Demonstrated ability to make money is usually demonstrated by actually making it though. I mean, the most obvious point for comparison in revenue growth figures at the same point in their history would be Twitter, and I don&#x27;t think there are many people who backed its IPO that feel it&#x27;s lived up to its promise after turning the money tap on. Just because Pinterest&#x27;s revenues will grow sharply over the next three years doesn&#x27;t mean it isn&#x27;t overvalued and under-monetised for its age.<p>Amazon told investors they&#x27;d have to wait because the internet was in its infancy, and profits would taken even longer because they were reinvested in building logistics operations but they were doing a billion in revenue by their sixth year, even as the rest of the dotcom world crashed around them because not enough people were online yet. Facebook&#x27;s management were decidedly unfocused on revenue, in an era where the idea of socially targeted advertising was a relative novelty, but it was also fast approaching a billion in revenue by its sixth year.<p>Pinterest&#x27;s entry into a much more mature market should in theory mean fewer problems to solve, it&#x27;s probably maxed out the &quot;US women&quot; niche that&#x27;s the core of its value proposition to advertisers, and those advertisers are not impressed with its attempts to &quot;build positive experience&quot; for them. Seems a bit optimistic to compare it with other companies that achieved much higher revenue after six years in more difficult circumstances.