I don't think the founders will sell digg. I'm probably wrong but I like to think theres more to digg than a pricetag.
If that's the case, however, what is slashdot worth?
Terrence
· 3 years ago
Seems grossly distorted to me. While YouTube kept expanding, getting bigger and bigger, deeper and wider, Digg has not. Since the beginning of the year there has been hardly any substantial reach or traffic growth. Digg has hit its peak, and from what I have heard has no significant revenue to speak of.
How will Digg build Yahoo's bottom line (which is what they need?) I can't see it. Yahoo News is by far the stronger property, and if they want to add features to it to bring people into their world, they can do that. If they could get it for $20m, then I can see them doing it. But $200m? No way, they would get clobbered for that.
Brian Breslin
· 3 years ago
Jimmy, Slashdot sold itself years ago. For like 15mil i think. $400m for gawker is downright retarded. $250m for digg seems absurd too. Their pageviews might be high, but its not a mass market thing yet.
Nisan Gabbay
· 3 years ago
I have a fairly detailed analysis on why I think Digg is reasonably worth $120M on my Startup Review blog. Please see the "Exit Analysis" section and the comments.
Digg is worth nothing, vandalism and gaming is not stoppable on this kind of sites, look at wikipedia, it is broken since it reached mass-market.
Emre Sokullu
· 3 years ago
Klaus, Wikipedia broken? I don't think so...
I don't think Yahoo would be likely to buy Digg. Because they took lessons from Google and they will be more focused on ads and technologies in the following months. That's why they acquired/invested in 2 ad companies one after another last week. This was the first signal of this policy. And that's why talks with Facebook has frozen, I believe, Yahoo is already a successful media company, they don't need that much to be more, they need to find out technologies that will generate more revenue of what they already do.
Viacom, however, may be a better fit for Digg. Or any other old media companies.. Because they are hungry for internet traffic more than Yahoo is.
And I think $250M valuation for Digg is very low. Facebook, with less traffic, is valuated at more than $1B. Digg proved that they have a loyal userbase (see Netscape, Newsvine) (just like YouTube), have innovative ideas at Digg Labs and is one of the most visited properties on the internet.
Dunk
· 3 years ago
Boy I have real trouble with this.
I can understand that if they are able to generate a decent revenue rate, then 10X earnings could get them a decent price tag.
But I have a problem with their content and focus, they are appealing to a limited (but attractive) demographic, and essentially it’s only a redirection page for users (other than people who comment), if they had real valuable content of their own such as product reviews or something tangible then I could begin to understand.
But clearly their only assets currently are the users. How many times in this fast changing world are people going to continue to pay to get their hands on those users (the same users again and again….) Surely you need something with more momentum and in-depth content / meaning like a myspace or something with a much larger potential such as youtube.
I think Yahoo would be mad to buy them, but it might make sense from a marketing standpoint…
Good luck to them though.
Value This!
· 3 years ago
I know a valuations expert that I ran this stuff by and he laughed. Now granted, he's used to doing valuations for large M&A deals in other sectors, but I think he has right to be skeptical since all of these numbers are based purely on potential, not actual results.
Digg is reportedly doing $3 million/year in revenues and just below break even according to the BusinessWeek article. Even if you assume that since then they've hit break even and are on pace for higher revenue, there is absolutely no way you can value them at $200+ million based on revenues. It is not a site that has mainstream appeal (yet?) and it is now apparently becoming the focus of parties that are gaming it for profit or to make a point. Emre: are you out of your mind about Facebook vs. Digg? Look at Alexa and the other tracking sites. Facebook has way more traffic and a significantly higher number of pageviews per session. I think Facebook is way overvalued at $1 billion (it works out to about $100/user) but they are reportedly doing $50 million in revenues annually (vs. Digg's $3 million) and have a significantly higher amount of data for each of their users.
How is a blog network like PopSugar worth $100 million? Isn't the fact that they took $5 million in VC funding telling you something about their revenue numbers? Take Alexa with a grain of salt, but their rank is 4,243 and they get a measly 3-4 pageviews per session. Looks like a decent small business at best, not a company that would typically be bought into by VCs who are looking for $1 billion+ market opportunities.
It will be interesting to see if YouTube is worth $1.65 billion to Google in 1 year, but the one thing it has that a lot of these other services don't is wide, mainstream, worldwide appeal and some very interesting monetization possibilities. Whether it fulfills its potential is another matter, but it's a decent risk.
Based upon some of the comments here it is apparent that we are back in the eyeball economy. The risk of that is that traffic is worthless if you can't monetize it, and advertising-based services are highly vulnerable to external factors. If there's a recession in 2007, as many economists believe is very possible, and the ad market contracts (like it did after the first bubble popped), expect to see blood in the streets.
Mexxbw
· 2 years ago
test
salim
· 1 year ago
Hai, i am from future and what it looks absurb or impossible 2 yrs back is actually possible --- THOSE UNREALISTIC VALUATIONS R MORE THN REALITY !!!
All Comments
If that's the case, however, what is slashdot worth?
How will Digg build Yahoo's bottom line (which is what they need?) I can't see it. Yahoo News is by far the stronger property, and if they want to add features to it to bring people into their world, they can do that. If they could get it for $20m, then I can see them doing it. But $200m? No way, they would get clobbered for that.
http://www.startup-review.com/blog/digg-case-st...
I don't think Yahoo would be likely to buy Digg. Because they took lessons from Google and they will be more focused on ads and technologies in the following months. That's why they acquired/invested in 2 ad companies one after another last week. This was the first signal of this policy. And that's why talks with Facebook has frozen, I believe, Yahoo is already a successful media company, they don't need that much to be more, they need to find out technologies that will generate more revenue of what they already do.
Viacom, however, may be a better fit for Digg. Or any other old media companies.. Because they are hungry for internet traffic more than Yahoo is.
And I think $250M valuation for Digg is very low. Facebook, with less traffic, is valuated at more than $1B. Digg proved that they have a loyal userbase (see Netscape, Newsvine) (just like YouTube), have innovative ideas at Digg Labs and is one of the most visited properties on the internet.
I can understand that if they are able to generate a decent revenue rate, then 10X earnings could get them a decent price tag.
But I have a problem with their content and focus, they are appealing to a limited (but attractive) demographic, and essentially it’s only a redirection page for users (other than people who comment), if they had real valuable content of their own such as product reviews or something tangible then I could begin to understand.
But clearly their only assets currently are the users. How many times in this fast changing world are people going to continue to pay to get their hands on those users (the same users again and again….) Surely you need something with more momentum and in-depth content / meaning like a myspace or something with a much larger potential such as youtube.
I think Yahoo would be mad to buy them, but it might make sense from a marketing standpoint…
Good luck to them though.
Digg is reportedly doing $3 million/year in revenues and just below break even according to the BusinessWeek article. Even if you assume that since then they've hit break even and are on pace for higher revenue, there is absolutely no way you can value them at $200+ million based on revenues. It is not a site that has mainstream appeal (yet?) and it is now apparently becoming the focus of parties that are gaming it for profit or to make a point. Emre: are you out of your mind about Facebook vs. Digg? Look at Alexa and the other tracking sites. Facebook has way more traffic and a significantly higher number of pageviews per session. I think Facebook is way overvalued at $1 billion (it works out to about $100/user) but they are reportedly doing $50 million in revenues annually (vs. Digg's $3 million) and have a significantly higher amount of data for each of their users.
How is a blog network like PopSugar worth $100 million? Isn't the fact that they took $5 million in VC funding telling you something about their revenue numbers? Take Alexa with a grain of salt, but their rank is 4,243 and they get a measly 3-4 pageviews per session. Looks like a decent small business at best, not a company that would typically be bought into by VCs who are looking for $1 billion+ market opportunities.
It will be interesting to see if YouTube is worth $1.65 billion to Google in 1 year, but the one thing it has that a lot of these other services don't is wide, mainstream, worldwide appeal and some very interesting monetization possibilities. Whether it fulfills its potential is another matter, but it's a decent risk.
Based upon some of the comments here it is apparent that we are back in the eyeball economy. The risk of that is that traffic is worthless if you can't monetize it, and advertising-based services are highly vulnerable to external factors. If there's a recession in 2007, as many economists believe is very possible, and the ad market contracts (like it did after the first bubble popped), expect to see blood in the streets.