Archives

bookmark_borderAtlassian’s Collaboration Surge

Posted on by mikejsiegel

Atlassian has become a staple for teams around the globe, but I feel it often flies under the radar compared to flashier tech giants. Their tools—Jira, Confluence, Trello—are ubiquitous in software development circles and increasingly popular in non-tech businesses. I’m convinced their growth story is still in its early chapters.

I caught a ZDNet interview with Atlassian’s co-CEOs discussing how remote work has changed the nature of collaboration. They emphasized that asynchronous communication is here to stay. Atlassian’s platforms are tailored for that environment, allowing teams to connect seamlessly, regardless of time zones.

Despite the broader market jitters, Atlassian’s subscription revenue has been robust. The transition from on-premises software to cloud-based solutions has been a tailwind. Yes, competition from Microsoft Teams, Slack (now under Salesforce), and others exists. But Atlassian focuses more on project and issue tracking than just chat. That specialized niche gives it a certain moat.

On the financial side, they’re investing heavily in R&D, which I consider prudent for long-term gains. They’re also acquiring complementary services that can slot into their ecosystem. As remote or hybrid work continues, I expect Atlassian to remain indispensable. I’m staying long, anticipating that more enterprises will standardize their workflows around Atlassian’s platform in the years to come.

bookmark_border Rebranding and the Metaverse

Posted on by mikejsiegel

Facebook’s big rebrand to Meta has become the talk of the tech town. I’ve been following Mark Zuckerberg’s vision for the “metaverse,” and while it sounds futuristic, it’s not entirely science fiction. As an investor, I see this pivot as a natural evolution for a company that has consistently bet on immersive social experiences—think Instagram Stories, VR headsets, and more.

A Wired article I read last week laid out some compelling reasons why Meta might actually pull this off. They’ve already got the hardware component with Oculus, and they’re working on VR/AR apps that could bridge social networking and mixed reality. The question, of course, is whether mainstream adoption will happen fast enough to justify the current spending spree.

Regulatory issues and privacy concerns haven’t gone away. But if Meta can build a new platform from the ground up that addresses these concerns, they might sidestep some of the scrutiny that plagued Facebook. The risk is that the metaverse vision proves too expensive, or remains too niche, draining resources and investor patience.

I’m holding my shares because I believe in the leadership’s ability to shift and adapt. It won’t be a smooth ride—Meta’s stock could see volatility if investors lose faith in the metaverse concept. But high risk can lead to high reward. If they crack it, Meta might anchor an entirely new digital ecosystem.

bookmark_borderSnap’s Growing Ecosystem

Posted on by mikejsiegel

Snap Inc. has been quietly—and sometimes not so quietly—building an ecosystem that goes beyond just disappearing messages. Snap’s push into augmented reality is especially intriguing. They’re turning AR filters into a valuable e-commerce tool, letting users virtually try on products before buying.

The latest Bloomberg piece details how brands are leveraging Snap’s AR to market directly within the app. This is a win-win: Snap fosters user engagement and generates advertising revenue, while brands get innovative ways to showcase their products. Sure, competition from TikTok is fierce, but Snap’s approach feels more like a curated experience than a free-for-all feed.

Does Snap’s daily active user count rival Facebook’s? Not yet. But it doesn’t have to. Its user base skews younger and is highly engaged. Advertisers pay a premium to reach that audience, which is exactly why I’m still holding SNAP shares. The platform’s unique approach to AR is something I believe will pay off massively in the coming years.

I also see Snap as a potential acquisition target—though I suspect they’re aiming for independence. Their rapid feature rollouts, like Spotlight (a TikTok competitor), show they’re not afraid to evolve. If management continues to innovate while balancing user privacy and monetization, Snap could become an unexpected heavyweight in the social media space. As the holiday season approaches, I’m keen to see how AR-driven shopping campaigns play out.

bookmark_borderApple’s Q3 Surprises

Posted on by mikejsiegel

Apple continues to impress. With strong Q3 earnings around the corner, it’s interesting to see how the iPhone maker keeps diversifying its revenue streams. Between Apple Music, Apple TV+, and the wildly successful AirPods, they’re showing us there’s more to this company than just a smartphone supercycle.

I read MacRumors daily for tidbits on upcoming Apple events and product launches. Rumors are swirling about a revamped MacBook lineup powered by their own silicon chips. From an investor standpoint, this vertical integration helps Apple maintain healthy profit margins. And if you look at how quickly consumers adopt new Apple products, it’s clear the brand loyalty remains off the charts.

The real question for me is how Apple will navigate privacy concerns and potential regulatory scrutiny. The new iOS privacy features are a bold move—limiting how much data third-party apps collect. It might ruffle some feathers (especially for ad-driven platforms like Facebook), but it also cements Apple’s image as a privacy-first company. I suspect that’s a long-term advantage, especially as data protection becomes a global priority.

Could Apple’s stock be overvalued? Maybe in the short term, but their track record with consistent growth, innovative products, and an installed base of loyal customers says otherwise. I’m comfortable holding (and occasionally adding) Apple shares. With each earnings report, they continue to defy gravity, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon.

bookmark_borderChecking in on the Cloud Boom

Posted on by mikejsiegel

We’re a quarter into 2021, and cloud adoption keeps accelerating. Remote work has forced even the most traditional businesses to rely on online collaboration tools, which is a win for Atlassian, Amazon (via AWS), and others in the cloud services space. Atlassian’s project-management solutions are making waves: the more teams go digital, the more they need streamlined collaboration software.

I came across a solid TechCrunch article discussing Atlassian’s acquisitions that aim to enhance product offerings in enterprise collaboration. They’re positioned strongly to retain market share, especially as software development teams expand and new remote workflows become permanent.

AWS remains the undisputed leader in cloud infrastructure—further boosting Amazon’s overall valuation. It’s fascinating how AWS essentially underwrites Amazon’s other ventures. While e-commerce sometimes struggles with low-margin or logistical complexities, AWS’s robust revenue stream more than compensates. I see that synergy as a major reason to stay long on AMZN.

Now, some worry cloud growth might slow post-pandemic, but I doubt it. Once a company invests in cloud infrastructure, it rarely goes back. The cost savings, scalability, and global access remain too compelling. Atlassian’s Confluence and Jira, Microsoft’s Azure, Google Cloud, AWS—these are now essential for businesses of all sizes.

Short-term dips may appear, but for long-term investors like me, these cloud-focused tech giants are building an ecosystem that’s tough to dislodge. That’s why I keep adding on small pullbacks and letting my positions ride.

bookmark_borderEmbracing the Tech Rally

Posted on by mikejsiegel

I’ve spent the start of this year reviewing how tech stocks have fared after the tumult of 2020. Unsurprisingly, many big names continue to thrive—especially companies like Facebook (still calling it that for now) and Amazon, which remain cornerstones of my portfolio. They both benefit from shifting consumer behavior: more online time means more ad revenue, more e-commerce, and more opportunities to innovate.

Recently read a piece on The Verge about how Amazon is expanding its logistics network even further. The broader market might be fluctuating, but Amazon’s willingness to invest in infrastructure suggests it’s looking far beyond immediate gains. It’s also a strong sign that the tech rally might still have legs, as investors reward growth in these companies.

As for Facebook, user growth continues steadily. Even with all the debates around privacy and regulation, the platform remains indispensable for advertisers. I’m keeping my eye on the rumored VR/AR devices they’re developing; it might redefine how we interact online. So while some folks are rotating into other sectors, I’m holding tight to these positions.

Sure, we have vaccine rollouts and “return to normal” conversations, but tech’s role in everyday life isn’t going backward. Remote work, online shopping, and digital entertainment are part of the new normal. In my eyes, that’s an ongoing catalyst for companies like Amazon and Facebook/Meta—which is why I’m still bullish on them going into 2021.

bookmark_borderWhere will Howard Stern go next?

Posted on by mikejsiegel

With Joe Rogan signing an exclusive deal with Spotify, both Ben Thompson and Jon Gruber mentioned Howard Stern in their analysis.

Gruber, assuming Joe Rogan was making between $64mm-$240mm per year from his podcast wrote –

However much Howard Stern was getting underpaid by Sirius six months ago, it’s even more so now.

Since Joe Rogan’s multi-year deal with Spotify is being estimated in the ~$100mm range, the $64mm-$240mm estimate is most likely inflated.

Howard Stern’s deal with Sirius has long been estimated to be $100mm per year. Howard will get more in his next contract but to call him underpaid is an exaggeration. He is the highest-paid radio/podcast broadcaster in the world, by a large margin.

Ben Thompson wrote –

Lots of folks have drawn a comparison between Spotify’s deal with Rogan and the one Sirius made with Howard Stern back in the 2000s. The latter, though, required Stern fans to actually buy hardware and pay for a subscription service; it’s a testament to Stern’s popularity that this actually worked, and also a great sign for Spotify. After all, the company isn’t asking Rogan fans to buy a new phone, or even pay any money at all: the fact Spotify’s goal is first and foremost advertising means the cost imposed on users is simply switching to an app they have probably already downloaded.

It is Luminary that is a better analogy to Sirius: no, you didn’t need new hardware, but you did need to download a new app and pay money; without a singular star like Stern, the idea was doomed from the beginning (in fact, even with, say, Rogan, Luminary would have still had no chance: Rogan, unlike Stern in 2004, could already go direct to consumers, which would have given him leverage to take all of Luminary’s profits, were they ever to exist). I’m honestly baffled the company managed to raise more money no matter the terms.

Ben highlights that Howard has been a success with Sirius despite the incredible uphill battle of friction his listeners endured. This is why Howard is, and will continue to be, the highest paid broadcaster in the world.

The question is, where does Howard go at the end of the year when his contract is up?

Howard’s options are –

  1. Retire
  2. Go independent
  3. Go to Apple
  4. Go to Spotify
  5. Stay at Sirius

Does he retire? No. Howard’s price will be as high as ever, he’s in good health, and he’s good at what he does.

Will he create an independent podcast? Although he’s in good health, he’s 66yo. He’s scaled back his show to 100 a year. It’s unlikely Howard wants to take on the overhead of hiring staff, building studios, and selling ads.

Will he go to Apple? Apple is slowly but surely losing market share of podcast control to Spotify. An exclusive deal with Apple, which is a paid-only service, makes sense for both parties and get Howard a tremendous payday. Howard does not live a lavish lifestyle but he is competitive and views being paid the highest as validation that he is the best broadcaster alive.

Will he to go Spotify? Although Howard increased his pay, he lost total listeners when he went from radio to Sirius, which has a paid-only model. What’s appealing about this option to Howard is that he can get the payday he deserves while expanding his reach through Spotify’s free tier, increasing his relevance.

Howard would not want to go exactly the Joe Rogan route. Howard would want to be a Spotify employee and have Spotify build and maintain his studios, pay his staff, and sell his ads. Spotify has an advantage over Apple, having a major office in NYC, Howard’s home.

Finally, Howard may choose to stay at Sirius. Sirius has proven they are valuable partners to Howard and can continue to make him the highest-paid broadcaster in the world. They won’t be able to match an offer from Apple or Spotify but will they offer him enough that moving to another employer isn’t worth it? Howard has been with them for 15 years, he has his studio, his staff, and his show is running like a fine-tuned machine.

At 66yo, I expect him to stick with the familiar and stay at Sirius. But I hope he goes to Apple or Spotify.

bookmark_borderI’m Back

Posted on by mikejsiegel

After a nine-month hiatus, I’m itching to start writing again.

Instead of monthly long-form 500ish word take on biz&tech, I’m switching it up.

Going forward, posts will be takes on takes. Shorter, more frequent posts on takes by people like Ben Thompson, John Gruber, MG Siegler, and publications like TechCrunch and The Verge.

bookmark_borderSnApple – Apple should buy Snap

Posted on by mikejsiegel

It feels like if Apple wasn’t so wedded to their own legacy branding — more on that in a bit — they would rename this thing the iCamera.

MG Siegler https://500ish.com/apples-boar-on-the-floor-mistake-ad99ec8e494a

The case for Apple to buy Snap

After watching the iPhone 11 event, it’s clear that the iPhone’s most compelling innovation has been with the camera. iPhone is no longer a phone first but a camera.

This is where the similarities between Apple and Snap begin. Although the public perceives Snap as a social network, Snap fancies itself a camera company. Apple can make the claim they make the best smartphone camera in the world. Snap can make the claim they make the best product that leverages a camera in the world.

It’s undeniable that both are obsessed with cameras.

For the past couple of iPhone events, software features to utilize the new camera’s abilities have become a focal point of the event. In 2018, it was animojis and this year it was slofies.

These features are fun but they pale in comparison to what Snap has done.

  1. April 2011 – Snap makes the first popular ephemeral messaging platform. Snap also popularizes opening an app directly to the camera and vertical videos
  2. October 2013 – Snap launches Stories
  3. August 2014 – Snap launches geofilters
  4. January 2015 – Snap launches Lenses
  5. July 2016 – Snap acquires and debuts Bitmojis
  6. May 2019 – Snap launches gender swap lense
  7. September 2019 – Snap launches 3D camera effect

Evan and company have been busy. Over the last eight years, Evan has launched over six major hits that have been quickly copied by rivals. Evan has an uncanny intuition in how a person will interact with a camera.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Evan’s special talent for creating a product that takes advantage of the unique capabilities of a smartphone and its camera has been validated. Not only does Snapchat have over 203 million DAUs but many, most obviously being Instagram, have copied Snap’s features relentlessly.

Snap’s latest feature is a 3D camera which a user must have an iPhone X or later to leverage. This is an example of Evan not only taking advantage of the smartphone camera but quickly taking advantage of new features that are added to the camera

Privacy & Design

Apple and Snap share numerous core values. Apple prides itself deeply with being respectful and mindful about privacy, as does Snap.

Apple and Snap are design-first. Steve Jobs worked hand-in-hand with lead designer Jony Ivey for years. Likewise, Evan is known to work directly with the product designers at Snap to ensure the design is first-class.

Apple can afford it

Snap’s market cap sits at $23B as of this writing. Apple has over $200B cash on hand. Apple’s largest acquisition so far has been Beats Electronics in August 2014 for $3 billion. The ~ $25B price tag will be the biggest investment they’ve had but Apple can pull it off.

Apple has gone Hollywood

With the introduction of Apple TV+ and Apple entering the original content game, Apple has entered Hollywood in a big way. Snap is one of the largest players in the LA tech scene. Snap has accumulated incredible talent, have cut many content deals of their own and can be a major asset to Apple’s Hollywood aspirations.

Apple lacks a Product thought leader

With Jony Ivey leaving the company and Steve Jobs long gone, Apple no longer has a recognizable product thought leader. Although Tim Cook is a genius with logistics he is not the charismatic product leader and presenter that Apple lacks. This is a lofty claim, but Evan Spiegel is the perfect heir apparent to Steve Jobs.

Why it won’t work

There are many reasons Apple buying Snap may not work.

First, can it get done? Would the government, which has become wary of “big tech”, allow Apple to own a successful social network? Although this is a risk, with Facebook and Instagram’s domination, it would be hard for the government to make a case that this acquisition would lead to monopoly power.

Second, would Evan sell? Google offered Evan $30B in May 2016 and he said no. Although Evan fiercely wants to remain independent, a relationship with Apple would be hard for him to pass up. Apple is a better value fit for Evan and can accelerate his mission of Snap.

Third, Snap makes most of its revenue through ads. Although Apple sells ads such as placement in the App Store, Apple regularly slams companies whose primary revenue comes from targeted ads.

Apple could look at other business models for Snap. Perhaps Snap being tightly integrated with the iPhone will help Apple sell more iPhones and therefore Apple can avoid the Ad revenue. Or, perhaps this is an opportunity for Apple to diversify its revenue even more.

Bottom Line

Apple and Snap share the same values and could produce killers products together. Allowing Evan to have access to the camera months or years before it launches and letting him create a more integrated product is a dream. But that’s just the start. Giving Evan’s genius product mind access to Apple’s vast resources is a match made in heaven. What innovations could Evan add to iOS? What other areas of Apple could he make an impact?

Apple is perhaps the best business in the world. Apple has top of the line products, amazing logistics, and an incredible brand. But it lacks soul if you ask me. It’s easy to criticize Snap, but Snap has soul.

bookmark_borderRooting for Peak Facebook

Posted on by mikejsiegel

Peak predictions are tempting. Peak Oil has been an on-going prediction since at least the 60s, yet here we are in 2019 and have yet to reach peak oil.

In tech, peak Apple has been everyone’s favorite (incorrect) prediction.

Facebook is the newest peak-predicting victim.

MG Siegler has been a fan of predicting Facebook’s demise. The first such prediction he made in 2015, but he’s made others, going as far as penning a post called “Peak Facebook” a year ago.

Here is his latest take, writing about “Instagram by Facebook” –

The first thing that jumps to mind: Facebook is dead. Long live Facebook!

This is pretty clearly a way to cheat death (eventually). Or, at the very least, to hedge against it. It’s a lot harder to have a narrative around the “decline of Facebook” when Instagram by Facebook and WhatsApp by Facebook are thriving. (Not to mention that it would seem to be an attempt to solidify the “they can’t be broken apart” narrative…)


But there is a very real downside risk here. As the article notes, many people don’t know that Instagram is owned by Facebook. If and when they now know, does that change their usage at all? Even I — obviously very aware who Instagram is owned by — find myself questioning if this will or should change my usage. I mean, it’s just a name change! But it’s also a clear signal of the way forward..

First, let’s look at the facts. Facebook added 25 million DAUs last quarter for a total of 1.587 billion daily users. That’s insane and obviously objectively not peak Facebook. The fine print shows that these numbers do not include WhatsApp or Instagram, this is the big blue app.

Since MG’s first peak prediction in 2015, Facebook has added a whopping 500 million DAUs! 50% growth from their 1 billion at the time in 2015. Amazing, and shows how foolish MG’s prediction was at the time.

MG is missing another detail with his latest critique. Facebook is not outright saying why they are changing Instagram and WhatsApp to “Instagram by Facebook” and “WhatsApp by Facebook”. The detractors like to accuse Zuckerberg of being vain. There is a rumor going around he’s “annoyed” that he isn’t getting credit for their success.

This seems wildly out of character for how Zuckerberg has acted in the public to date. If anything, Zuckerberg would love to be more under the radar than the intense scrutiny his company receives.

What is more likely is that this change is due to pressure from regulators, most likely European regulators. The regulators feel Facebook is tricking people by not being more upfront about owning these apps. Facebook is getting ahead of this critique by becoming more transparent about their ownership.

And this sums up Facebook’s current can’t-win situation. Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.