Snapchat reportedly planning to buy Bitstrips for $100m
Will we soon see those comic strips arriving on Snapchat?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Snapchat is reportedly in the process of buying Bitstrips, for a price of around $100 million (£71 million).
The sale could result in an unholy millenial alliance of Snapchat's self-destructing picture and video messages, and Bitstrips' trademark personalised emojis (or 'bitmojis').
As reported by Fortune, who cited "multiple sources," the hefty $100m sum will be paid in a mixture of cash and stock.
It's not clear yet what Snapchat plans to do with Bitstrips - the obvious outcome would be an integration of the personalised bitmojis in Snapchat itself, but they could be coming up with something better.
According to Fortune, Bitstrips has raised around $11 million in funding from venture capital firms, and it's clear Snapchat sees something in the company to pay so much for it.
Bitstrips declined to comment on the matter. The Independent has contacted Snapchat for more information.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments