I think you’ve missed the overriding thesis I’ve presented.

Having identified an unmet need, Snap has exploded onto the scene.

Facebook has attempted to copy Snap. In multiple ways.

But — a failure that often hurts incumbents — and truly — here the incumbent is Facebook — is the belief that if they just add these features they will defang the oncoming lion. It’s a classic disruption mistake.

The disruptor is honed and focused and very close to and in deeper understanding of its target than the incumbent. The disruptor doesn’t try to be all things to all people as the incumbent is forced to. The disruptor can afford to pivot as often as needed where the incumbent can not.

My reference to LinkedIn is based on the introduction of “Articles”. I appreciate the introduction — but I don’t feel in any way that the dialogue we are having would have occurred there or could. LinkedIn is attempting to be “all” where Medium is just trying to be singularly great at one thing — long-form content.

Snap is a disruptor doing something very interesting and different — and they are making it insanely easy for content creators to create their content. Again — this bears some similarity to Medium — where creating content is a pleasure.

Keep your eyes on them and we can see which of us is correct over the next two years.