Snap Inc. 的首次公开募股

但镜头是Snapchat有而Instagram还没有的独特功能。

But lenses are the one sort of piece product feature that Snapchat has that Instagram doesn't yet.

有趣的是，无论你读S-1文件，我都在想，到底有多少人真的在用镜头？

And what's interesting is either you read through the S-one and I was thinking like, okay, well like how many people actually use Lenses?

显然，每天有三分之一的Snapchat用户使用镜头。

And apparently a third of Snapchat users use Lenses every day.

哇。

Wow.

而且你读到的Snap在技术和基础设施上的投资，很多都投入到了支持镜头的技术上，这让你开始思考移动和增强现实之后的下一代，当然还有Spectacles眼镜。

And that's what you read through and all the technology investments and infrastructure investments that Snap is making, a lot of that is going into, the technology powering Lenses which starts to make you think about the next generation after mobile and augmented reality and then of course there's Spectacles.

你知道，Snap是不是在利用IPO和S-1文件，把自己定位成准备迎接下一波科技浪潮，并表明他们相信那将是增强现实？

Know, is Snap kind of setting up using the IPO and their S-one to set themselves up as, being positioned for the next wave in tech and putting a stake in the ground that they believe that's gonna be augmented reality?

哦，天哪。

Oh, man.

对。

Yeah.

而且想想看，他们说 Snap 是一家相机公司，这真的很有意思。

And it's super interesting to think about, you know, when they say, you know, Snap is a camera company.

就像柯达以前也是做相机的。

Well, like, Kodak was a camera company.

那到了今天，苹果还算是一家相机公司吗？

And then, like, today, like, is is Apple a camera company?

或者说，索尼和三星才是真正制造那些内置镜头的公司。

Or, you know, Sony and Samsung make the actual the the the actual actual lenses that go in there.

所以他们算是全球第一的相机制造商吗？当然，这里的相机是加了引号的。

So are are they the number one camera, quote, unquote, camera manufacturer in the world?

说实话，我对Snap自称是家相机公司持保留态度，不过他们现在确实把Spectacles的硬件全栈都做出来了。

And, you know, I'd be a little bit more skeptical of Snap saying they're a camera company, except that they have they actually do the full stack in making the hardware now of of Spectacles.

实际上，这些硬件大概率是由那些为智能手机制造镜头和传感器的代工厂生产的。

And realistically, those are probably OEM ed in by by the same folks that that make the actual lenses and actual sensors that are in in smartphones.

但如果你顺着这个思路继续推演，比如把苹果也看作一家相机公司的话……

But as you continue to extrapolate that so let's look at Apple as a camera company.

我们从纯光学相机过渡到了混合光学和软件相机的时代。

We we crossed over from from, like, pure optics based cameras into hybrid optics and software based cameras.

比如几年前智能手机那一代，镜头和传感器都非常小，而且彼此靠得很近。

Like, several years ago in the smartphone generation, there was such tiny little lenses and sensors, and they're they're so close to each other.

实际上没有太多物理条件能产生高质量图像，所以我们得做很多复杂的伪装，还有用户看不到的软件后期处理。

There's not a lot of, like, actual physics that that would produce, high quality images, and we have to, like, do a lot of really tricky faking and and kind of, like, post production in software that the user is never exposed to.

突然之间，随着iPhone 7 Plus的出现，这一点变得非常明显，因为它有两个镜头。

And that's suddenly, with with the iPhone seven Plus, become extremely visible with with the fact that there's two lenses.

他们从不暴露你从广角切换到长焦的事实。

There's a they never expose the fact that you're switching from wide to telephoto.

只是有一个平滑的滑块，直接到2倍变焦。

There's just this, like, you know, smooth slider into two x.

它真正在做的是，实时合成两个镜头的图像，并进行大量高级计算，不仅用于人像模式，而且始终利用这两个镜头的优势。

And the thing that it's really doing there is, like, it's always in real time compositing a a, mashup of of the two Lenses and and doing a lot of really advanced computation on the fly, not just for portrait mode, but always to be taking advantage of of both of those Lenses.

所以

And so

我觉得这其实和Snapchat的镜头功能很相似，对吧？

And and I think that's that's actually a great analogy to what Lenses in Snapchat are doing, right?

那就是增强现实，需要大量的处理能力。

That is augmented reality and that requires a lot of processing power.

到目前为止，增强现实和虚拟现实都是些笨重的东西，没人想要，还花很多钱，而且不清楚能用来做什么，你知道吗？

And augmented reality thus far in virtual reality have been these really clunky things that nobody wants that cost a lot of money that it's unclear what you do with them, know?

对。

Yep.

但Snapchat让这一切变得非常简单。

But Snapchat just makes that really easy.

这一切都在幕后进行。

It's just all behind the scenes.

而且正如我们稍后会聊到的，这让他们在托管费用和技术资源上花费了很多。

And as we learn, we'll talk about this in a minute, it's costing them a lot in hosting fees and technology resources to be able to do that.

是的。

Yeah.

完全同意。

Totally.

所以关于这一点，我觉得当他们说自己是相机公司时，世界已经变了，相机不再只是一个物理设备。

So to close on that one, I think when they say they're a camera company, the world has moved to a place now where a camera is not just a physical thing.

相机是一个完整的硬件、软件、服务堆栈，当你这样理解所谓的“相机”时，它可能是一个硬件、软件、服务网络堆栈，这就让“哦，我明白了”变得更有说服力。

A camera is a full hardware software services stack, and that starts when you think about what a, quote, unquote, camera is that way and the the fact that maybe it's a hardware software services network stack, that starts to lend a lot more credibility to, oh, I see.

Snapchat 就是现代相机的完整堆栈。

Snapchat is really the full stack of the modern camera.

好了，听众朋友们。

Alright, listeners.

现在是感谢我们的老朋友 ServiceNow 的好时机。

Now is a great time to thank our longtime friend of the show, ServiceNow.

如果你在运营一家大型企业，AI 代理可能分布在每个团队中，部署它们已经不再是难事了。

If you are running a large enterprise, AI agents are likely spread across every team, and deploying them is, no longer the hard part.

对。

Yeah.

难点在于了解它们有什么权限，员工在用它们做什么，或者AI在做哪些决策。

The hard part is knowing what permissions they have, what employees are using them for, or what decisions AI is making.

对于大型企业来说，AI安全可不是小事。

AI security for an enterprise at scale is not a small concern.

风险是真实存在的。

Like, the risks are real.

没错。

Exactly.

而且AI的挑战在于管理、保护、衡量它，并确保它真正带来价值。

And the challenge with AI is governing it, securing it, measuring it, and making sure that it actually delivers value.

这就是ServiceNow打造AI控制塔的原因。

That is why ServiceNow built the AI control tower.

对。

Yep.

AI控制塔为企业提供了一个统一的地方，来查看、管理、治理和优化整个业务中的AI。

AI control tower gives enterprises a single place to see, manage, govern, and optimize AI across the entire business.

而且它适用于任何AI，不只是他们自己的。

And it works with any AI, not just theirs.

你网络上的每个设备，每个系统中的每个权限，每个AI代理，都在一个地方可见且安全。

Every device on your network, every permission across every system, every AI agent visible and secure in one place.

ServiceNow能做到这一点，是因为他们花了二十多年时间构建企业的运营骨干，包括工作流、治理、审批、安全控制，以及推动IT、人力资源、客户服务、财务和安全领域实际工作完成的机构知识。

And ServiceNow can do this because they've spent more than twenty years building the operational backbone of the enterprise, the workflows, governance, approval, security controls, and institutional knowledge that power how work actually gets done across IT, HR, customer service, finance, and security.

ServiceNow每年已经运行超过1000亿个工作流，为超过85%的财富500强企业处理数万亿笔交易。

ServiceNow already runs more than a 100,000,000,000 workflows annually and trillions of transactions for more than 85% of the Fortune 500.

所以当公司需要在企业规模上治理AI时，他们是在一个已经处于业务运营核心的平台上进行构建。

So when companies need a place to govern AI at enterprise scale, they're building on a platform at the center of how their business already operates.

而且未来不会只有一个AI，而是会有成千上万个AI代理在公司各个职能部门协同工作。

And in a future that isn't going to be one AI, it's going to be thousands of AI agents working across every function of the company.

但问题是，谁来管理它们全部？

But the question is, who's managing them all?

所以如果你想把AI的雄心转化为实际的业务成果，并确保它在规模上安全、可靠地运行，就去看看servicenow.com/acquired，告诉他们是本和戴维推荐你来的。

So if you're trying to turn AI ambition into real business outcomes and make it work safely, securely at scale, go check out servicenow.com/acquired and tell them that Ben and David sent you.

我们继续讲第二点吗？

Should we go on to number two?

对。

Yeah.

来吧。

Let's do it.

Snap 的叙事里，他们希望你相信的第二个主要观点是，他们是一家品牌广告业务，这和目前互联网上那些巨头广告网络——比如 Facebook 和 Google——有着根本的不同。

So the the second, main point in Snap's narrative that they'd like you to believe is that they are a brand advertising business, which is fundamentally different than the gigantic elephant in the room major, major ad networks on the Internet right now of Facebook and Google.

他们真正想说的是，我们是在跟电视竞争，而不是跟印刷媒体竞争。

And what they're really saying there is we are attacking TV, not print media.

对于没有玩过 Snap 广告平台，或者 Facebook、Google 广告平台的人来说，在 Facebook 和 Google 上，你可以做非常精准的定向，而且真的可以非常细致地选择你要触达的人群类型。

And for anyone who's, who hasn't played around with the the Snap ad platform versus Facebook or Google's ad platforms, on Facebook and Google, you can do pretty incredible targeting, and you get to really finally, get extremely granular on what type of demographics you're you're reaching.

而且，你知道，比如你用 Google 的再营销之类的，你可以追踪人们在网上的行为，可以做各种事情。

And you also, you know, like, when you're when you're using Google remarketing and things like that, like, you can you can track people around the web, and you can do all sorts of things.

而 Snapchat 在这方面，至少目前来看，是非常注重隐私的。

Snapchat is this super, like, at least right now, privacy first.

我们不会给你那种超精准的定向投放。

We are not gonna give you incredible targeting.

你就像买电视广告一样，买一大片受众，然后就能触达一大群人。

You you buy big broad swaths like you would a television commercial, and and you just reach a bunch of people.

所以他们本质上是在追求规模，就像品牌广告业务需要的那种规模。

So So they're fundamentally, you know, driving for scale there the way that you need scale for for brand advertising businesses.

另外，Snapchat上你其实没法真正点击跳转。

And the other thing is that you can't really, like, click through a Snapchat.

那些Snapchat广告没法把人带到你的网站，然后优化转化率什么的。

There's there's no way with those Snapchat ads to land on someone's site and have them optimize conversion rates and all these things.

这就像谷歌和Facebook的应用安装平台，它们就是干这个的。

It's like way that Google and and Facebook with their app install platform, like, like, that's what they are.

完全同意。

Totally.

就是，就是，就是……

It's it's it's

就像转化机器一样。

like conversion machines.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

更像是，看，这是新款雪佛兰。

It's more like, here's a new Chevy.

多想想雪佛兰。

Think about Chevy a lot.

对。

Yeah.

嗯，这里有几个非常重要的点。

Well, and there's just like there are a couple really really important points here.

你知道，第一，Snap在这里提出的观点是，正如Ben所说，他们正在瞄准电视广告市场。

You know, one, Snap is making the argument here, that as Ben said, know, they are going after TV, after television.

他们瞄准的并不是互联网广告。到目前为止，网络广告在很大程度上只是传统分类广告和直接响应式广告的翻版。

They are not going after, you know, in a lot of ways, the internet advertising to this point has been a reinvention of kind of the classified ad, the direct response.

电视虽然还在，但它根本没法像传统在线广告那样做到精准的数据衡量。

TV has persisted but TV is not measurable in anywhere near the same degree that traditional online advertising is.

而且规模也小得多。虽然美国看电视的人数确实不少，但跟用谷歌、用脸书的人比起来，那就差远了。

And it's smaller like the number of people in The US who watch TV, is large but relative to the number of people who use Google, who use Facebook, etcetera like it's much smaller.

不过，脸书和谷歌没有而电视有的东西，就是用户参与度。Snap的核心卖点也就在这儿：我们有高参与度。

But what TV has that Facebook, that Google don't is engagement and the whole Snap's whole narrative around this is we have engagement.

对，我们比Facebook小。

Yes, we're smaller than Facebook.

对，我们比Instagram小。

Yes, we're smaller than Instagram.

对，我们甚至比Twitter还小。

Yes, we're even smaller than Twitter.

但他们为了在S-one上宣传，真是煞费苦心。你知道的，他们强调Snapchat用户平均每天打开应用18次。

But they make, they make go to great lengths in the S-one talking about, you know, the average Snapchat user opens the app 18 times a day.

这是平均值。

This is on average.

大概，

For, what,

二十分钟到二十五分钟。

twenty twenty five minutes.

每天在Snapchat上花二十五到三十分钟。

Twenty five to thirty minutes in Snapchat every day.

他们声称这和电视历史上的参与度是同一水平。

And and they argue that that is the same level of engagement that, television has historically seen.

对。

Yeah.

我们得指出，尽管人们在屏幕前——不管是电脑屏幕还是手机屏幕——花在应用和网页上的时间远远超过看电视的时间。

And we should call out that, despite the fact that there's way more, time spent in front of a a screen, be it desktop or a phone screen interacting with apps in the web than than there is on TV.

这种情况早就发生了，人们花在网上的时间比看电视的时间多。

That sort of happened a while ago where people are spending more more time on the Internet than they are in front of a TV.

但在2017年之前，也就是今年真正发生转变的第一年，广告投入一直远远落后。

But until 2017, this is the first year that this is actually gonna happen, the ad spend has totally lagged it.

所以电视广告支出一直超过数字广告支出，而现在终于要追上了，资金方面比用户注意力的转移晚了五到十年。

So the the ad spend on television has has outpaced digital ad spend, and finally, we're gonna, have this catch up where the the dollars are five to ten years behind the switch in, in engagement.

Snap在路演视频里甚至可能在一季报里都提到过这一点，他们确实借着这股东风。你知道的，广告商正在寻找一种数字化的投放渠道，因为所有的广告投放都在往那边转，毕竟用户的注意力和参与度也在那儿。他们想要那种像可口可乐那样铺天盖地、覆盖全球的品牌曝光效果。

So Snap is is I think they even say this in their roadshow video and possibly their s one that they they really have a tailwind here of, you know, the the the dollar spend from from advertisers is that they're looking for a place in a a digital format because that's where all the ad buying is shifting, because that's where all the attention and engagement is, and they're looking to buy the sorts of, you know, incredibly broad Coca Cola style blanket the entire world with advertising, for for their brand.

所以他们正在寻找一个能让他们把这笔钱投出去，并产生以往那种熟悉效果的渠道。

And they're they're looking to they're looking for a place to deploy those dollars in in a in the produce the effect that they're used to spending.

品牌广告这块其实规模大得多，具体数字我不太清楚，但肯定比目前主导网络的直接效果广告要高出不少。

And brand advertising is just it it I actually don't know the numbers, but it's it's significantly larger than this direct response advertising that's dominated the web to date.

没错。

Yep.

接着我们来看Snap叙事里第三个关键点，也就是他们把自己定位为一家革命性的相机公司。

And, and so then, let's jump to the to the third, the third piece critical piece we we see in in Snap's narrative, which is really the, you know, taking one, you know, we are this revolutionary camera company.

他们的形象和你想象的不一样。

We are not what you think we are.

我们代表一种全新的愿景，而且我们要进入的市场跟其他互联网公司以前做过的非常不一样。

We're a new vision, and we're going after this market that is very different from what other internet companies have gone after before.

我们能做到这一点，是因为我们的联合创始人兼CEO埃文·斯皮格尔是一位十年一遇的产品天才。

The reason we're able to do this is that our founder, co founder and CEO Evan Spiegel is a once in a generation product genius.

关于Snap的这个说法已经流传很久了。

And this has been a narrative around Snap for a long time.

顺便提一下，这里要厚着脸皮安利一下我们之前的那期节目。

Actually, you know, again, to to plug our our previous episode, you know, shameless self promotion here.

在上一期关于 Snapchat 的节目里，我们深入聊了伊万的经历。他可不是那种随便辍学去开家 App 公司的普通小孩。

The previous Snapchat episode, we actually dive into Evan's history, and he's not just some random kid who dropped out of college to found, you know, another app company.

从他斯坦福大学早期的表现就能看出来，他确实有着非常特别的才能。

It was pretty clear from his early days at Stanford that he was he had some very special talent.

他甚至说服自己进入了设计学院（d.school），这地方通常只给研究生留名额，而且可能是全球最负盛名的设计学院。

He talked his way into the d school which is normally reserved only for graduate students and is probably the most famous design school in the world.

设计学院的创始人、也是咨询公司 IDEO 的创始人戴维·凯利，最后成了伊万的直接导师。

David Kelly who founded the d school and was founder of IDEO, the consulting firm ended up becoming Evan's direct advisor.

还有斯科特·库克，Intuit的董事长，硅谷的知名人物。

And Scott Cook, the chairman of Intuit and famous Silicon Valley luminary.

他在斯坦福的时候遇到了埃文。

He met Evan while he was at Stanford.

他立刻雇了埃文，帮忙开发一个他认为在Intuit非常重要的产品。

He hired him immediately to help work on a product that he thought was super important at Intuit.

你知道，他确实很有才华。

You know, he does have a lot of talent.

对。

Yep.

这一点在S-1文件里也体现得很明显。

And and that is on display in the S-one.

我是说，你读产品部分的时候，就像本说的那样，那真是最清晰的思考，对用户和问题有非常深刻的理解，也解释了为什么Snap的产品会做成那样。

I mean, you read the product section and like Ben was saying, I mean, it's some of the most clear thinking, really compelling understanding of users and problems and why Snap's product, why their products are built the way they are.

完全同意。

Totally.

而且我们还应该提一下，他们在S-1里并没有真正把Evan Spiegel说成是产品天才。

And it's it's we should also call out, they talk about, they don't really, in the in the S-one, talk about Evan Spiegel as the product genius.

那更像是媒体在暗示、旁敲侧击的那种说法。

That's sort of like the the the hint hint hint, nudge, nudge, like, the way that the media has sort of spun this.

但他们说的是，Snap是一家创新公司，我们作为公司做了这些事情。

But they talk about, you know, Snap is an innovation company and that we as a company have done these things.

他们确实没有把他称为那种百年一遇的产品天才，但是——

And they they definitely don't refer to him as, like, a a once in a lifetime product genius, but

但言下之意很明显，他们——

the implication is clearly what they

就是想暗示这个。

want to imply.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

而且，你知道，他们确实很神秘，但如果能听到那些离开Snapchat的人在未来十年里聊聊产品开发流程是怎样的，是不是都来自高层，还是有很多值得信赖的副手参与，那会非常有意思。

And, you know, that they have an secrecy about them, but it is it would be really interesting, and we'll probably hear this in the ensuing decade from folks that have left Snapchat to to kinda talk about, you know, what is the product development process there, and and and how does it, you know, does it sort of all come from the top, or or are there a lot of trusted lieutenants?

而且我确实从那边的一些人那里听说，他们采用了一种老派微软式的做法，就是让内部团队互相竞争。

And I I do know from just kind of talking to a couple folks there that they do the kind of old school Microsoft style thing of having internal teams that compete.

这其实和苹果的做法一样，比如同时有两个团队在秘密开发iPhone，一个愿景被提出来，然后有两个人各自带着小团队秘密工作，互不知道对方在做什么，看谁能更好地实现那个愿景。

So it's in actually the same way Apple sort of did too with, you know, two different teams working on the iPhone at the same time, where, you know, a vision is laid out, and and there are two people working in secret that don't know what the other person is working on, kind of leading very small teams that are seeing who can who can, better fulfill that vision.

而且很多时候，你甚至不知道有另一个人在做和你一样的事情，但肯定有这种观念，就是我们所做的需要大量创造力和创新，这需要多个人去探索同一个愿景的不同版本。

And often, you don't necessarily know that that there's another person working on the same thing that you're working on, but there's definitely this notion of, you know, what we're doing requires a lot of creativity and a lot of invention and a lot of newness, and that comes from multiple people exploring different incarnations of the same vision.

对。

Yep.

所以这就是Snap的叙事。

So that's Snap's narrative here.

你知道，第一，我们是一家相机公司。

You know, one, we're a camera company.

我们不是社交网络。

We're not a social network.

第二点，我们是做品牌广告业务的。

Two, we're a brand advertising business.

我们的目标是抢占电视广告市场的份额。

We're attacking TV.

我们不会主动去和脸书、谷歌抢市场。

We're not attacking Facebook and Google.

第三点，无论是公司本身，还是我们的创始人埃文，还有那位联合创始人——如果你看过路演视频就会知道，首席技术官兼联合创始人博比·墨菲在视频里的地位也非常高。

Three, we as a company and our founder, co founder Evan, and actually if you watch the roadshow video, Bobby Murphy, the CTO and co founder is super elevated in that as well.

所以只把功劳归到埃文一个人身上，其实是不对的。

So it's wrong to say just Evan.

但埃文和鲍比带领的这支团队，真的是几十年才会出一次的顶尖队伍。

But Evan and Bobby are know, this team is once in a generation.

要知道，我们就像是下一个苹果公司，我们的团队就像当年乔布斯带领的苹果那样。

You know, we are the next, you know, Apple and Steve Jobs here.

这就是Snap对外塑造的形象。

That's the snap narrative.

那我们聊聊投资者的叙事，媒体和投资者的叙事。

So let's talk about the investor narrative, the media and the investor narrative.

而且，实际上，稍微停顿一下。

And actually, taking taking a quick pause.

我甚至从来没想过，我们在规划这期节目的结构时，我在整理我的思路。

I never even you know, we were laying out the structure of this episode, and I'm formulating my thoughts.

我之前没真正意识到，他们描绘的画面是，通过这些小小的细节，你知道，我们是产品创新者，我们尊重你的隐私，我们是一家相机公司，我们不是软件公司，这些东西，你知道，我们就是下一个苹果。

I didn't really realize that, the picture they're they're painting by taking these little, you know, we're product innovators, and we respect your privacy, and we're a camera company, and we're not a software like, these things are like, we're the next Apple.

就像，拿我们和苹果比。

Like, comp us against Apple.

别拿我们和推特比。

Don't comp us against Twitter.

对。

Yep.

没错。

Exactly.

但这里有个问题，就是Snapchat是广告业务，不是消费品业务。对。

There's just one problem with that, and that's that Snapchat is a advertising based business, not a consumer products business Yeah.

至少目前是这样。

At least today.

没错。

Right now.

这正好引出了那些更持怀疑态度的投资者的看法。

Which is the perfect lead in into what the slightly more skeptical investor narrative is.

第一点，任何关注过相关报道的人都知道，Snapchat的用户增长出了问题，而这个问题就是Instagram。

And and point number one, here, which anybody who's been been following, you know, the stories will be unsurprising is, hey, Snapchat has a growth problem, a a user growth problem, and that problem's name is Instagram.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

而且他们的用户增长曲线很有意思，看起来很像一条S形曲线。

And there's a a pretty interesting graph of their, their user growth that looks a lot like an s curve.

比如在2014年初的时候增长比较慢，然后开始加速。

Like, kinda slower in in the beginning of twenty fourteen, speeds up.

你会看到一个很陡的上升趋势，一直到大概2016年第二季度，然后就有连续三个季度左右开始趋于平缓。

You get a nice steep slope till about, what, q two of twenty sixteen, and then you have, like, three three quarters in a row of kind of, like, leveling off.

对，没错。

And Yep.

这确实很巧合地跟

That really aligns, kind of coincidentally with the

Instagram故事功能的推出

The launch of Instagram stories.

对。

Yeah.

没错。

Exactly.

这就是为什么你提到

And that's why you called

你知道，就是说，嘿，Snapchat发明了这种格式，我们把这个格式拿过来，带到我们的网络里，因为我们是Facebook宇宙，是占主导地位的社交网络。是的，Snapchat会跟你说他们是一家相机公司，但你知道，你把照片分享给朋友，而我们才是朋友公司。

know, it says like, hey, Snapchat invented this format and we we are taking this format and we are bringing it to our network because we, the Facebook universe is the dominant social network and yes, Snapchat will tell you they're a camera company but like, you know, you share you share your pictures with your friends, and we are the friends company.

对。

Yeah.

而且，这挺有意思的，再多给点背景信息。

And it's it's interesting to to give a little bit more context too.

Snapchat大概有多少活跃用户？1.6亿？

So Snapchat has, what, like, 160,000,000 active users?

差不多吧。

Something something

Snap的日活是1.58亿。

SNESO, Snap has a 158,000,000 daily And, active

你知道，当你看到这个数字，跟Instagram和Facebook本身比起来，简直是小巫见大巫。

know, when you when you look at that, it it totally pales in comparison to, to Instagram and and Facebook proper.

但关键的区别在于，这基本上是国内和国际的对比。

But the important delineation there is that it's basically domestic versus international.

Snapchat在美国的市场渗透率确实很高。

Like, there are Snapchat's got real good saturation in The US.

但在其他国家，它的用户普及率非常低。

They have very, very little adoption in, in other countries.

而且不仅用户少，在其他地方的变现能力也很差。

And and not only do they not have, great adoption, but they're not monetizing well elsewhere anywhere.

没错，这点很对，但这也正是真正考验实力的地方。

Well, and here's here's where, yes, very true, but this is where the rubber really hits the the road, you know.

自从2016年8月Instagram推出快拍功能，以便在产品层面更直接地与Snapchat竞争以来。

In since Instagram launched Instagram Stories to compete much more directly with Snapchat product wise in August 2016.

从那时之前的一个季度到现在，Instagram的日活跃用户增加了1亿。

From the quarter before then until now, Instagram has added a 100,000,000 daily active users.

他们在七个月内从3亿增长到了4亿，哇。

They went from 300,000,000 to 400,000,000 in seven months Wow.

这说明他们的增长速度加快了，而且是非常巨大的加速。

Which is an acceleration of their growth, a huge acceleration.

同一时期，Snapchat 却停滞不前了。

In that same time, Snapchat has flatlined.

他们在同一时期只增加了1500万日活用户，这比他们之前的增长速度要低得多。

They added 15,000,000 DAU in the same in the same period, which is lower growth than they much lower growth than they had earlier than that.

所以，这对Snap来说可不是什么好兆头。

So, like, this is a this is not a good narrative for Snap.

对。

Yeah.

所以接下来的问题是，如果你开始思考每家公司各自的优势，Facebook和Instagram有结构性优势，他们可以慢慢来，等待时机，并且知道他们有优秀的团队，能够以适合这些平台的方式实现这些功能，然后通过找到正确的方式将这种机制融入产品，从而获得像那样惊人的1亿日活用户增长。

And so then the question is, if you start to think about sort of what each of these companies has going for them, Facebook and Instagram have a structural advantage where they can buy their time and wait and know that they have great teams that that can implement these features in an appropriate way for those platforms and then get those insane 100,000,000 DAU spikes like that by figuring out the right way to incorporate that mechanic into their product.

Snapchat的优势在于，他们从根本上相信——或者我猜，现在投资Snapchat的话，我们可以在结论部分再讨论这个——你必须相信Snapchat能够在新用户的产品体验上做出更具创新性和趣味性的东西，而Facebook则能够利用他们在行业中的结构性优势进行复制。

What Snapchat has going for them is they fundamentally believe that, or I guess to invest in Snapchat right now, and we can revisit this later in the conclusion, you have to believe that Snapchat can do things that are more innovative and more interesting in a a product sense for new users then Facebook will be able to leverage their structural advantage in the industry and copy.

所以，这归根结底是——因为我不认为一定存在时间窗口上的优势。

And so what that sorta comes down to is can because I don't think there's necessarily, like, a time window advantage.

假设Facebook在Snapchat推出新功能的三到六个月后就全部复制过来。

Let's say Facebook copies everything three months or six months after after Snapchat.

我觉得Snapchat不会拥有这种优势，也就是说，它们不太可能跑在前面，在那么短的时间内积累起足够的用户。

I don't think that Snapchat's gonna have this advantage of, like, they're gonna get out ahead, and they're gonna they're gonna, you know, get enough users in that short window.

我觉得这种情况不会发生。

I don't think that's gonna happen.

你需要相信的是，Snapchat能找到一种方法，吸引大量新的日活跃用户，而且Facebook没法复制这一点。凭借现有的网络效应和产品基础，Facebook并没有足够的杠杆去给Snapchat不断设置障碍。

I think the thing that you have to believe is that Snapchat can figure out a thing to do that gets a whole bunch of new daily active users, that Facebook is not in the position to copy, that having that existing network and that those existing products doesn't give them the leverage to, to you know keep building these roadblocks for Snapchat.

说到这儿，这让我想到我们这期节目里会聊到的内容——其实这期是跟另一个播客《互联网历史》做的跨界合作，录制时间比这期早，但播出时间在下周。

Well and this for me is really, you know in our episode, that actually is gonna come out after this but that we recorded earlier this week with our crossover episode with the Internet History podcast coming out next week.

谢谢布莱恩，这期节目太精彩了。

Thank you Brian, that was a blast.

我之前在和布拉德·斯通聊优步和滴滴那期节目里提到过，这一期以及下周要出的那一期，真的让我重新思考了竞争和护城河的问题。

But I talked about how in the Uber Didi episode we did with Brad Stone, this episode and that one that's coming out next week really has made me think about competition and moats.

说实话，Facebook及其整个生态，包括Instagram，都拥有巨大的护城河。

And man does Facebook and the Facebook universe, the Facebook app universe including Instagram, they have this enormous moat.

如果你把这场竞争看作社交网络之间的较量，那Facebook就是那个真正的社交网络平台。

As long if you think about this as a competition between social networks, Facebook is the social network.

他们有这个优势，而且确实存在。

They have it, it exists.

再看看Snapchat的核心用户群在哪里？

And then you look at who, where is Snapchat's core user base?

主要是青少年和更小的孩子，还有那些第一次在网上建立社交关系的年轻人，他们可以在Snap上建立这些关系。

It's in teens, preteens and then teens who were building their social graph online for the first time and they could build that on Snap.

但Facebook基本上拥有整个现有的世界。

But Facebook has literally the entire existing world.

所以Snap可以瞄准年轻人，他们确实取得了一些进展，Facebook也肯定在关注。

So Snap can go after the young folks and that's, you know, they have certainly made inroads and Facebook is definitely paying attention.

但Facebook和Instagram拥有所有人，他们可以拿枪去参加刀战。

But Facebook and Instagram have everybody that they can bring a gun to a knife fight.

对。

Yeah.

然后我一直在想，Snapchat能不能想出一些东西，让这个优势不再那么明显？

And then that I continue to think, like, will will Snapchat be able to come up with something where that's actually not an advantage?

对，就是这样。

Where, like Exactly.

想象一下，比如在一个峡谷里打仗，现有的巨头有十万士兵堵在峡谷中间。

There's imagine, like, there's a battle in a canyon, and there's the, you know, incumbent that's got a 100,000 soldiers that are all blocking the middle of the canyon.

有没有可能，Snapchat能爬上峡谷的侧壁，沿着边悄悄溜过去，甚至大摇大摆地走过去，而他们却无能为力，因为他们上不了峡谷。

Is there something where, like, you know, Snapchat can get up on the side of the canyon and and tiptoe along and and even, like, waltz past all them, they can't do anything about it because they can't get up the canyon.

除了已经用那个应用的大量用户之外，还有没有另一个维度，能完全让Facebook措手不及？

Like, is there another dimension here other than tons of users that are already using that app on their phone that is just gonna completely blindside Facebook?

是不是他们还没涉足的新硬件？

Know, is it is new hardware that they're not on?

很难想象这些会是什么，但投给Snapchat的钱，肯定是在赌他们能想出办法来。

Is it it's hard to imagine what these things could be, but the the the the dollars into Snapchat, think, have to be a bet that they will figure that out.

是的。

Yep.

我觉得这正好触及了Snapchat想表达的核心，就是说他们是一家相机公司。现在要看好Snapchat，你就得相信他们能把市场带到一个Facebook无法竞争的维度。

And and I think this is this gets at the heart of what Snapchat is trying to say which is we're a camera company and to be a bull on Snapchat right now, you have to believe that they are going to basically pivot the market into a dimension that Facebook can't compete with them on.

他们确实在这么做，比如推出了AR镜头功能。

And they are doing that like they have lenses.

Facebook和Instagram在这方面根本比不了他们。

Facebook and Instagram can't match them on that.

Snapchat的技术在本质上更优越、也更独特。

The technology is fundamentally better and different with Snapchat.

但当你开始思考这些技术最终会应用在哪儿时，这是否意味着我们要进入增强现实领域了？

But when you start thinking where does that play out, does that lead us into augmented reality?

当然，Facebook有Oculus。

Well of course Facebook has Oculus.

但我也想说，他们确实有点步履蹒跚。

But I would also say, you know, they have stumbled a bit.

所以在那方面，竞争环境要公平得多。

So it is a much more even playing field there.

但我觉得，如果你现在要押注Snapchat，就必须赌一把：他们会跑在Facebook前面，率先迈入这个新范式。

But I think that's the bet you have to make if you're gonna bet on Snapchat right now, that they're gonna outrun Facebook into this new paradigm.

对。

Yeah.

而且，你知道，我们评估IPO是否成功的一个标准，或者说实际上就是标准之一，就是我们在这期节目里可能没法完全展开，因为时间太近了，但是那笔资本注入——这次他们通过卖股票筹到的343.4亿美元——那笔资本注入能让公司做到哪些原本做不到的事情呢？

And perhaps, you know, one of the things or actually the criteria that we evaluate if an IPO was successful or not, which we actually we won't be able to fully do on this episode since it's so recent, but what did that capital infusion, in in this case, the $3.43400000000 dollars that they raised from selling those shares, what does that capital infusion allow the company to do that they wouldn't have been able to do otherwise?

比如说，他们是不是真的把IPO当作一个融资工具，用来做一些公司层面的新尝试？

Like, did they did they effectively use IPO ing as a vehicle to raise capital to go do something new as a as a company?

也许就是去做一些新的硬件方面的东西。

And maybe it's it's to to do new hardware stuff.

比如说，也许就是去探索下一个前沿领域。

Like, maybe it's to figure out what that next frontier

他们其实已经展示过了，你知道，他们把自己看作一家硬件公司。

already shown, you know, they think of themselves as a hardware company.

对。

Right.

对。

Right.

而且我觉得现在他们卖的已经不只是那些带Spectacles的自动售货机了。

And I think actually now they're selling it's it's not just the vending machines with with Spectacles.

我觉得他们其实悄悄地在网上上线了，你可以直接下单订购。

I think they sort of quietly stood that up online and you can order them

而且现在也发货了。

and them shipped now.

我觉得这样挺好的。

I think that's alright.

所以，是的。

So that's Yeah.

我们在这个问题上纠结了很久，但咱们还是快速过一下，然后总结一下叙事。

We we we've rat holed on that, but but really quickly to cover and then wrap up on narratives.

现在关于Snapchat的媒体叙事还有另外两个方面。

There are two other aspects to the sort of press narrative about Snapchat right now.

一个是Snap存在基础设施问题，而且你知道，在IPO中透露出来，他们已经同意向谷歌支付。

One is that Snap has an infrastructure problem and you know, they've it came out as part of the IPO that they've agreed to pay Google.

他们主要用的是谷歌云引擎，未来五年要付20亿美元。

They primarily run on Google Google Cloud engine $2,000,000,000 over the next five years.

另外还要给亚马逊的AWS再付10亿美元来补充。

They're also paying Amazon and AWS another billion dollars to supplement that with AWS.

因为花了这么多钱，而他们的收入跟Instagram和Facebook比还是少得可怜，虽然也算可观，所以Snapchat的毛利率其实是负的，至少最近之前一直是。

And as a result of all this spending relative to the still large and impressive but minor revenue they have compared to Instagram and Facebook, Snapchat's actually gross margin negative or was until very recently.

也就是说，他们的基础设施成本比广告收入还高。

So their infrastructure costs were higher than the revenue they were making from advertising.

这还没算上工资和硬件成本呢。

That's before even paying any of their payroll costs or their hardware costs.

对。

Yeah.

而且实际上，亏损真的非常严重。

And in fact, this the losses are so huge.

这可能是第一家申请IPO的公司，在IPO前十二个月的收入成本就超过了收入。

This may actually be the first company to file for an IPO that has a cost of revenue alone higher than revenue in the trailing twelve months before IPO.

我的意思是，他们的成本……我们

I mean, their their costs are We've

之前在聊优步和滴滴那期节目里，我们还开玩笑说网约车的毛利率是负的。

joked on the on the, you know, Uber Didi episode about ride sharing going gross margin negative.

你看，Snapchat的毛利率也是负的，或者说直到最近才不是这样。

Like, well, Snapchat is gross margin negative as well, or it was until very recently.

这几乎完全是因为基础设施成本太高。

And it's almost entirely due to to infrastructure costs.

我觉得第二块成本是跟内容合作伙伴的收入分成。

I think a second cost there is rev share to to publisher partners.

不过，2016年的营收成本是4.52亿美元。

But, I mean, the cost of revenue in 2016 was $452,000,000.

所以这里面很大一部分，如果你算一下他们每年付给谷歌的钱，大部分其实是用于谷歌云的基础设施。

So a large amount of that, I mean, if if if you figure out how much they're paying to to Google year over year, a lot of that is is for the Google Cloud infrastructure.

我认为Snap想让你理解的是，我们现在花大价钱是为了保持灵活和敏捷。

And I think the way that Snap wants you to view this is we are paying a lot of money to stay nimble right now.

那些对Snap提出质疑的人会说，第一，你们为什么不自建基础设施呢？

Like, you you the that people that are pushing back on Snap would say, number one, why don't you have your own infrastructure to buy now?

你们为什么不投资自己的数据中心呢？

Why don't you invest in your own data centers?

第二，你们到底在谷歌的数据中心里用了多少计算资源？

Number two, how the heck are you using so much compute in Google's data centers?

就是说，为什么每个用户的计算成本这么高？

Like, why why is it so expensive on a on a compute per user basis?

我觉得这跟他们正在实时处理的所有这些非常先进的增强现实功能有关。

And I think it's it's just, you know, the the nature of all this really advanced, augmented reality stuff that they're doing completely on the fly.

就是那些滤镜。

Lenses.

对。

Yep.

嗯，我觉得这既是滤镜的问题，也跟他们传输和存储海量数据有关，不只是照片，而是，对。

Well, think it's a combination of lenses and the fact that they are delivering and storing just an enormous amount of of it's not photos, it's Yeah.

在Snap平台上。

On Snap.

我的意思是，带宽成本非常高昂。

I mean, the bandwidth costs are enormous.

确实如此。

Yeah.

而且大家不禁要问，作为投资者，如果要支持他们这么做，必须相信的一点是：花大价钱让Google来处理基础设施并保持完全外包，是否真的能让他们更快地尝试新事物？毕竟，这家公司真正的内在价值就在于能够快速实验、把事做对，并迅速推出优秀的产品。

And the the the the thing you have to wonder is, and also the thing you had would have to believe as an investor to wanna wanna do this is, does paying a ton for Google to handle their infrastructure and keep that completely outsourced allow them to try things faster, which is the true kinda in inherent value of the company is that they can experiment, get things right, and roll out really good products quickly.

你是真信这个说法吗？

Like, do do you believe that?

你觉得他们这种按用户计算、耗费大量算力的做法，真的值得吗？

And do you believe that it's worth all these computationally expensive things that that they're doing on a per user basis?

因为云服务的成本并不是固定的，也不会随着用户增加就自动摊薄。

Because the the cloud costs, it's not like those are fixed and that, like, it'll be amortized by all these users coming on.

不是这样的。

No.

它能随着用户规模扩大而扩展。

It scales

随着用户增加。

with users.

随着用户增加。

With users.

对。

Yeah.

是的。

Yeah.

首先，你得想想，按每个用户来算这笔费用到底值不值？

So number one, think you have to say is it worth it to be paying that on a per user basis?

其次，他们是不是该付这笔溢价，把业务留在公司外面，好让自己能灵活调整？

Number two, should they be paying that premium to keep it outside the company so they can move?

对。

Yep.

然后，这就是新闻叙事的第二部分。

And then so that's the that's the second part of the press narrative.

接着第三部分呢，我是这么想的。你看这次IPO的表现，定价高于区间上限，之后股价一路走高，昨天还涨了44%，第二天继续上涨。

And and then the third part is, you know, actually I think and and when you look at how the IPO performed, when it, you know, priced above the range and then traded up and had the 44% pop yesterday and is trading up again on day two.

我觉得在更广泛的舆论里，第三层意思是：尽管存在那些问题，Snapchat以及埃文和博比确实是产品方面的天才，他们值得在IPO中获得的赞誉。

I think the third part of the world at large narrative is that yes, despite those problems Snapchat and Evan and Bobby really are fundamental product geniuses, and they deserve the credit that they are lavishing on themselves in the IPO.

不过我认为市场在过去两天已经表明，暂时愿意给Snapchat一个机会，但他们必须尽快拿出成绩来。

But but I think the market has shown over the last two days that they're willing to give Snapchat a pass for now, but they better deliver soon.

是的。

Yeah.

当然。

Sure.

我是说，那种狂热和兴奋劲儿，我把IPO超额认购、上市首日股价大涨以及第二天的涨幅都归因于此。毕竟自推特以来，我们还没见过这么火爆的科技股IPO。

The I mean, the frenzy and the excitement that I'm I'm I'm attributing all of the, oversubscribed nature of the IPO, the pop in trading, the pop the next day, like, we just haven't had a a a big IPO in tech since Twitter.

我觉得确实是这样。对。

Like, I think this is really Yep.

你知道吗，这个数据真的很厉害。

You know, the this is a a great stat.

2016年上市的15家美国科技公司总共筹集了14.4亿美元，而Snap一家就筹了34亿。

15 the 15 US based tech companies that went public in 2016 raised a total of $1,440,000,000, and Snap raised 3.4.

就像，这是第一个社交媒体，是的。

Like, it was it was the first social media yeah.

自2013年Twitter以来，第一个社交媒体IPO。

The first social media IPO since 2013 in Twitter.

这是2017年的第一个科技IPO。

It's the first tech IPO of 2017.

积压的需求非常巨大。

There's incredible pent up demand.

所以我会把大量买股票的人视为积压的需求。

So I'm gonna evaluate the massive volume of people buying shares at pent up demand.

但我认为

But I think

但我觉得，要想买这些股票，你得相信这家公司很特别。

But I think the rationale that you have to believe to buy those shares is that this is a special company.

如果你光看数据，把它跟社交网络对比，再拿它跟Facebook和Instagram比，它其实并不特别。

And if you just look at the numbers and you compare it to and if you think it's a social network and you compare it to Facebook and Instagram, it's not a special company.

从数据上看，它甚至表现得很差。

It's actually a pretty bad one by numbers.

还有更疯狂的呢。

Here's the craziest thing too.

你看，他们的毛利是负的。

Like, they're they're gross market margin negative.

我们是在赌那些理论上会推出未来产品的人，而这些产品甚至还没被发明出来，我们完全是基于一个故事在买入。

We're making bets on the people theoretically coming up with future products that haven't been invented yet, and we're buying on a story.

这在我看来根本不像是一次首次公开募股。

And that to me doesn't sound like an initial public offering.

倒更像是一个种子轮的商业计划书演示。

It sounds like a seed deck.

听起来真的很像。

Like, it sounds like Seriously.

如果我在

If I'm

一家

in a

风险投资公司，那些就是我看重的东西，比如团队、产品感觉。

venture firm, those are the things that I look for, like, team, like, product sensibilities.

这些就是我愿意给一个还没做出任何东西的人写一张一两百万美元支票的原因。

Like, these are the things that I would write a a, you know, 1 or $2,000,000 check for for somebody that hasn't built anything yet.

而不是我评估公开证券的方式。

Not the sort of ways on which I would be evaluating a public security.

这个观点说得太好了。

That's such a good point.

而且我觉得，天啊，这样一想，没有什么比IPO招股书和流程看起来像种子轮融资文件和流程更能体现我们身处科技时代的现状了。

And I think, man, thinking about this this way, I think nothing better encapsulates the time in which we're living in tech where an IPO, prospectus and process looks like a seed deck and a seed process.

对。

Yeah.

我不确定这是好事还是坏事。

I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

是的。

Yeah.

其实，那确实是

Actually That is

我们当下所处的现实情况。

the reality in which we live today.

我这边有点激动了，不过说实话，我是同意你的观点的。

I'm getting all worked up over here and I don't I I actually agree with you.

虽然看起来好像没什么区别，

Like even though it's like the same

毛利率是负的。

was gross margin negative.

我想特别强调一下这一点。

I wanna I wanna just highlight this.

这家公司之前毛利率是负的。

This company was gross margin negative.

这意味着他们之前卖一块钱的东西只收五毛或者九毛，直到几个月前都是这样，而现在他们是一家市值超过350亿美元的上市公司。

That means they were selling dollars for 50¢, or 90¢ or whatever until, like, a couple months ago, and they are now a, you know, 35,000,000,000 plus market cap public company.

对。

Yeah.

而且这不只是像推特那样因为运营规模大而不盈利，实际上推特从来就没盈利过。

And it's it's not just, like, Twitter where they weren't profitable because of their massive operations, and then, actually, Twitter never became profitable.

上市时净利润不是正的，这很常见。

Like, going public without being net income positive is is a common thing.

对。

Yeah.

但上市时毛利率还是负的，这就非常罕见了。

But going public while being gross margin negative is a very uncommon thing.

对。

Yeah.

是啊，David，你要是有什么美元要卖给我，我出50美分收，然后你拿这钱去创业吧。

Yeah, David, if you have any dollars to sell me, I got, I got 50¢ for you and then go go run a business I off that

我可是个风投。

am a VC.

总之，我们在这部分花了不少时间，也希望大家听听听众们的看法。但我觉得这件事和这家公司最迷人的地方在于，你可以像Snapchat那样非常有效地把它描绘成“未来”，它是自Facebook以来登陆公开市场最引人注目、最有意思的公司。

Anyway, so the point of all this, we've we've spent a long time on this section and listeners let us know what you think of it but I think what's just so fascinating about this event and this company is you can paint it as Snapchat has very effectively as this is the future, and this is the most compelling, most interesting, you know, company to hit the public markets since Facebook.

而且我们面临的浪潮和脸书完全不同。

And that we are riding a very different wave than Facebook.

你也可以把它看作是一个走向终结的开始。

Or you can paint it as, like, this is the beginning of the end here.

眼下这个时刻特别有意思，因为两边的论点都很有道理。

And and and both the moment that we're at right now is just so interesting because there are great arguments on both sides.

确实如此。

Yeah.

我觉得最好的总结方式就是，这是公开市场跟埃文·斯皮格坐在同一张桌子前，看着他的眼睛，然后埃文对公开投资者说，你们相信我吗？

And I think it the the best way to summarize it is this is the public market sitting down with Evan Spiegel at a table looking him in the eye and saying and Evan saying to to public investors, do you trust me?

没错。

Exactly.

然后，回到节目开头提到的，埃文得到了这笔奖金，这笔巨额奖金，将近六亿美元的股票奖励，就为了成功上市。

And, you know, going back to at the start of the show, you know, Evan getting this, this bonus, this huge bonus, know, almost more than $600,000,000 in in in stock grants for a successful IPO.

你懂吧？

You know?

这真的就是关键所在。

It's really coming down to, to that.

对。

Yep.

对。

Yep.

对。

Yep.

好了，各位听众。

Alright, listeners.

现在正是介绍我们 ACQ2ired 的新合作伙伴的好时机——Legora，这是一个正在重新定义全球顶尖法律团队工作方式的智能代理操作系统。

Now is a great time to talk about a new partner of ours here on ACQ2ired, Legora, the agentic operating system that is redefining how the world's best legal teams work.

对。

Yep.

很明显，AI 将会彻底改变法律行业。

It's sort of obvious that AI is gonna completely change the legal industry.

我敢打赌，在座的大多数听众都曾经把合同扔进过某个AI聊天机器人里。

I bet most of you listening have dropped a contract into some sort of AI chatbot out there.

Legora抓住了这个洞察，然后问了一个问题：如果从头开始，专门为法律行业打造一款能发挥这种力量的产品，会怎样？

Legora took that insight and asked the question, what if you really built something with that power from the ground up for the legal industry?

所以，创始人们做了所有优秀创始人都会做的事——极度专注于客户需求。

So the founders did exactly what great founders do, operate with obsessive customer focus.

他们直接驻扎进一家大型律师事务所，待了好几个月。

They embedded inside a massive law firm for months.

他们和律师们坐在一起，就看着工作到底是怎么完成的。

They sat with the lawyers just watching how the work really gets done.

这样你才能做出客户喜欢的功能，比如表格审查，你放进去一个文件夹，里面有几百份合同，它就能把每个关键条款都拉到一个表格里，律师可以直接操作。

And that's how you get features that customers love, like tabular review, where you drop in a folder of hundreds of contracts and it pulls every key term into a grid a lawyer can actually work with.

Legora在这里的赌注很有意思。

Legora's bet here is interesting.

因为它让每个律师能处理更复杂的事情，所以每个人都能提高工作质量，做更有价值的工作。

Since it lets each lawyer handle more complexity, any given person can increase the quality of their work and do higher value work.

这意味着，即使每个具体任务花的时间更少，整个蛋糕也能变大。

And this means that the pie can grow even as each individual task takes less time.

他们最近推出了Legora agent，提供更强的智能和性能。

And they recently launched Legora agent, offering greater intelligence and performance.

这个agent让律师设定一个目标，然后它就能处理规划、执行和最终产品的交付。

The agent lets lawyers set an objective, then it can handle the planning and the execution and delivery of the final product.

法律团队能保持完全的控制和透明度，因为在需要判断的地方，他们仍然参与其中。

Legal teams get to maintain full control and transparency since they're still involved where judgment is required.

而且Legora能在你现有的工作环境里使用。

And Legora works where you already work.

你可以在Microsoft Word里做修订或起草时直接用它。

You can use it within Microsoft Word while redlining or drafting.

Legora早期的数据基本上已经说明了一切。

The early Legora numbers essentially speak for themselves.

当他们和最大的竞争对手进行正面试点时，他们赢了70%的情况。

When they have a head to head pilot with their top competitor, they win 70% of the time.

Legora现在有超过10万名律师在使用，来自50个国家的1200个法律团队。

Legora now has over a 100,000 lawyers on the platform from 1,200 legal teams in 50 countries.

更夸张的是，他们从100万到1亿美元的年度经常性收入，只用了大约18个月。

And crazily, they went from 1,000,000 to a 100,000,000 in ARR in about eighteen months.

这数字真是疯狂。

Truly insane numbers.

而这才是真正的考验。

And that is the real test.

很多产品演示起来效果都不错，但关键问题是，在忙得不可开交的时候，忙碌的律师真的会去用它吗？或者，合伙人是否会在跟重要客户谈话前信任它？

Plenty of things demo well, but the question is whether a busy associate actually reaches for it during crunch time or whether a partner trusts it before going into a conversation with a major client.

如果你的法律团队想了解一下，不管你是律所还是公司的法务部，都可以去 legora.com/acquired 了解更多详情，告诉他们本和大卫让你来的就行。

If your legal team wants to check it out, whether you're a law firm or you're in house at a company, you can learn more at legora.com/acquired and just tell them that Ben and David sent you.

好。

Alright.

我们要不要快点进入节目的其他部分？

Should we move on quickly to the the rest of the show?

那原本会发生什么情况呢？

Do what would have happened otherwise?

对。

Yeah.

是的。

Yeah.

所以，我是说，我坐在这儿琢磨的是，他们现在非得出去吗？

So, I mean, the thing I'm sitting here wondering is do they have to go out now?

他们能不能靠银行里的钱，或者再融点私募资金，继续维持运营？

Could they have continued to fund their operations by what they had in the bank, raising more private money?

现在上市对他们来说是不是更有利？

Is it advantageous for them to go out now?

我很想听听你的看法。

Love to hear your thoughts on that.

他们别无选择。

They had no choice.

我是说，他们一直在烧钱。

I mean they were burning money.

我记得我把那些数字记在笔记里了，放哪儿来着。

I think where did I put the I had the numbers in my notes.

我一时想不起来具体数字，但我记得Snap在私募市场刚融了一大笔钱，不到一年前的事。

Don't have them offhand but I think Snap had, even after the huge amount of money they just raised in the private markets like less than a year ago.

他们手头现金大概只有10亿美元，而去年自由现金流烧了差不多7亿，我敢说今年肯定烧得更多。

They had just about $1,000,000,000 in cash on hand and they burned free cash flow of almost I believe $700,000,000 last year and that's I'm sure gonna be even larger this year.

所以，如果他们拿不到这笔资金，现金就会耗尽，这是第一点。

So, like, they were gonna be out of cash if they didn't get this capital infusion, one.

第二，想想看，我们之前也聊过，这是他们展示自己、讲述故事的最佳时机。

But two, also, think, like, we've talked about, like, this was their opportunity and this was the time for them to tell their story.

对。

Yep.

没错。

Yep.

我想这一节的标题是‘否则会发生什么’，所以我们得去探讨一下其他的可能性。

I guess it the name of the section is what would have happened otherwise, so that we have to sort of explore other options.

他们有没有可能被收购？如果是的话，谁会在这个阶段收购他们呢？

Could they have been acquired, and who would have acquired them at this point?

他们的估值已经是Facebook上次试图收购他们时的十倍了。

They're 10 times more valuable than the last time Facebook tried to acquire them.

不过，我是说，考虑到Facebook当初给WhatsApp的价格，假设我们按公开市场的常规标准，也就是40%的溢价来算……

But, I mean, for what they dumped on WhatsApp, would they have let's say it was even let's say it's the standard public market, 40% premium.

我觉得他们当时的市值是240亿美元。

Like, they they I think what was their they went out at a $24,000,000,000 market cap.

所以，你想想看，接下来会怎样？

So, you know, would what?

比如到了33年、34年或者35年，Facebook还会愿意出这个价吗？他们又会接受吗？

Like, '33, '34, '35, would Facebook have paid that much for them, and would they have accepted it?

我

I

我也不清楚。

don't know.

其实，我们上一期关于Snapchat的节目结尾时，我当时的观点是：我们应该问一个问题，就是Facebook在2013年试图回购Snapchat时，是不是应该出更高的价？

I mean, we ended our our last Snapchat episode with, you know, I I was arguing that we were asking the question, should Facebook have offered more to try and buy Snapchat back in 2013?

我的回答是否定的，因为Snapchat的产品愿景和文化基因，跟Facebook完全是背道而驰的。

And, I argued no because because just this the vision and the culture of of the culture of Snapchat and their vision of their product is just anathema to what Facebook is.

而且我们现在看到的情况也进一步印证了这一点。

And and and we've seen that play out even more so now.

我是说，你知道，他们有Instagram。

I mean, you know, they have Instagram.

他们有Instagram Stories。

They have Instagram Stories.

那个做得很好。

That's doing great.

Instagram的增长比以往任何时候都快。

Instagram's growing faster than ever.

他们现在为什么要花350亿美元买Snapchat呢？

Why would they pay $35,000,000,000 for Snapchat right now?

对。

Yeah.

你说得对。

You're right.

是的。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

他们有Oculus。

They have Oculus.

对。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

让我再给你提一个假设性的未来，这仍然有可能发生。

Let me throw out another hypothetical future for you, and this could still happen.

所以这不是有人收购Snapchat，而是相反的情况。

So this is not somebody buying Snapchat, but rather the reverse.

所以我们生活在一个Twitter，或者抱歉，谷歌和Facebook占据了绝大多数社交网络广告的世界，它们正在完全蚕食所有的程序化和展示广告。

So we live in a world where Twitter or I'm sorry, Google and Facebook are the the vast majority of of social network based advertising that's that's, being bought, and they're they're totally eating into all programmatic and display also.

他们是超级巨头。

They're the mega giants.

而Facebook通过把更多网络加入自己的平台，为广告主带来了规模效应。

And Facebook gets these economies of scale for their advertisers by, adding additional networks into the portal.

所以他们把这些广告主都引导过来了。

So they have channeled these advertisers.

广告主已经习惯了在Facebook上买广告。

The advertisers are used to buying ads on Facebook.

他们买了Instagram，然后突然之间，砰的一下。

They buy Instagram, and then suddenly, bam.

现在我也能换个图片尺寸，就能在Instagram上打广告了。

Now I can also just upload a different image size and advertise on Instagram too.

那么，如果Snapchat要参与竞争，会不会就是开始整合那些剩下的玩家呢？

So what if Snapchat's way of getting into that competition is starting to aggregate anyone that's left?

所以，你知道，现在推特的市值是110亿美元，可能还高估了。

So, you know, right now Twitter is valued at $11,000,000,000 their market cap's $11,000,000,000 and that's probably too high.

比如，如果估值再低一点，可能真有人愿意接手。

Like, if that was lower, then somebody would probably actually pick them up.

但现在价格太高了，没人觉得这买卖划算。

But right now, they're kinda priced too high for anybody to to feel good about that purchase.

如果他们继续撑不住，Snapchat手里可是有新鲜资金的。

If they continue to topple, Snapchat's got new money in the bank.

他们市值很高，完全可以通过股票交易的方式来完成收购。

They've got this really, you know, really high market cap where they could do a a stock deal.

比如，如果 Snapchat 收购了 Twitter，然后让广告主能通过一个统一的入口同时在这两个平台上投放广告，那会怎样？说不定还能借此横扫市场。

Like, what if Snapchat bought Twitter and then enabled advertisers to have a single portal to buy, you know, buy advertisements on both platforms and then sort of win on a spree.

这感觉完全违背了 Snapchat 的品牌基因。而且，鉴于这两种广告形式差异巨大，可能根本不存在什么规模经济效应。

It feels completely antithetical to me to Snapchat's DNA, and perhaps there actually is no economies of scale since those ad formats are so different.

不过，这确实描绘出了一幅有趣的图景：Snapchat 拿到这笔刚融到的资金，以及这个经过公开市场验证的扎实估值后，可能会做些什么。

But it sure paints an interesting picture of what could Snapchat start to do with this cash they've just raised and this this concrete, you know, public market validated valuation.

对。

Yeah.

其实，这真的很有意思。

Actually, that's really interesting.

我觉得另一个有趣的问题是，如果不是推特，而是福克斯，或者某个电视媒体公司被Snapchat收购呢。

I think another interesting question is what if it's not Twitter but what if it's Fox or what a if television media company that Snapchat would buy.

嗯，他们和维亚康姆有合作关系。

Well, they've got that relationship with Viacom.

我不知道这个关系还在不在，但维亚康姆曾经是Snapchat广告的渠道销售商，我想他们可能已经解除了这个合作。

I don't know if that still exists, but they were Viacom was, I think they might have dissolved that, but Viacom was their channel, channel sales for a while for all the the Snapchat ads.

对。

Yeah.

我的意思是，Snapchat是一家总部在洛杉矶的公司。

I mean, and Snapchat is they are an LA based company.

你知道，董事会主席，我记得是迈克尔·利顿，他曾经是索尼娱乐的CEO。

You know, the chairman of the board is, I believe it's is it Michael Litton, I think, who was the Sony Entertainment CEO.

对。

Yeah.

你知道吗，从很多方面来说，好莱坞、媒体和电视对Snapchat来说，就像硅谷和科技一样，是它的核心基因。

You know, that that is in in as in many ways, Hollywood and media and television is as core to Snapchat's DNA as as Silicon Valley and tech is.

完全同意。

Totally.

完全同意。

Totally.

在我们聊科技主题之前，还有一件事，这件事可能正好处在科技主题的边缘。

And the the one other before we talk move into tech themes, and this is probably this sits right on the border of what would have happened otherwise in tech themes.

那就是，Snap这样上市是不是正确的选择，它有没有吸引到合适的投资者？

Is there a was this the right way for Snap to go out, and did it get them the right investors?

我的意思是，Snap这家公司，比其他任何科技公司都更可能在季度财报上遇到真正的麻烦。

So what I mean by that is, you know, Snap's a company that, even more so than any of these other tech companies, is gonna potentially have a real tough time with these quarterly earnings.

如果他们吸引了一堆散户投资者，这些人因为兴奋和需求而短期进场，却没有获得长期投资者，那这里有个反例。

And if they got themselves a bunch of retail investors that were short term and excited for the pop and got in because there was all this, like, excitement and demand and they didn't get these long term investors, like, the here's the here's the counterexample.

亚马逊在它的S-1文件中说得非常清楚，而且不知怎么地，它建立了一个令人难以置信的投资者基础，这些人愿意等上几十年，直到它开始盈利。

Amazon was extremely clear in their s one and and somehow built this incredible investor base who was willing to wait decades for them to start being profitable.

是的。

Yeah.

这就是汤姆在我们那期节目里说的那句经典的话，你知道，杰夫总是说，你得到的是你想要的投资者。

And it's that great line that Tom said on on our episode of, you know, that Jeff always says, you get the investors you ask for.

对。

Yep.

对。

Yep.

对我来说，这里最大的问题是，Snapchat 有没有找到合适的投资者？

And big question for me here is, did Snapchat ask for the right investors?

他们有没有得到合适的投资者？

Did they get the right investors?

他们能不能承受住那些投资者在季度财报电话会议上的 scrutiny？

And will they be able to stand up to the scrutiny of of quarterly earnings calls for those investors.

但这里，这里又回到了节目开头的话题。

But here's here's where it comes back though to the beginning of the show.

你知道，他们找到的那些投资人，到底缺了什么？

You know, the investors they got, what do they not have?

他们对公司完全没有任何话语权。

They have no say in the company whatsoever.

没错。

That's right.

那这还重要吗？

So does it matter?

嗯，这确实有关系，毕竟股价会……对，他们当然有话语权。

Well, mean it matters in the sense that like their share price would like Well, yes, of course they have

但Snap刚刚筹集了这么多资金，足够支撑接下来至少几年的产品研发。

a say in the share price but Snap just raised all this money that they can use to fund all the product development for the next, you know, at least couple of years.

他们有足够的空间去施展。

They have this room to run.

说实话，他们这次融到的钱基本上相当于种子轮的一倍半。

Honestly, they just raised their basically raised one and half of their seed round.

对。

Yeah.

没错。

Right.

哦，是的。

Oh, yeah.

为了他们接下来要攻克的下一波。

For their for their next wave that they're tackling.

是的。

Yep.

有趣的问题。

Interesting questions.

我们继续聊科技主题吧？

Should we move on to tech themes?

好。

Yeah.

那就开始吧。

Let's do it.

我们在这里会很快，因为我们已经花了太多时间，而且我觉得在节目其他部分已经讲了很多这个。

So we'll be quick here since we spent so much time on and I feel like covered a lot of this on the rest of the show.

但对我来说，想到这一切，最大的一个就是我们在这个节目里反复讨论的浪潮和技术浪潮，以及思考Snap非常明显，尽管他们在S-1文件里怎么说，他们是从移动浪潮开始的，他们是移动端的一个社交网络，但Snap的未来，如果他们要成为他们想要的那个样子，就是他们要去驾驭一个非常不同的浪潮。而我只想到两件事。

But for me, I mean the biggest one here thinking about all this was just what we've talked about so much on this show of waves and technology waves and thinking about how Snap very clearly, despite what they're saying in their S-one, they started with the mobile wave and they were a social network on mobile but the future of Snap, if it will be the one that they want, is gonna be them riding a very different wave And I'm just reminded of two things.

第一，Facebook的故事，以及我们那期关于Facebook IPO的节目，你知道，Facebook当时是在驾驭Web 2.0的浪潮，然后通过IPO过程意识到他们需要划过去征服移动浪潮。

One, the Facebook story and our Facebook IPO episode and how, you know, Facebook was riding the web two dot o wave and then realized through the IPO process that they needed to paddle over and conquer the mobile wave.

我在想，在我看来很明显，Snap现在也在发生类似的事情。

And I wonder, it seems to me very clear that something similar is going on with Snap right now.

对。

Yeah.

那他们是在划向AR浪潮吗？

And are they paddling over into the AR wave?

你是说，嗯，

Is that what you're Well,