131–140 of 145 posts
Why is this a link to Mashable when all the reporting work and original information is from the Wall Street Journal? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020457370457718...
I can see the Mashable article but I can't see the WSJ article (presumably because I'm not a subscriber).
Well, honestly I think that buying Facebook shares right now is a high risk move. While it is possible maybe to forecast some ups and downs in the immediate following days, if the evaluation actually goes to 100 billions it'd look scary to me. I'm not saying that Facebook is dying or that it's gonna die anytime soon, but I am not able to foresee any significant growth. The article compared, with sort of negative term…
Google's market cap is 188B, and they are changing everything to compete with Facebook. Google is based on information that people want. Facebook is based on the social interactions of people themselves. That's one giant leap closer to where the money comes from (people). As for what need Facebook meets... it's communication (and communing): people connecting with people. This is the basis of many technological innov…
That statement is backwards. Facebook sort of knows what I kinda like, but Google knows exactly what I want, right now. If I type "Escort midtown manhattan" and click the Google ad, Google will make about $4, which is more than Facebook will make during an entire year by guessing what I want.
Search ads are 1-2 orders of magnitude more valuable than perfectly targeted display ads.
* The escort example was to only prove the point that wants are where the money in advertising is, not people or interactions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's one giant leap closer to where the money comes from (people). Actually, the money comes from advertisers . Eyeball-hours are a fixed-sum game at any point in time (the sum grows over time). Eyeball-hours spent on Facebook are eyeball-hours not spent elsewhere looking at Google searches, Google products or Google-mediated advertising.
The value of one eyeball-hour is not fixed. The more targeted the advertising, the more effective and therefore valuable it is. In fact, for sufficiently well-targeted advertising, it doesn't need anything - as when you seek a product. Overture/goto made money like this (google used its ideas for adwords). Consider advertising on TV and print media: you try to hit your demographic and hope for the best. Next is direc…
But it's still hard to know what people want or need to buy right now
They can (and do) personalize it somewhat, but just aren't as well-placed as facebook, because they aren't as close to the user (people). People are ultimately where the money comes from. That's how advertisers get it.
So who's information is more valuable? Facebook's because they know more about you overall (your friends, your habits etc.) or Google's because they know what you want right now (because you just entered it right fucking there in the search box)
I'm leaning toward Google. If someone has a problem, they go to Google to search for ways to solve it, and as you point out, that's precisely when they're most amenable to advertising. People go to Facebook to connect with other people. Advertising will always be noise there. (Stupid mindless games notwithstanding.)
Is anyone paying attention? Just because a company has a massive user base, big popularity, and lots of VCs, doesn't mean it has a great business model.
Sure,you can buy shares, watch them triple in the first 24 and dump them, but when the dust settles, what really happens?
Groupon is trading at $20.04. It IPO'd at $20. Zynga is trading at $10.05. It IPO'd at $10.
Good for the VC's, finally getting a return on their money and all, but it doesn't seem that the companies are really doing much to deserve the hype.
Facebook is presumably making money, and has a crap-load of user-data, but 100 Billion dollar valuation? Maybe based on what people are willing to pay for it, in the hype to get some of it's stock, but its revenues were 2.5 Billion last year. A valuation that's 50x their revenues seems a little steep to me - but again, that could just be me.
Groupon Zynga Is anyone paying attention? Just because a company has a massive user base, big popularity, and lots of VCs, doesn't mean it has a great business model. Sure,you can buy shares, watch them triple in the first 24 and dump them, but when the dust settles, what really happens? Groupon is trading at $20.04. It IPO'd at $20. Zynga is trading at $10.05. It IPO'd at $10. Good for the VC's, finally getting a re…
Insanity.
(Disclaimer, I have a vested interest in this stock going down.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd like to add to your list of Facebook products. * Facebook Search Engine.
I don't get why people seem to ignore this. If facebook added internet search to their site they would instantly become the second biggest provider. I would be very surprised if they weren't already working on this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Wall Street made a mistake with Google, since now their shares now are worth 5 times as much as they were at the opening. August 2004: Gold $405 Google $85/share (thought it was $100/share, huh) Now: Gold $1735 Google $576/share 1735/405 ~= 4.27 85*4.27 ~= 364 So no, Google's shares are not worth 5 times more. They value went up some 50% in six years, which is great but nothing scary.
It may be interesting to compare growth VS gold.. but is it standard to compare against the price of gold? I know nothing of valuation, but by that logic the price of gold would never be worth more.. than.. the price of gold? I thought you'd value the gain in the market currency, aka dollars. No?
Remember there are three functions of money
1) Unit of account 2) Medium of exchange 3) Store of value
Currency is not a good store of value - it can be printed at will. It does store value over a short time frame but if you were given a box from 1930 that inside held somones life savings from 1930 - would you wish it to be in USDs or gold? Hint: USDs is the wrong answer! Currency is an excellent medium of exchange. You can buy food at the supermarket with it. Just don't save your surplus wealth in it.
Gold is used as a store of value instead of orange juice concentrate since it has historical value, it is fungible, divisible and inert (ie: it won't spoil). Also you are not impinging on the economy by hoarding it as a store of value since it has relatively little utility otherwise.
If you think gold is not valuable because you cannot excahnge it for food, then ask yourself why the US Government banned its ownership in 1933 for citizens and why the Euro has it as its number one asset on its consolidated financial statement - above all currencies - including USD http://www.ecb.int/press/pr/wfs/2011/html/fs110706.en.html
Well, honestly I think that buying Facebook shares right now is a high risk move. While it is possible maybe to forecast some ups and downs in the immediate following days, if the evaluation actually goes to 100 billions it'd look scary to me. I'm not saying that Facebook is dying or that it's gonna die anytime soon, but I am not able to foresee any significant growth. The article compared, with sort of negative term…
My (sure to be wrong) Facebook predictions: * The Facebook Phone * The Facebook Netbook * Major user datamining product sales to global governments * Acquiring binge (gaming, education (I think they will go for Khan Academy) * video hosting * Their own voip platform Facebook still has a lot of room to innovate, not that they would necessarily be successful in each iteration. But I would say that the number one thing…
Facebook is like a drug. It's addictive because it makes you live in an idealized life. You feel like a celebrity and getting 5 likes on a status update is like consuming nicotine. So you keep updating, commenting and liking. And you keep getting delighted.
The next big thing that Facebook can do is to integrate with businesses (like restaurants, shops...). Since they can influence people, they can generate strong and massive leads.
I can see Facebook a trillion dollars business with that. It'll need a genuine organization to do that, but they already did a good progress.
*[I'm talking here about my Facebook friends (100% of my friends use Facebook on a daily basis)]