from the next fad. it is surprising what they have evolved into, though. celebrity support played a vital role, but the only thing they really have is numbers and that can change in a heartbeat.

people in the know will make money off this. just like the .com and housing markets.

 

[Scherrman]

I myself use Twitter a lot. Far more than I ever thought I would. When I finally found the true purpose of it I started using it a lot. I use it mostly for up to date info on sports. I get lots of news there before I see or hear it anywhere else.

 

[Teehar]

Doesn't FB make money off of some of the apps and games they offer?I know several of the games offer credits to garner higher scores,or get past certain levels.They suckered me in with angry birds friends a few times,just gotta get the high score.