Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
GAY COUPLES ACROSS and Wales said “I do” last night as a law authorising same-sex marriage came into effect at midnight, the final stage in a long fight for equality.
Prime Minister David Cameron hailed what he said was an “important moment for our country”, and a rainbow flag flew above government offices in London in celebration.
In Brighton on England’s south coast, Neil Allard and Andrew Wale exchanged vows and rings in the opulent splendour of the Royal Pavilion in front of about 100 guests.
Wearing velvet-collared three-piece suits with white flowers in their buttonholes, the smiling couple of seven years hugged and kissed after they became “husband and husband”.
They were among several couples bidding to be first to take advantage of last year’s Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act by holding midnight weddings.
“We are very happy this day has come finally. It’s very exciting,” said Wale, a 49-year-old theatre director.
Emerging out into the crisp night air after the ceremony, they were stunned to be greeted by hundreds of cheering supporters.
To calls of “speech, speech!”, they expressed hope that the change in Britain would help bring equality to same-sex relationships in other countries.
(Gareth Fuller/Press Association Images)
Earlier this week, Wale remarked “how lucky we are to live in a comparatively tolerant part of the world”.
Civil partnerships have been legal since 2005 and marriage brings no new rights. The ability to adopt, for example, was introduced in 2002.
But campaigners have insisted that only the right to marry gives them full equality with heterosexual couples.
Teresa Millward, 37, will wed her her long-term girlfriend on Saturday. She said,
We didn’t want to get married until it was a marriage that my mum and dad could have
The gay marriage law is the final victory in a long battle stretching back to the decriminalisation of homosexuality in England in 1967.
Cameron backed the change despite strong opposition from members of his Conservative party and the established Church of England.
“This weekend is an important moment for our country,” the prime minister wrote in an article for Pink News.
“Put simply, in Britain it will no longer matter whether you are straight or gay — the state will recognise your relationship as equal.”
Still Resistance
Not all attitudes have changed. A poll for BBC radio said 20 percent of British adults would turn down an invitation to a same-sex wedding.
However, the survey also found 68 percent agreed gay marriage should be permitted, with 26 percent opposing it.
The Church of England had opposed same-sex marriage, insisting weddings should only take place between a man and a woman, and secured an exemption from the new law.
The House of Bishops last month also warned clergy they should not bless married gay couples.
But Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, the leader of the world’s 80 million Anglicans, said the Church had accepted the new law and would continue to demonstrate “the love of Christ for every human being”.
Peter McGraith and David Cabreza, who have been together for 17 years, also married shortly after midnight in front of friends and their two adopted sons in London.
They hope their wedding will send out a message to places like Nigeria, Uganda and Russia where the idea of gay marriage is a distant dream.
While 15 countries have legalised gay marriage and another three allow it in some areas, homosexuals remain persecuted in many parts of the world.
“There’s a lot of gay men and lesbians around the world who are not invited to the party,” McGraith, a clothing designer, told AFP ahead of the big day.
Same-sex couples who were married abroad are now recognised under the new law, although only in England and Wales.
Scotland, which has devolved powers, is expected to introduce gay marriage later this year, while the British-controlled province of Northern Ireland remains deeply divided on the issue and has no plans to change the law there.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
“This is why Snapchat fully deserves a €16 billion valuation” And yet the article doesn’t explain why Snapchat deserves a €16 billion valuation. Sure, I understand its potential revenue raising abilities. I understand its appeal to advertisers. I understand that it hosts a lot of personal information which would be invaluable to potential investors and advertisers. But why, exactly, is it €16 billion? Why not €15 billion? Or €1000 trillion? How did they arrive at a figure of €16 billion?
I think the headline means, “Snapchat has recently been valued at $16bn. Here’s why it’s so popular/unique”.
Yeah, but we know why it’s so popular and unique. We see articles about it every second day. If, at this stage, you don’t know about Snapchat’s popularity and uniqueness then the likelihood is you just don’t care, in which case you wouldn’t be reading this anyway. We have still to see how exactly the 16 billion figure was calculated, which I what the headline alludes to.
What I was saying above is that Snapchat has three major features that could be massive money spinners for them, and how it’s effectively become a multimedia platform as well, they’re the most quantifiable ones unless you’re privy to their future plans then fire away.
As for how a company is valued, that takes into a number of factors into consideration which would include money raised (so far, it’s raised $648m in 6 different funding rounds), current popularity, the potential for growth in both revenue and users, (which links to the last one but anyway), the value of the industry (instant messaging would be the obvious one, but it’s now become a media entity and has video on its side so that’s two, three if you include Snapchat Stories and its potential for widespread event), assets (both digital and physical), is it public or private, and so on.
Determining the exact reasons why it settled on $19/€16 billion to the point of a formula isn’t possible since you don’t know what factors they’re prioritising ahead of others. Also, when you’re dealing with a private company as unlike Facebook, Apple, Twitter or any other public company, they’ve no obligation to share details about their plans or forecasts to anyone.
In Snapchat’s case, it’s potential in three areas as I mentioned above: events, multimedia (it trying to become a Netflix-style entity for articles, music and TV), and payments/ecommerce as they’re the ones that have a massive influence on this valuation. Also the core psychological element of Snapchat of limitation (which is oddly overlooked and was the main reason I wrote this in the first place) is such a massive factor and that seeps into all of its features. If Snapchat was just about self-destructing photos/videos on its own, then it would have been overshadowed by Facebook Poke back in 2012 or accepted Facebook’s $3 offer back in 2013.
The discussions I’ve seen on the subject (on Twitter and other sites) only mention Discover as if that was the sole reasons behind such a high valuation. The main point above is that it’s rarely one factor that leads to that, (especially when it’s well-known), and it’s weird how other features are forgotten about just because they’re not as new or shiny as the latest thing (or the tired ‘sexting’ angle that’s peddled out regularly).
Give it 3 yrs and youll see all such companies worth a fraction of todays value, times they are a changin
I get all that. The fact still remains that the headline suggests that the accompanying article will explain exactly how the figure of 16 billion was reached. I was curious to know how they got that figure. And yet, I’m still none the wiser. Should it have a large valuation? Obviously the answer is yes, and you have explained that both in the article and your comment. But we’re still no closer to understanding the 16 billion valuation. Sorry, but I’m a stickler for this kind of thing. If you know how, then say it and let the headline reflect it. If you don’t, then don’t mislead the reader into thinking you do, only to leave the reader empty handed.
If everyone on snap chat had a super sweet party = 16 x the amount of willie photos ever sent = 16billion
On Sesame Street their number of the day is 16 x 1billion. Tomorrow it will be $43 Billion
I’d say the long term bet is when an analyst bets a pension fund on this.
I’d be nervous.
It could only ever be a trade sale to Google or the like …. Its a very limited product. If a pension fund manager bought snapchat, they should be sacked.
Nothing on this Earth deserves to be valued at €16 billion
So what’s your idea of a max cap value so Andy?
You haven’t seen my willy.
If I owned it I would sell now
Fapchat
It deserves about a 16 CENT valuation. It’s ridiculous, and hopefully a fad that will die quickly. If the world is lucky, some evil company will pay 16B, then go out of business when people realise how stupid Snapchat is.
Never seen such anger directed at a mobile phone application before! Got dumped via Snapchat did you? :-)
have your say