The big problem with social networks is that their growth and traction are not strongly correlated with initial financial investment. Facebook, Instagram, Snap

The big problem with social networks is that their growth and traction are not strongly correlated with initial financial investment. Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and WhatsApp all famously started off on shoestring budgets. In contrast, large budgets and huge ambitions are probably toxic to building social networks. Google+ and post-acquisition MySpace are two good examples of this. As a result, the best opportunity for disrupting Facebook is taking the billion dollars and starting a social media-focused venture capital firm. The firm's goal would be to make it easy and risk-free for college students to create mobile-first social experiences. Hopefully, some of the seed investments will gain traction, and you should have enough of the initial billion dollars left over to provide significant follow-on capital. Ideally, your most promising Facebook competitors will not need to rely on advertising for several years. After those several years, your top winners will probably be approached by Facebook's corporate development team... and they'll be offering to acquire your most promising portfolio companies. In order to avoid Facebook winning the final round, you'd have to use your influence over your portfolio companies to block any sale to Facebook. I'm not sure how practical this is because it would probably anger the founders, all their employees, and all other shareholders in the company. Eventually... ten or fifteen years after your VC firm made its first investment... you might have a portfolio company that could stand up to Facebook. Or you might not. If this strategy was a sure bet, I'm sure that Google Ventures and CapitalG would already be halfway there.