Get ready for another DECADE of us – Zuck
That's one of the more depressing headlines I've read this week.
Facebook raked in revenues of $7.87bn in 2013, up 55 per cent on the previous year, according to company filings published today. The social network's latest finance reports show that in the final quarter of 2013 alone, sales climbed 63 per cent year-on-year to top out at $2.59bn. On the 12 months to December 31, 2013, and …
"a few recent studies and experiments have shown Facebook, gives no returns to the advertiser?"
What are you babbling about? The return for the advertiser is advertising. Facebook ads are some of the most effective advertising available and has Google wishing it could target so effectively. With Google, you search for a mountain bike and you get cycling ads until you search for something else. With Facebook, you mention 5 or 6 hobbies, tell them your age, sex, location and who your peers are and they serve you up things which may be of interest. They can even tell roughly what income bracket you fit into based on your posts. So now an advertiser doesn't need to show a million people an advert to make a sale, they show 30 people the ad because they know those 30 people are interested already. It's like a psychic Yellow Pages which doesn't need you to ask.
Obviously Facebook also offers passive ads for when there are no specific targeted ones to show you, and these are for brand recognition like Microsoft or Coca-Cola where they are not necessarily trying to sell you something, they just want to make sure that when you buy it's their name on your lips. Passive ads are orders of magnitude cheaper than targeted ones on Facebook. I believe when I looked it was about 1000 times cheaper per impression than targeting.
"What are you babbling about? The return for the advertiser is advertising."
Well, strictly speaking, the return for the advertiser are sales as a result of the advertisements.
I therefore assume what AC means is that some recent experiments show no benefit to sales as a result of advertising on FaecesBook. Whether that's true or not is another matter.
"Facebook ads are some of the most effective advertising available and has Google wishing it could target so effectively. With Google, you search for a mountain bike and you get cycling ads until you search for something else. With Facebook, you mention 5 or 6 hobbies, tell them your age, sex, location and who your peers are and they serve you up"
...adverts for dating services, mainly, mixed in with the odd other irrelevant thing that held no interest for me.
At least, that's what it was like when I had a FaecesBook account. (Approaching one year without, now).
If it's truly now serving up adverts for...
"things which may be of interest."
...then it has changed.
A lot.
"why keep showing them to me."
Because something about your profile is telling them that gambling ads are appropriate for you. I've never seen a single gambling ad on my profile, and dating ads only show up when I'm single. Even when I'm dating and have yet to change my status to being in a relationship they don't show me dating ads. Presumably they see the pictures and posts about a girl. Of course, I'm not cool enough to leave my profile blank and let them wildly guess what I like either. I filled in my profile and chat with friends and acquaintances on there about things that matter to me so they have a little more to go on.
"Of course, I'm not cool enough to leave my profile blank and let them wildly guess what I like either. I filled in my profile and chat with friends and acquaintances on there about things that matter to me so they have a little more to go on."
My profile was never blank. The information it contained may not have been entirely honest - which does give them something to go on, because they don't know what is and what isn't true about me - but it was never blank.
And, just as the AC poster says for the gambling ads, I clicked to indicate I wasn't interested in the dating ads.
And that, in itself, is something quite significant for them to go on: Their system didn't need to analyse my comments and profile information to try to determine whether or not I wanted that type of advertisement, it could have instead gone by the fact that I explicitly said "No, I don't want this type of advert" and from that drew the conclusion that, no, I don't want this type of advert.
Even if (god forbid) Zuck is right, there is still a big hole in their economic model.
FB is currently valued at $131 Billion - insane money (from insane investors). If the company lasts for another decade then it needs to pay out $13 billion in dividends every year to compensate for it being worrthless in 10 years. So far it hasn't paid out any dividends. Earnings per share are less than 1% of the valuation. Can they increase earnings ten-fold?
I think FB is now a touchstone for financial advice. If you meet a financial advisor who owns or recommends buying FB shares, run away very fast.
Yup, that must be right. After all, Microsoft and Apple have always been famous for dividends too. FB, like Google will only grow ad revenue as advertisers catch on to the new and better ways of advertising. They made over a billion dollars a year for the first couple of years after they floated, how is your company doing? Oh, you're not as smart as Zuck after all?
Yeah, and I don't have any stock in those either.
Matter of fact, I only have stock in companies that actually pay out dividends. Shocking, isn't it ?
May be, but I'm not a billionaire, and I don't see the point of bragging about the value of a stock that brings nothing until you sell it.
If you don't sell it and it doesn't reward you, it's just dead money.
I understand that Zuck is rated as being a billionaire because of the system, good for him. I didn't nick someone else's good idea at Uni, so I can't play the same game.
My loss, obviously.
Facebook raked in revenues of $7.87bn in 2013, up 55 per cent on the previous year, according to company filings published today.
The social network's latest finance reports show that in the final quarter of 2013 alone, sales climbed 63 per cent year-on-year to top out at $2.59bn.
The tobacco companies were riding a similar high circa 1967.
Facebookers die younger
Facebooking clogs the arteries and causes heart attacks and strokes
Facebooking causes fatal lung cancer
Facebooking when pregnant harms your baby
Protect children: don't make them breathe your Facebook
Your doctor or your pharmacist can help you stop Facebooking
Facebooking is highly addictive, don't start
Stopping Facebooking reduces the risk of fatal heart and lung diseases
Facebooking can cause a slow and painful death
Get help to stop Facebooking: [telephone]/[postal address]/[internet address]/consult your doctor/pharmacist
Facebooking may reduce the blood flow and cause impotence
Facebooking causes ageing of the skin
Facebooking can damage the sperm and decreases fertility
Facebook contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide