Maybe the future is in these over-glorified social media lifestyle companies acquiring or bailing out "worthy" startups working on "hard problems". Sort of like how ad-funded Google is investing in health longevity research and the like.
The future is going to be funded from the largesse of dumb app companies, because the public would rather fund dumb app companies than rocket ship firms.
That or because it's more profitable to do so, especially on a risk-adjusted basis? What's with the negativity around funding apps if they create tangible value? What makes them "dumb"?
If you believe there's some amazing untapped opportunity in funding rocket ship companies, then perhaps you should raise some money from LPs and invest in rocket ship companies.
I saw pretty easily how Instagram could be worth a billion to FB, who has a social network and wants to expand their user base / stop competition from rising.
I don't understand how these shares that pay no dividend and give no voting power are worth $24 each. They are basically "SnapChat Fun Bucks." Anyone buying it just hoping another person down the line will pay more for it. On top of that, we know there's a large number of people holding it (employees) that are going to start selling their shares over the next year.
To be fair, you didn't take into account the difference that $1B was worth between those times. Not just inflation, but the economic situation in 2008 as well.
