Discussion
  • Read More
    KinglyCitrusHamilton Nolan
    3/25/14 11:24am

    These pieces always strike me as being based in rivalry more than anything else. I feel like Denton comes into meetings sometimes and goes "Hey, guys, we need another scathing Vice hit piece today. Fuck those guys, amirite?" They really aren't any more "corporate" or "sell-out" beneath the surface than Gawker Media (also a very profitable business) is. Both companies are run by huge douchebags, too—imagine that!

    The primary difference is that Vice actually produces real, in-depth, on-location journalism sometimes—something that Gawker almost never even bothers to attempt. I go here more often than there because their comment "community" is virtually non-existent, but you guys are trying really, really hard to fuck up your advantage there anyway. I know Gawker wants to wear big boy Journalism britches too, but writing snarky blogs about your competitors from the peanut gallery isn't the way to get there.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      goldgoldergoldestKinglyCitrus
      3/25/14 11:32am

      I think the difference lies in the fact that Gawker admits they don't produce anything and have sold out, while Vice still pretends to be edgy and anti-establishment, while being partly owned by Murdoch and co. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      gorillamunchKinglyCitrus
      3/25/14 11:38am

      I agree some of the articles feel like rivalry and shit talking, but this article is more about an absurd valuation. I guess somethings worth is determined by how much a sucker is willing to pay for it. I do enjoy most of the documentaries vice puts out. The online articles are hit or miss. What viable company doesnt advertise these days? Its hard to complain about getting sold to a corporation when most people post every detail about themselves on Facebook.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Cpr196Hamilton Nolan
    3/25/14 11:30am

    does good journalism on the side

    Hey you have something common!

    -

    -

    -

    Just so you know that was a joke, I love this site... please don't ban me.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Hamilton NolanCpr196
      3/25/14 11:39am

      Fairly accurate. We do tell jokes though.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      DannyNoonanHamilton Nolan
      3/25/14 12:03pm

      But who WHO writes more hard hitting stories about Lena Dunham's muffin top? You should be very proud, Hamilton. Something to mention when it's your turn to do an interview with Bloomberg? #skrillix

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    arsepoeticaHamilton Nolan
    3/25/14 11:20am

    First rule of bubbles: Use any metric OTHER than P/E to value companies.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      burntbunnzarsepoetica
      3/25/14 11:38am

      I am going to ask some of my smart friends to build an algorithm that calculates hype to sales and then use it to short those companies which are over hyped.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      narcissusarsepoetica
      3/25/14 11:41am

      98% of market returns are explained by adding together dividend yield, earnings growth, and change to P/E ratio. The remaining 2% is market noise.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Governor McCheeseHamilton Nolan
    3/25/14 1:19pm

    Revenue per share has its own metric: P/S, or price/sales. It would be interesting to see how Vice's P/S of 56 compares to other media companies'. The P/S of most companies usually falls somewhere in the 1-3 range. I don't know why HamNo did this weird P/S to P/E comparison, which tells us virtually nothing, especially when a P/S to P/S comparison would better illustrate just how wildly overvalued Vice is.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      KaiFromDogtownHamilton Nolan
      3/25/14 11:22am

      Wait a minute... they've made $500M *in a year* selling cool kids to corporations? Fuck it if I'm not in the wrong business.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        cantfindmyrealacctKaiFromDogtown
        3/25/14 11:23am

        If you spend $499.5 M to make the $500 M, then it is definitely less impressive.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        Citizen-Kangcantfindmyrealacct
        3/25/14 11:25am

        It's even worse if you're upside-down on that ratio.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      GemmabetaHamilton Nolan
      3/25/14 11:29am

      So if Vice is the tech bubble, what's Gawker then?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        GogogadgetanythingGemmabeta
        3/25/14 11:42am

        Let me know when Denton is valuing Gawker at $1 trillion. If you are in tech right now it may be a good time to get out because when every other app is valuing themselves in the billions this is Internet Bubble 2.0

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Flm3454Hamilton Nolan
      3/25/14 11:23am

      Wow, really hitting Vice hard lately.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Dustin de WyndeHamilton Nolan
        3/25/14 12:57pm

        Despite my Vice v. Gawker diss below I'd be remiss if I didn't say that your logic here regarding this bubble is sound, HamNo.

        Currently pretty much you and Sam Biddle are the only ones right now calling bullshit on the Silicon Valley/Wall Street nexus, which is what keeps me sticking around in Denton's little playground.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          'olJackBurtonAlwaysSaysHamilton Nolan
          3/25/14 11:20am

          I can't wait to read the Vice Guide to selling out.

          Reply
          <
          • Read More
            OMG!PONIES!Hamilton Nolan
            3/25/14 11:20am

            Well if the last 10 years has proven anything, it's that there's big money to be made in journalism.

            Parents - send your kids to j-school! They'll never be poor and never regret it!

            Reply
            <