Comments on: Facebook, is this the best you can do? Where media and technology meet Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:48:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: BobFoolery Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:51:34 +0000 1) “… ad revenue growth could slow to 40 percent or less in 2012 — much closer to Google’s recent growth.”

Why is 40% growth and the concept that facebook might have matured be such a bad thing? 40% growth? The market compares this to two extraordinary examples (Apple and Google), and measures all else a failure if they do not compare. First, the idea that 40% growth for facebook is marginal is ridiculous. Second, the idea that facebook is mature is ridiculous. This is an example of a widespread attempt at analysis based on a spreadsheet.

But there’s a real world out there.

2) “Suddenly, the two biggest purveyors of online ads are hitting a speed bump. And it’s not entirely clear why.”

Well, the buyer’s of ads realize that facebook, and Google, have not only collected a lot of data about people that they use to sell ads, but they have also provided a lot of data about people that the buyer’s of ads can use for free. Make a facebook page, sell your product. Period. Why buy an ad? It’s free.

Countering this failure of the business model is the narrow-minded concept that facebook and Google cannot profit without selling ad space. That this is their sole opportunity and no other exists. They must sell ads or they will fail. This is the analysis of bean counters looking at spreadsheets that fail to recognize their environment is wrapped in a physical and very real world.

Foolishness. Idiocy. And I’m not a particular fan of either of these companies.

By: bburgess7 Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:26:27 +0000 Great article. It touches on some of the points I made last week in my piece “Why Unprotected Sex is the Only Way to a $100B Facebook Valuation”, here:

The valuation doesn’t make any sense now, and Facebook is saying they are going to get into mobile advertising, which is good, but as people move to spending more time on their phones with small screens as opposed to their computers with large screens that is less real estate for ads, which means fewer dollars for Facebook.

By: jledbet Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:48:01 +0000 @Retuer: Thanks for pointing out the mistake; it’s been fixed.

By: retuer Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:48:42 +0000 It’s 100B not 100M valuation.

By: WeWereWallSt Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:03:16 +0000 “You end up wondering if its best years aren’t already behind it.”

What best years? This thing has been a waste product since Zuckerberg did those hard bodied twins at Harvard. If this is what America has to offer, a platform and advertising revenues, we’ll be learning Mandarin to smooch up to our assembly line supervisors while we make cheap products to ship to the Chinese.

Facebook has been a pump-and-dump from the start ( s.html) and investors who buy it ought to just send their dosh to the Sisters of Mercy.

Gates and Microsoft giveth productivity. Zuckerberg and Facebook taketh productivity away. The hoola hoop has been going round longer than we thought it would, but people will wake up one of these days and ask why they trusted these guys with their privacy and why they wasted so much time on it.