> Can someone actually explain to me how the situation came to this point where it practically looks as if ... Is this just impatience from stockholders? Money

> Can someone actually explain to me how the situation came to this point where it practically looks as if ... Is this just impatience from stockholders? Money doesn't grow on trees, and Facebook has lost a half billion dollars every year. They have maybe four years left at that rate before they run out of cash on hand. The numbers are improving by about 20 percent a year, which, if projected forward, means they'll stop losing money in ... four years. I don't think it's impatience to question if your investment will go bankrupt or not. Impatience was taking the company public before it was profitable. > For example, let us just say, hypothetically, something really damaging comes out about FB (e.g. the news about the fake video view metrics) and advertisers start fleeing from it. Wouldn't Twitter be the beneficiary of at least some of that exodus? Do they really have no option of an end game? Why would you invest in Twitter if the only reason to expect a positive outcome was if Facebook horribly fucked up?