Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#111

Post by morgante » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:22 PM UTC

kuschku wrote: post #85

morgante wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Except that most of Americans between 16-22 (the oldest FB audience) have quit. That's an extraordinary claim and requires extraordinary evidence. You don't have any. As someone who's actually in that demographic I can tell you it's patently false. Facebook continues to be the hub of social networking, particularly on college campuses. If you're having an event of any sort, Facebook is the place you announce it. Me…

As someone in that demographic, I see new posts on my timeline every 2 or 3 weeks. If I want to know what's going on on the campus, I check Jodel. If I want to message others, I use WhatsApp. Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp is the only reason why I use any of the products.

From your profile, it looks like you're German, not American. Germans have always had a tepid relationship with Facebook and it's definitely not a core or strategic market for them.

(If I'm wrong, I apologize for assuming.)

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#112

Post by danbruc » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:30 PM UTC

I graphed Google search trends for different platforms [1] a few weeks ago. If Facebook is like the others, it crossed its peak three years ago and is dying ever since, something that matches my personal experience on Facebook. So where does this disparity come from, how can Facebook keep announcing new records while the search trend points downwards for about three years? Did they manage to break free from the correlation? Maybe because of the widespread use of its apps? Does the rise of WhatsApp play a role in the presented numbers?

Don't get mislead by the normalization, Facebook has still more than six times the search volume compared to the peak of Myspace.

[1] http://i.imgur.com/SGci58n.png

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#113

Post by aembleton » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:35 PM UTC

danbruc wrote: post #112

I graphed Google search trends for different platforms [1] a few weeks ago. If Facebook is like the others, it crossed its peak three years ago and is dying ever since, something that matches my personal experience on Facebook. So where does this disparity come from, how can Facebook keep announcing new records while the search trend points downwards for about three years? Did they manage to break free from the corre…

* If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google.

* Instant articles means they get a cut of advertising revenue from external sites such as Daily Mail and New York Times when users click on a shared story

* It is plausible that they have improved their ad targeting algorithms so that those who want to see an ad are more likely to see it.

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#114

Post by ghshephard » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #93

ghshephard wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think that customers are reasonably sophisticated when it comes to stuff like this, particularly when they are spending real $$$. How difficult is it, for something like brand advertising, to do before/after poll's to discern how effective the dollar spend is in promoting a brand (with conversion to sales, it's even more trivial.) Done properly, the customer doesn't actually care if 99% of the exchange invent…

Your hand wavy usage of "measure awareness" is the problem. How do you do such a thing? When you're advertising on multiple channels, even if you did have a solid measurement of awareness (you don't), you still wouldn't know what was responsible. This is the appeal behind things like Facebook ads. It seems you have a very clear sense of what return you're getting because there's such precise targeting and tracking. T…

Two ways to measure brand awareness - polling, and are people buying your product.

And you run many, many programs on lots of channels in different demographics, and geographies - and see which program is most effective.

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#115

Post by danbruc » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

aembleton wrote: post #113

danbruc wrote: post #112

I graphed Google search trends for different platforms [1] a few weeks ago. If Facebook is like the others, it crossed its peak three years ago and is dying ever since, something that matches my personal experience on Facebook. So where does this disparity come from, how can Facebook keep announcing new records while the search trend points downwards for about three years? Did they manage to break free from the corre…

* If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google. * Instant articles means they get a cut of advertising revenue from external sites such as Daily Mail and New York Times when users click on a shared story * It is plausible that they have improved their ad targeting algorithms so that those who want to see an ad are more likely to see it.

If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google.

On the other hand a lot of other searches contribute to the search volume and should track the popularity of Facebook, problems with the app, developers looking for API documentation, discussions of policy changes, people looking for jobs, news about the company and so on. So even if people are using the app the search volume should say something about the popularity. One thing I can imagine though is that a shift from the web to the app might decrease the search volume by such a large amount that it totally obscures the trend of the other kinds of searches I mentioned above.

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#116

Post by aembleton » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:52 PM UTC

putlake wrote: post #63

physcab wrote: post #24

Here's the thing that most people don't know unless they are in the "industry": * The gaming industry is most likely driving a lot of this growth. I'm sure Machine Zone and Supercell are doing between $5M - $10M a day on FB alone. * FB is re-defining attribution. They want to bring in big brands and are re-defining last-click to "Multi-touch". Their end game ofcourse is to say the reason why you decided to make a tri…

If what you are saying is true, then it's phone apps (games) driving this revenue. In that case, it seems to me that one should actually buy Apple stock. Because phone apps will only spend this kind of money on Facebook ads if they are able to generate RoI in the app store via in-app purchases. And Apple gets a 30% cut of that without doing anything. So Apple must be making as much revenue as Facebook from this pheno…

Applies equally to Google

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#117

Post by aembleton » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

danbruc wrote: post #115

aembleton wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google. * Instant articles means they get a cut of advertising revenue from external sites such as Daily Mail and New York Times when users click on a shared story * It is plausible that they have improved their ad targeting algorithms so that those who want to see an ad are more likely to see it.

If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google. On the other hand a lot of other searches contribute to the search volume and should track the popularity of Facebook, problems with the app, developers looking for API documentation, discussions of policy changes, people looking for jobs, news about the company and so on. So even if people are using the app the search volume shoul…

I expect most searches are from people typing Facebook into Chrome and hitting Enter.

If those people are shifting more and more to the mobile app then they won't be doing that so much. Sure, they'll search if there are problems with the app, or they're after a job but that has got to be less than those trying to access the site.

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#118

Post by danbruc » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 3:16 PM UTC

aembleton wrote: post #117

danbruc wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone has the Facebook app then they're not going to be heading there via Google. On the other hand a lot of other searches contribute to the search volume and should track the popularity of Facebook, problems with the app, developers looking for API documentation, discussions of policy changes, people looking for jobs, news about the company and so on. So even if people are using the app the search volume shoul…

I expect most searches are from people typing Facebook into Chrome and hitting Enter. If those people are shifting more and more to the mobile app then they won't be doing that so much. Sure, they'll search if there are problems with the app, or they're after a job but that has got to be less than those trying to access the site.

That is exactly what I meant with my last sentence. According to the graph from this article [1] the number of web users halved between Q1/12 and Q4/14 while the number of web and mixed users combined increased by about seven percent. It's hard to match against the search volume, it may or may not explain it.

As already mentioned, from my personal experience I would say I see evidence for the decline, I see no new users but I have seen a few users leave. Maybe there is also regional variations, older markets already losing users while newer markets are still growing.

[1] http://pandawhale.com/post/57536/jan-2015-facebook-has-119-b...

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#119

Post by aembleton » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 3:36 PM UTC

coldcode wrote: post #107

Apple makes more profit than all of Facebook's revenue times 3. Yet Apple stock goes down and Facebook, which has a price/revenue ratio that makes no sense whatsoever, goes up. Apple makes products people generally love, and Facebook makes money from ad and ad like things which people hate (and eventually will block). I really don't understand the stock market at all.

Stock isn't bought just based upon last quarters profits, but on how much investors think can be derived in the long term.

Facebook have done better than investors expected. Apple have done worse than investors expected. What makes you think people hate Facebook ads? Facebook ads are the only ones that I have ever clicked on, and then made a purchase. I think they are well targeted and very effective.

Re: Facebook Climbs to 1.59B Users, Beats Q4 Estimates with $5.8B Revenue

#120

Post by throwaway198374 » Thu, Jan 28, 2016, 3:54 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #114

ethanbond wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your hand wavy usage of "measure awareness" is the problem. How do you do such a thing? When you're advertising on multiple channels, even if you did have a solid measurement of awareness (you don't), you still wouldn't know what was responsible. This is the appeal behind things like Facebook ads. It seems you have a very clear sense of what return you're getting because there's such precise targeting and tracking. T…

Two ways to measure brand awareness - polling, and are people buying your product. And you run many, many programs on lots of channels in different demographics, and geographies - and see which program is most effective.

The polling is often done by randomly inserting Vizu polls into the page somewhere and hoping someone fills them out. Of course hardly anyone does - who can be bothered? Still, they've managed to establish themselves as a credible third-party verifier (not saying they actually are credible - I know sometimes people running the campaign will fill these out to show that the campaign is working)

Also, I'm not saying it's all fraudulent and doesn't work at all - of course if that were the case everyone would know. What I'm saying is that the brand is massively overpaying, because a large percentage of their delivery goes to fraudulent bot traffic. And it's pretty much in everyone's financial interest except the brand's to turn a blind eye.

Also, it's important to know how campaigns are actually delivered: firstly, Sales sells something wildly optimistic like delivering 1m impressions a day to 45-50 y/o women in Florida. As time goes on and delivery can't be met we loosen the targeting parameters in order to "deliver in full" even though this delivery is no longer to the customers specifications. We might tell them we're doing that, or we might not and hope we get away with it. Then after the campaign we take whatever numbers we got and create a story out of it that makes us look good. If we're working with an agency we give it to them and they presumably spin it some more before presenting it to the customer.