TWTR - Twitter, Inc.

[fareastwarriors]

Twitter Seeking to Raise $1 Billion in IPO

 

 

 

 

FORM S-1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000119312513390321/d564001ds1.htm

[Palantir]

Awesome, I love this company. Pretty much QoQ growth for ten quarters, global userbase, widely popular, an awesome platform for advertising. Once they are FCFE positive I'll start paying attention.

 

We have a new tech stock, let the trolling begin!

[Guest valueInv]

Sit back and watch them turn on the mobile advertising spigot from here on.

 

[ItsAValueTrap]

Twitter's advertising model could be banner ads 2.0.  Banner ads used to be very popular until advertisers realized that few people looked at them.  Rates could go down dramatically when advertisers start trying to measure their ROI and realizing that it's negative.

[Liberty]

Sit back and watch them turn on the mobile advertising spigot from here on.

 

Should we read this as: "I'll be buying"?

[Guest valueInv]

Sit back and watch them turn on the mobile advertising spigot from here on.

 

Should we read this as: "I'll be buying"?

 

Nope. I'll buy if they run into problems and the stock plummets like Facebook.

 

For now, I am content watching. I don't like to fish where everyone else is.

[siddharth18]

Sigh...do we NEED another tech thread? Unless one can make a solid case that Twitter is a VALUE STOCK.

[Mikenhe]

Sigh...do we NEED another tech thread? Unless one can make a solid case that Twitter is a VALUE STOCK.

can we discuss the value of a stock on its own thread in order to make our own determination or shall we run everything past you first?

 

you could just ignore the threads you don't like... or does the outrageous fee for accessing this forum dictate that you have to read every thread..

[Hielko]

Ladies & gentlemen; we have set a new record for derailing a tech thread! Good job everybody.

[DCG]

I still don't really get the point of Twitter.

 

 

I've had an account and follow some people, but the majority of my feed generally consists of useless retweets, comments on other people's walls (which I don't want to read), tweets from companies people I follow follow (which I don't care about), and lots of messages from spammers. On top of all that nonsense, sponsored Tweets, and the fact that a lot of well-known people pay other people to post on their behalf kills Twitters credibility.

 

 

Seems like a majority of Twitter users are businesses spamming people and other businesses.

[Guest valueInv]

I still don't really get the point of Twitter.

 

 

I've had an account and follow some people, but the majority of my feed generally consists of useless retweets, comments on other people's walls (which I don't want to read), tweets from companies people I follow follow (which I don't care about), and lots of messages from spammers. On top of all that nonsense, sponsored Tweets, and the fact that a lot of well-known people pay other people to post on their behalf kills Twitters credibility.

 

 

Seems like a majority of Twitter users are businesses spamming people and other businesses.

 

I don't get it either. But that may have to do with my grasp Rather than the value of Twitter's model.

[alwaysinvert]

I still don't really get the point of Twitter.

 

 

I've had an account and follow some people, but the majority of my feed generally consists of useless retweets, comments on other people's walls (which I don't want to read), tweets from companies people I follow follow (which I don't care about), and lots of messages from spammers. On top of all that nonsense, sponsored Tweets, and the fact that a lot of well-known people pay other people to post on their behalf kills Twitters credibility.

 

 

Seems like a majority of Twitter users are businesses spamming people and other businesses.

Even if you don't want to follow different people and whatnot (my own Twitter is tailored mainly towards investment/science related stuff), I find that for news Twitter is unparallelled right now and much better than Google News, which previously was the best source for fast news. If a stock suddenly falls 10%, the first thing I check is Twitter by just searching the company name and invariably relevant news stories and links will show up. In addition there will often be added commentary and discussion which often is of value.

 

I don't tweet myself because I don't find that I have that much to say, but I'm grateful that there are smart people who do (some of which frequent this board, like Plan Maestro).

 

[Palantir]

^Yep, remember when somebody hacked the AP News Twitter feed to say bombs went off at the White House?

 

New paradigms of advertising are really going to hurt the incumbent player, Google must be very worried.

[Guest valueInv]

^Yep, remember when somebody hacked the AP News Twitter feed to say bombs went off at the White House?

 

New paradigms of advertising are really going to hurt the incumbent player, Google must be very worried.

 

Wow, Palantir, that's quite a change of heart :D

 

Twitter has cemented itself as the official channel for

broadcast communications on the web. That is a very

good position to be in.

[Mikenhe]

can someone summarise this in 140 characters please....

[SmallCap]

Twitter spent a whopping 44% of its revenue, or almost $112 million, on research and development through the first half of 2013.

 

Facebook (FB) spent 19% of its revenue on R&D over the same period. Review listing app Yelp (YELP), which has a market cap under $5 billion, spent 15%. LinkedIn (LNKD), valued at $27 billion, used 26%. Bigger companies spend far less even than that. Apple (AAPL) allocated just 2.5% of its revenue to R&D over the nine months ended June 30.

 

The rate of spending is also far higher than Google’s (GOOG) research budget was back when it went public. It spent $91 million, or a little under 10% of its revenue, on R&D in 2003 and $35 million, or 9% of revenue, in the first quarter of 2004. And if you travel all the way back to 1986, Microsoft (MSFT) spent 12% of its revenue on R&D in the year before it went public. Fast forward to today and Google spends about 14% of revenue on research while Microsoft allocated 13%.

 

http://yhoo.it/GCPXf6

 

I am having a hard time understanding this kind of R&D. The attractiveness of Twitter to many people is the sheer simplicity of it. Unlike the complexity of so many other platforms such as linkedin and facebook. The Mobil app is so simple that it has a total of 4 buttons I think. Where is all this 112M going into R&D? What are they coming out with?

 

Also just another thought, It has been years since I read Phil Fishers book on growth companies but doesn't he make a lot out of what the R&D budget is in relation to revenue?

[SmallCap]

can someone summarise this in 140 characters please....

 

Summarised Twitter stye:

 

"Group of brilliant Investors weigh in on the value of $TWTR http://bit.ly/1bwCdAr "

 

;D

[Guest valueInv]

Twitter spent a whopping 44% of its revenue, or almost $112 million, on research and development through the first half of 2013.

 

Facebook (FB) spent 19% of its revenue on R&D over the same period. Review listing app Yelp (YELP), which has a market cap under $5 billion, spent 15%. LinkedIn (LNKD), valued at $27 billion, used 26%. Bigger companies spend far less even than that. Apple (AAPL) allocated just 2.5% of its revenue to R&D over the nine months ended June 30.

 

The rate of spending is also far higher than Google’s (GOOG) research budget was back when it went public. It spent $91 million, or a little under 10% of its revenue, on R&D in 2003 and $35 million, or 9% of revenue, in the first quarter of 2004. And if you travel all the way back to 1986, Microsoft (MSFT) spent 12% of its revenue on R&D in the year before it went public. Fast forward to today and Google spends about 14% of revenue on research while Microsoft allocated 13%.

 

http://yhoo.it/GCPXf6

 

I am having a hard time understanding this kind of R&D. The attractiveness of Twitter to many people is the sheer simplicity of it. Unlike the complexity of so many other platforms such as linkedin and facebook. The Mobil app is so simple that it has a total of 4 buttons I think. Where is all this 112M going into R&D? What are they coming out with?

 

Also just another thought, It has been years since I read Phil Fishers book on growth companies but doesn't he make a lot out of what the R&D budget is in relation to revenue?

 

Take this with a grain of salt, given my partial understanding of Twitter:

 

They have a core tweets +native ads business. Given the 140 character issue, that gives them only

so much heft. They are trying to expand what a Tweet is i.e. They are trying to embed things like widgets/webpages/ apps or cards into Tweets. If they succeed, it will result in a much bigger business.

 

No idea why their spending is so high. Maybe building their ad infrastructure?

[fareastwarriors]

I wonder how is Vine doing?

[SmallCap]

ValueInv,

 

Good thoughts, what you said about adding widgets/webpages/ apps or cards into Tweets makes sense. From what I know (not much) adding an advertising infrastructure into their current environment had better not cost them more then 20M. But as you say they may be trying to capitalize on the popularity of Twitter to add a lot more onto it.

 

 

[krazeenyc]

Best way to capitalize on twitter going public is apparently buying Tweeter and hoping people get confused. up 1800% at one pt today. lol

 

Long-Dead Tweeter Soars; Some Seek Twitter? -- Market Talk

10:39a ET October 4, 2013 (Dow Jones)

Long-Dead Tweeter Soars; Some Seek Twitter? -- Market Talk

10:39 EDT- Tweeter Home Entertainment (TWTRQ) filed for bankruptcy in November 2008, days before fellow electronics chain Circuit City, and both closed their stores soon thereafter. But TWTRQ seems to have gotten caught up in Twitter frenzy. TWTRQ first jumped from a fraction of a cent before jumping toward 4c after Twitter disclosed last month it confidentially filed initial IPO plans with the SEC. Shares subsequently moved back below a penny before late Thursday's public release of the filing, which includes plans for Twitter to have a TWTR ticker symbol. TWTRQ is up 1800% at 13c on volume of 4.2M shares; there's nearly 26M outstanding, according to FactSet.

[Guest wellmont]

I suspect that in the year after twitter goes public they will likely buy at least 10 companies with STOCK in an effort to build a sustainable business. that's the problem with shorting overpriced stuff in a liquidity pump. a high priced stock is an asset. the twitter you see today won't be the twitter you see in 2015.

[Kraven]

Twitter spent a whopping 44% of its revenue, or almost $112 million, on research and development through the first half of 2013.

 

Facebook (FB) spent 19% of its revenue on R&D over the same period. Review listing app Yelp (YELP), which has a market cap under $5 billion, spent 15%. LinkedIn (LNKD), valued at $27 billion, used 26%. Bigger companies spend far less even than that. Apple (AAPL) allocated just 2.5% of its revenue to R&D over the nine months ended June 30.

 

The rate of spending is also far higher than Google’s (GOOG) research budget was back when it went public. It spent $91 million, or a little under 10% of its revenue, on R&D in 2003 and $35 million, or 9% of revenue, in the first quarter of 2004. And if you travel all the way back to 1986, Microsoft (MSFT) spent 12% of its revenue on R&D in the year before it went public. Fast forward to today and Google spends about 14% of revenue on research while Microsoft allocated 13%.

 

http://yhoo.it/GCPXf6

 

I am having a hard time understanding this kind of R&D. The attractiveness of Twitter to many people is the sheer simplicity of it. Unlike the complexity of so many other platforms such as linkedin and facebook. The Mobil app is so simple that it has a total of 4 buttons I think. Where is all this 112M going into R&D? What are they coming out with?

 

Also just another thought, It has been years since I read Phil Fishers book on growth companies but doesn't he make a lot out of what the R&D budget is in relation to revenue?

 

Take this with a grain of salt, given my partial understanding of Twitter:

 

They have a core tweets +native ads business. Given the 140 character issue, that gives them only

so much heft. They are trying to expand what a Tweet is i.e. They are trying to embed things like widgets/webpages/ apps or cards into Tweets. If they succeed, it will result in a much bigger business.

 

No idea why their spending is so high. Maybe building their ad infrastructure?

 

R&D = long dinners at expensive restaurants with many bottles of pricey wine.  It also means trips to Vegas where the crew can see how people interact in "real life".  While there it includes long dinners at expensive restaurants with many bottles of pricey wine.  After those long dinners in whatever place it means long bullshit sessions that go into the wee hours of the night with many bottles of expensive booze.  All in the name of figuring out how to say what needs to be said in 140 characters.

[Guest valueInv]

Twitter spent a whopping 44% of its revenue, or almost $112 million, on research and development through the first half of 2013.

 

Facebook (FB) spent 19% of its revenue on R&D over the same period. Review listing app Yelp (YELP), which has a market cap under $5 billion, spent 15%. LinkedIn (LNKD), valued at $27 billion, used 26%. Bigger companies spend far less even than that. Apple (AAPL) allocated just 2.5% of its revenue to R&D over the nine months ended June 30.

 

The rate of spending is also far higher than Google’s (GOOG) research budget was back when it went public. It spent $91 million, or a little under 10% of its revenue, on R&D in 2003 and $35 million, or 9% of revenue, in the first quarter of 2004. And if you travel all the way back to 1986, Microsoft (MSFT) spent 12% of its revenue on R&D in the year before it went public. Fast forward to today and Google spends about 14% of revenue on research while Microsoft allocated 13%.

 

http://yhoo.it/GCPXf6

 

I am having a hard time understanding this kind of R&D. The attractiveness of Twitter to many people is the sheer simplicity of it. Unlike the complexity of so many other platforms such as linkedin and facebook. The Mobil app is so simple that it has a total of 4 buttons I think. Where is all this 112M going into R&D? What are they coming out with?

 

Also just another thought, It has been years since I read Phil Fishers book on growth companies but doesn't he make a lot out of what the R&D budget is in relation to revenue?

 

Take this with a grain of salt, given my partial understanding of Twitter:

 

They have a core tweets +native ads business. Given the 140 character issue, that gives them only

so much heft. They are trying to expand what a Tweet is i.e. They are trying to embed things like widgets/webpages/ apps or cards into Tweets. If they succeed, it will result in a much bigger business.

 

No idea why their spending is so high. Maybe building their ad infrastructure?

 

R&D = long dinners at expensive restaurants with many bottles of pricey wine.  It also means trips to Vegas where the crew can see how people interact in "real life".  While there it includes long dinners at expensive restaurants with many bottles of pricey wine.  After those long dinners in whatever place it means long bullshit sessions that go into the wee hours of the night with many bottles of expensive booze.  All in the name of figuring out how to say what needs to be said in 140 characters.

 

And you know that Twitter is spending its budget on pricey dinners from where?

[Liberty]

On the lighter side of things:

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-04/twitter-look-alike-ticker-triggers-684-advance-in-penny-stock.html

 

Oct. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Tweeter Home Entertainment Group Inc., the once-bankrupt home-entertainment retailer, surged 684 percent before trading was halted as traders confused the company with the microblogging service Twitter Inc.

 

The Canton, Massachusetts-based company trades over the counter under the ticker TWTRQ. Twitter, which is seeking to raise $1 billion in its initial share sale, will list under the ticker TWTR. Trading of Tweeter was halted at 12:42 p.m. New York time under the code U3, according to OTC Bulletin Board. “An extraordinary event has occurred or is ongoing that has had a material effect on the market,” it said. The stock rallied as much as 2,200% to 15 cents.

 

“Somebody probably got confused ahead of the Twitter IPO and either misspelled the name of the company or mistyped the ticker by adding a Q at the end,” Larry Peruzzi, senior equity trader at Cabrerra Capital Markets LLC in Boston said by phone. “The stocks like Tweeter and Lehman Brothers are out there and are completely unregulated where somebody can just buy a few thousand shares and it’s off to the races.”