Facebook has admitted that some of its 845 million accounts might be fake or duplicated user identities, but that doesn't seem to be worrying the banks since they have doubled the social network's loans to $8bn to take care of its market debut. Facebook said in additional filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) …
10 - 11% of its users may not be generating useful traffic ?
I wonder what else will be admitted to ? (number of underage account holders ? - although you can still market to them)
Next big banking bail out?
$8bn for a market debut.
Have these (w)bankers learnt nothing?
Re: Next big banking bail out?
Of course they've learnt something: if they gamble big-time with our money and fall flat on their @rses, the governments of the world will commit our money to bailing them out. Trebles all round!
They're giving their normal customers derisory interest rates, refusing valid business loans to small businessness, putting up mortgage rates and generally making life difficult for 99% of the population.
But hey, a recreational website full of insecure egomaniac 20 teens and somethings posting pictures of themselves getting drunk? Nooo problem , lets just chuck tax payer bailout money at it!
I'm no street protest crusty - I even used to work in the financial sector, but the behaviour of the banks right now is utterly immoral and makes me sick to my stomach.
$8bn. So that's a dollar for every man, woman and child on the planet. Plus all the dogs, I think.
Of course, you'll want that back with interest. And you'll want it back in, say, 5-10 years. And you'll be paid back by Facebook's money-making expertise, which basically consists of Google Ads (of which Google only gets about $9bn a year itself - before costs).
So you're suggesting that ONE website on the planet is going to make, say 1/5th to 1/10th, of the money that Google sees from ads (not including costs) in pure profit that it can afford to pay you back. AND MORE, to keep running effectively. And for this state of affairs to continue (at both Facebook and Google, without ANYTHING changing in terms of customer numbers, etc.) until the company is sold at a profit and/or the loan is paid off.
That's a lot, considering that most people use Facebook for a bit of IM and for showing granny their baby pics.
I'd like to contrast this with a friend of mine recently who was refused by their bank to have a debit card (or credit card, or overdraft, or chequebook, etc. - only an ATM card) on their account when they earn a verifiable, reliable, and historical £50,000 a year at a job that took them 10 years to qualify for, and had no debts, when the bank next door (one of those bailed out by the government) offered her credit card, debit card, chequebook, mortgage, etc.)
Banks have a lot to answer for.
Re: Banks have a lot to answer for.
Who do the banks answer to?
What confuses me...
is why they need to borrow money to fund tax payments - I'm not an expert but surely tax is based on profits received? How can they expect the situation of both having tax to pay and not having money to pay the tax?
Surely this is just another way of saying "we want more money now instead of later."
Unless whatsisface wants to bump the shares up as high as they can go before dumping the lot and walking away.
Re: What confuses me...
That's exactly what I would be doing.
He's a self made billionaire in his 20s and those billions came more by luck than judgement so I would happily cash in my enormous wedge and retire to a life of globe trotting luxury.
I'm baffled as to where Facebook make their money. I've never even noticed any ads on Facebook's site though I use it very little: perhaps that is because I use the CustomizeGoogle extension with Firefox? Though I have noticed that a number of online newspapers cause Facebook's site to be 'contacted'. Is that their source of revenue?
As Ollie pointed out before, the product is you (and Soilent Green is people). They sell profiling information for marketing purposes and who knows what else. I tend to avoid falling for the conspiracy theory crowd, but most users provide with enough information about their habits, purchase prospects, travel plans, etc to dwarf any data mining effort done to date (IMO).
If a service or product is free, then *you* are the product.
Facebook mostly created the 'fake account' problem for itself, by selling itself as a platform, especially for games, and especially for 'social' games.
You can play these games with all your friends, sure. Or you can create a handful of fake accounts to get all the benefits of 'playing with your friends' with none of the hassle. I know lots of people who do that - have four or five fake accounts they just use for playing games.
(No, that does not include me. I have better things to do than play games on Facebook. Yes, one of those things is posting in Reg comment threads. No, I didn't say the things were _very much_ better than playing games on Facebook...)
What problem? They love the fake accounts.
Their inflated valuation is based on a ridiculous monetary worth per account. I bet their efforts at rooting out duplicate accounts are as vigorous as casinos efforts to help problem gamblers kick the habbit.
@AdamWill: nice content in your post, but especially nice crystall ball gazing re likely thoughts of follow comment... ehm ers on your behaviour ;)
And yes, I agree, Facebook will probably show a VERY vigorous effort in detecting & removing those accounts...
Heh, point. Or as a Canadian would put it - the cyberspace equivalent of dinosaur arms...
Drought in the South
Perhaps the drought in the South of England isn't going to be as bad as they say, when all those Facebook Investors lose all their money the tears will flood the country.
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Review Tough Banana Pi: a Raspberry Pi for colour-blind diehards
- Product round-up Ten Mac freeware apps for your new Apple baby
- Analysis Pity the poor Windows developer: The tools for desktop development are in disarray
- Chromecast video on UK, Euro TVs hertz so badly it makes us judder – but Google 'won't fix'