3 ms·

It's a well-deserved market cap. It's an incredible business and they've been firing on all cylinders for years now. The business model itself is so solid, it'

It's a well-deserved market cap. It's an incredible business and they've been firing on all cylinders for years now. The business model itself is so solid, it's scary. It's on better footing than Amazon in my opinion.

nightski 9y ago
Deserved? A market cap is based on investor sentiment, not how hard you work or even necessarily how sound your business is. For the downvotes - are you implying that stock price is directly correlated with business performance and that the market is completely rational?
- icebraining 9y ago
  What askafriend is saying is that in this case the investor sentiment is appropriate for the soundness of the business. If anything, it's implying the stock price is not always correlated with business performance, otherwise the statement would be redundant.
  - askafriend 9y ago
    This is exactly what I'm saying. My opinion of their business model and their performance is independent of my opinion of the product.
2close4comfort 9y ago
HA! that is...oh wait you are SERIOUS!)*&^%$# it is cat pictures. That cap is way too high, they only reason it is successful is that people are sheep. Once they figure out how soylent green is made and the FCC chair ignites the internet apocalypse and people will suddenly have to PAY for that "service" Zuck will turn into Bill Gates. And I think we will all be better off.
- alphonsegaston 9y ago
  I think it’s unlikely that Future Zuckerberg is going to behave with anywhere near the benevolence of post-Microsoft Bill Gates. How he tried to pull one over on the public with his “foundation” already demonstrated that quite clearly.
- kajecounterhack 9y ago
  Actually Facebook is not "cat pictures." It's a very efficient advertising engine the same way Google is. Similarly to Google (whose revenue is dominated by search ads), Facebook has feeds straight to consumers as well as valuable information about what the consumers are interested in. That's what makes money. Instagram, News Feed, Facebook News --> these are Facebook's Google Search & YouTube. When you look at the numbers you'll see that they're actually similar companies who've monopolized segments of the digital advertising space. If you're going to complain about Facebook's market cap then you should also complain about Google. Facebook's even got "other bets" -- Oculus, Workplace, WhatsApp, etc.
  - 2close4comfort 9y ago
    Advertising that you as the product have to opt into! Google is at least providing a service/product they give you a shiny something while they siphon your data. I think FB is pretty straight forward they take ALL of your information that you are willing to give up and they sell it. repeatedly. without conscience. for the money. If people stopped sharing or looking where would FB be? That is my problem with cap. They can buy other companies but none of them have anything productive to offer either but I bet they sell that info too.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      Just because you don't find value in what FB provides its users doesn't mean others don't.
- 9y ago
ComputerGuru 9y ago
Whatever else you may think of Facebook, it’s incredibly naive or unfair (not sure which) to suggest they’ve been “firing on all cylinders for years now.” Facebook the user experience has - objectively and measurably (even almost by definition) - taken a severe nose dive since attempting to capitalize on the page views. They’ve spent their time evolving into an advertising behemoth that has upended the advertising market, but very poorly despite all the access they have to metrics and use identifiable data because the user’s best interests and the advertiser’s best interest are almost at polar cross purposes such that it isn’t possible to optimize for one except at the cost of the other. Facebook ads simply do not convert except to Facebook properties (with the obvious “exceptions that prove the rule” aside); they are measurably worse investments than CPC advertising, probably worse than traditional CPM adverts (fake clicks), and probably better than old-school mass media advertising (billboards, bus stations, tv ads). They make their buck on people that either invest xxx thousand dollars until it becomes measurably obvious to the them or that don’t be know enough to measure. Facebooks only “social” innovations that are actually forward-looking past the heyday of feeds and in-feed apps (FarmVille and co) for consumers are Instagram and WhatsApp, both of which were bought out when facebook’s own in-house attempts failed to compete.
- bonzini 9y ago
  Actually, Facebook shopping ads (from Amazon, Banggood, and the like) and news ads are pretty much the only ads I click. Mostly because, unlike Google ads, when I am browsing Facebook I am not really looking for anything in particular. Facebook ads are like TV ads in that respect.
- askafriend 9y ago
  Look at their revenue growth, their stock performance, their cost of revenue, their profit margins, and their incredible strategic bets like Instagram/WhatsApp as well as their well-executed transition to mobile. What about hiring of COO Sheryl Sandberg at the perfect time, their well-executed competition with SnapChat, their well executed video strategy, multi-app strategy, look at messenger, look at their growth numbers quarter over quarter which are crazy. I mean you'd be incredibly naive to ignore those things and how well they've worked. Facebook Ads work. They work when you put effort into them and know what exactly what you're doing. Ask any marketing firm. It's a complicated mechanism that has to be learned and experimented with but now Facebook Ads are among the lions share of the advertising market along with Google. They work for many businesses. Just ask Dollar Shave Club. Ask Stitch Fix. Ask Warby Parker. Ask King. Facebook Ads also don't work if all you're doing is throwing $10k into them with a bunch of random targeting. In fact, no advertising works if you don't know what you're doing and if you're not tracking everything to a T. That's not Facebook's fault - their engine is completely self-serve. As are AdWords from Google. You can blow $100k on AdWords and get no results just as easily as you can blow it on Facebook and get no results. I made no value judgement on their innovations. I've learned better than to do that on HN where people become so hostile if you even suggest that Facebook might be useful in some ways. I only made a value judgement on their business which is sound and growing rapidly.

nightski 9y ago

Deserved? A market cap is based on investor sentiment, not how hard you work or even necessarily how sound your business is. For the downvotes - are you implying that stock price is directly correlated with business performance and that the market is completely rational?

icebraining 9y ago
What askafriend is saying is that in this case the investor sentiment is appropriate for the soundness of the business. If anything, it's implying the stock price is not always correlated with business performance, otherwise the statement would be redundant.
- askafriend 9y ago
  This is exactly what I'm saying. My opinion of their business model and their performance is independent of my opinion of the product.

2close4comfort 9y ago

HA! that is...oh wait you are SERIOUS!)*&^%$# it is cat pictures. That cap is way too high, they only reason it is successful is that people are sheep. Once they figure out how soylent green is made and the FCC chair ignites the internet apocalypse and people will suddenly have to PAY for that "service" Zuck will turn into Bill Gates. And I think we will all be better off.

alphonsegaston 9y ago
I think it’s unlikely that Future Zuckerberg is going to behave with anywhere near the benevolence of post-Microsoft Bill Gates. How he tried to pull one over on the public with his “foundation” already demonstrated that quite clearly.
kajecounterhack 9y ago
Actually Facebook is not "cat pictures." It's a very efficient advertising engine the same way Google is. Similarly to Google (whose revenue is dominated by search ads), Facebook has feeds straight to consumers as well as valuable information about what the consumers are interested in. That's what makes money. Instagram, News Feed, Facebook News --> these are Facebook's Google Search & YouTube. When you look at the numbers you'll see that they're actually similar companies who've monopolized segments of the digital advertising space. If you're going to complain about Facebook's market cap then you should also complain about Google. Facebook's even got "other bets" -- Oculus, Workplace, WhatsApp, etc.
- 2close4comfort 9y ago
  Advertising that you as the product have to opt into! Google is at least providing a service/product they give you a shiny something while they siphon your data. I think FB is pretty straight forward they take ALL of your information that you are willing to give up and they sell it. repeatedly. without conscience. for the money. If people stopped sharing or looking where would FB be? That is my problem with cap. They can buy other companies but none of them have anything productive to offer either but I bet they sell that info too.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    Just because you don't find value in what FB provides its users doesn't mean others don't.
9y ago

ComputerGuru 9y ago

Whatever else you may think of Facebook, it’s incredibly naive or unfair (not sure which) to suggest they’ve been “firing on all cylinders for years now.” Facebook the user experience has - objectively and measurably (even almost by definition) - taken a severe nose dive since attempting to capitalize on the page views. They’ve spent their time evolving into an advertising behemoth that has upended the advertising market, but very poorly despite all the access they have to metrics and use identifiable data because the user’s best interests and the advertiser’s best interest are almost at polar cross purposes such that it isn’t possible to optimize for one except at the cost of the other. Facebook ads simply do not convert except to Facebook properties (with the obvious “exceptions that prove the rule” aside); they are measurably worse investments than CPC advertising, probably worse than traditional CPM adverts (fake clicks), and probably better than old-school mass media advertising (billboards, bus stations, tv ads). They make their buck on people that either invest xxx thousand dollars until it becomes measurably obvious to the them or that don’t be know enough to measure. Facebooks only “social” innovations that are actually forward-looking past the heyday of feeds and in-feed apps (FarmVille and co) for consumers are Instagram and WhatsApp, both of which were bought out when facebook’s own in-house attempts failed to compete.

bonzini 9y ago
Actually, Facebook shopping ads (from Amazon, Banggood, and the like) and news ads are pretty much the only ads I click. Mostly because, unlike Google ads, when I am browsing Facebook I am not really looking for anything in particular. Facebook ads are like TV ads in that respect.
askafriend 9y ago
Look at their revenue growth, their stock performance, their cost of revenue, their profit margins, and their incredible strategic bets like Instagram/WhatsApp as well as their well-executed transition to mobile. What about hiring of COO Sheryl Sandberg at the perfect time, their well-executed competition with SnapChat, their well executed video strategy, multi-app strategy, look at messenger, look at their growth numbers quarter over quarter which are crazy. I mean you'd be incredibly naive to ignore those things and how well they've worked. Facebook Ads work. They work when you put effort into them and know what exactly what you're doing. Ask any marketing firm. It's a complicated mechanism that has to be learned and experimented with but now Facebook Ads are among the lions share of the advertising market along with Google. They work for many businesses. Just ask Dollar Shave Club. Ask Stitch Fix. Ask Warby Parker. Ask King. Facebook Ads also don't work if all you're doing is throwing $10k into them with a bunch of random targeting. In fact, no advertising works if you don't know what you're doing and if you're not tracking everything to a T. That's not Facebook's fault - their engine is completely self-serve. As are AdWords from Google. You can blow $100k on AdWords and get no results just as easily as you can blow it on Facebook and get no results. I made no value judgement on their innovations. I've learned better than to do that on HN where people become so hostile if you even suggest that Facebook might be useful in some ways. I only made a value judgement on their business which is sound and growing rapidly.