[jagfox]

Maybe should be in gambling forum. Anyway, does anyone intend to get involved in this share release. Any thoughts if it would be a good or bad investment?

[itzdrk]

jagfox, on 02 February 2012 - 02:08, said:

Maybe should be in gambling forum. Anyway, does anyone intend to get involved in this share release. Any thoughts if it would be a good or bad investment?

im not one for shares or anything like that

buuut having been a teenager during the social media revolution and signing up for just about everything

i would divert your attention to the popularity or myspace then decline until the point its seen as a site for bands more than anythng else now
also bebo which shut down recently actually
just for two examples there are many more with the same story


and consider that with facebook before buying in

This post has been edited by itzdrk: 02 February 2012 - 02:20

[NotThePars]

Strengthen your research somewhat by watching the motion picture The Social Network.

[McKee]

itzdrk, on 02 February 2012 - 02:19, said:

im not one for shares or anything like that

buuut having been a teenager during the social media revolution and signing up for just about everything

i would divert your attention to the popularity or myspace then decline until the point its seen as a site for bands more than anythng else now
also bebo which shut down recently actually
just for two examples there are many more with the same story


and consider that with facebook before buying in

Neither of those were any were close to being as popular as Facebook is now.

[Tryfield]

McKee, on 02 February 2012 - 02:50, said:

Neither of those were any were close to being as popular as Facebook is now.

They did however show Facebook the way to go. Games and advertising is what makes Facebook a financially viable (nay, phenomenon) as opposed to neddy sites like bebo.

That Zuckerwhatver his name is guy learned from others' mistakes. The options for social networking arent too stand-outish. You can walk down any High Street and pick a bank from about 5 or 6 to do business with, that choice isn't available if you only want to show off pictures of your 6 week old kitten to family and friends (and bitches you hate) but talk to in a two faced sort of way.

[itzdrk]

McKee, on 02 February 2012 - 02:50, said:

Neither of those were any were close to being as popular as Facebook is now.

yes but you have to beware of the whats next factor in social media

for some reason people enjoy moving to a new site having the exact same people on it posting the same stuff in almost the exact same mannor etc etc

the users seem to just enjoy moving to a new site every 4/5 years tbh

[Marsh]

Facebook does just seem to have the right formula though, people who I know who 3 years ago said "I'll never have a Facebook" now have one and use it regularly. Also, Google Plus tried and failed to be the next social networking phenomenon, so FB must be doing something different to keep everyone on board.

[Hedgecutter]

It's pissing a lot of folk (including me) off with all the various pointless changes though. I've just stopped using it all together after I used to be on it constantly. It'll just be a matter of time until the next one comes along and everyone will jump ship again. Personally I reckon buying shares will be throwing money away.

This post has been edited by Hedgecutter: 02 February 2012 - 08:53

[Tamdunk]

Reddit is the next up and comer, would prob be better to buy in that (not that I thinly you can) as I doubt Facebook will grow very much.

[jagfox]

Don't think e-chat forum best place for this. Any chance it can go back on gn?
One billion users, can't get more general than that

[flyingscot]

Unsure whether this is a good deal as I'm not convinced Facebook isn't being over priced as people look for the next Google. I think you are buying on a peak even if you get into the IPO but it will no doubt still shoot up in price anyway initially. Potentially decent investment but with risk in the value and competition.

[Ross.]

If you're looking to take part in the IPO, you'll do well to find a UK based broker who is participating.

[Al B]

Marsh, on 02 February 2012 - 05:30, said:

Facebook does just seem to have the right formula though, people who I know who 3 years ago said "I'll never have a Facebook" now have one and use it regularly. Also, Google Plus tried and failed to be the next social networking phenomenon, so FB must be doing something different to keep everyone on board.

Me, although much more recently than that. I signed up last march and while I'm not necessarily even on it every day, a combination of the way I do use it, and the way I observe other people using it has given me the view that it's moved on from the confines of "a social networking site", to become the latest addition to the list of things that revolutionise general life in the same way that mobile phones/satellite tv/the internet itself did. Something that started off as one thing popular in one cross-section of society, which has gone on to surpass that and become something that you just have. Everyone does...and when you find someone that doesn't, your immediate reaction is "Really? Why not?".

Everything else in that market has essentially just been a website, whereas it's strange to find soemone that's not on facebook in the same way that it's strange to find someone who has no TV, or no mobile phone. No other "social networking" facility has had that impact, and I can't see another one taking over from it.

[Just a bairn]

Turns out Bebo is back.

[Dariusz]

Hedgecutter, on 02 February 2012 - 08:51, said:

It's pissing a lot of folk (including me) off with all the various pointless changes though. I've just stopped using it all together after I used to be on it constantly. It'll just be a matter of time until the next one comes along and everyone will jump ship again. Personally I reckon buying shares will be throwing money away.

This is basically every single word of what I was going to write. Much of its potential has already been acheived.Can it feasibly double or treble in value? Too much of a gamble if you ask me, for how much gain? The very nature of the internet means that as soon as something new and better comes along, the previous "in thing" dies pretty quickly.

This post has been edited by Dariusz: 03 February 2012 - 11:38

[a_n_d_o]

Hi, we've realised that for all our hard work we don't have that much to show for it. We made a free to use social service that has expanded way beyond what was thought possible. Despite this success it still relies on money from sponsors and advertising, to which there is a cap. We have decided we need something to retire on so we are floating the company in the hope that people think just because its popular its an easy money maker.
Yours sincerely, The Facebook Team.



... I expect the words "I can't beleive they bought these" to be hidden in the small print somewhere

[Mr X]

Dariusz, on 03 February 2012 - 11:37, said:

This is basically every single word of what I was going to write. Much of its potential has already been acheived.Can it feasibly double or treble in value? Too much of a gamble if you ask me, for how much gain? The very nature of the internet means that as soon as something new and better comes along, the previous "in thing" dies pretty quickly.

That may have been true 5 or 10 years ago, but I dont think it applies anymore. Certainly not to the big players like Google and Facebook. Both are far too entrenched in society to simply be dropped on a whim because something new comes along.

Comparisons with Bebo and MySpace arent valid, in my opinion. Both were at their heights when social networking was a thing only for teenagers and geeks, but its moved on so much since then that its become part of every day life for a people who would never have touched a PC a few years ago. These people arent simply going to move on because something else looks cooler.

Having said all that, would I buy shares? Probably not because, as you say, its difficult to see where the big growth is going to come from. The only thing I can think of that would generate big money for Facebook is if they let Google at their data. That doesnt seem very likely at the moment though.

[Mr X]

a_n_d_o, on 03 February 2012 - 14:46, said:

Hi, we've realised that for all our hard work we don't have that much to show for it...

Except a site generating billions of dollars revenue and breaking $1 billion a year profit

a_n_d_o, on 03 February 2012 - 14:46, said:

Despite this success it still relies on money from sponsors and advertising, to which there is a cap.

Is there? Googles revenue streams are pretty much the same and it doesnt seem to be doing them any harm. You could argue that, potentially, Facebook is worth more to advertisers than Google. Marketing through Facebook and being able to get feedback from customers - and accurate feedback on how effective your marketing spend is - is a marketeers wet dream. Far more targeted and, arguably, far more likely to have higher conversion rates than Googles scattergun approach. Yet Google is making money hand over fist with no sign of slowing down. Why would there, then, be a cap on what Facebook can earn?

[a_n_d_o]

Mr X, on 03 February 2012 - 15:40, said:

Except a site generating billions of dollars revenue and breaking $1 billion a year profit

Is there? Googles revenue streams are pretty much the same and it doesnt seem to be doing them any harm. You could argue that, potentially, Facebook is worth more to advertisers than Google. Marketing through Facebook and being able to get feedback from customers - and accurate feedback on how effective your marketing spend is - is a marketeers wet dream. Far more targeted and, arguably, far more likely to have higher conversion rates than Googles scattergun approach. Yet Google is making money hand over fist with no sign of slowing down. Why would there, then, be a cap on what Facebook can earn?

Ah the good old capitalist infinite growth projection. You would agree there is a cap on the number of active users? The comapnies advertising don't have unlimited funds so they will have a cap on what they can spend? Google is a monster, they have branched out and have a wide varied portfolio, I don't see Facebook heading quite down that route. The route I see them wanting to take is more of an integrated premium subscription service including music, movies, sporting events etc. Of course Google will probably want to do that as well...

[Mybitchunderprotest]

Turns out that pompous arrogant bastard Bono already has a 1.5% stake in Facebook and that with the valuation being given to it for flotation his stock is worth around $1billion or £650 million.

Yet another reason to hate the cunt. For that reason alone I hope it goes down the shitter.

[Mr X]

a_n_d_o, on 03 February 2012 - 16:39, said:

Ah the good old capitalist infinite growth projection. You would agree there is a cap on the number of active users? The comapnies advertising don't have unlimited funds so they will have a cap on what they can spend? Google is a monster, they have branched out and have a wide varied portfolio, I don't see Facebook heading quite down that route. The route I see them wanting to take is more of an integrated premium subscription service including music, movies, sporting events etc. Of course Google will probably want to do that as well...

Of course theres a cap on the number of users and the revenue spend, but its more than high enough to make Facebook a succesful company for many, many years. I wasnt arguing with the fact theres a cap, just the implication that this is, in some way, a big issue. As I said, the same caps exist for Google, yet they are doing kind of ok.

Google have branched out, but only their search business generates any revenue. Facebook have already started going down the line of integrating other services, although not on a subscription basis. The idea that Facebook will sit forever more as it is without developing further revenue streams and/or ways to increase its user base - or increase the time spent on the site - is incredibly naive.

[WILLIEA]

I reckon Facebook know that the peak has been reached or is about to be reached. Every organisation has a finite lifespan and these are getting shorter. While it may have taken say ICI about 60 years to rise then fall I reckon something like Face book will be 10, 15 years max.
For that reason " I'm out "

[Cardinal Richelieu]

When Bebo was at its peak a few years ago, AOL spunked $850m on snapping it up.

Two years later, they sold it for $10m.

So I think I'll steer clear .