5 ms·

They're almost certainly making $2 per user. Another dime is gonna be easy.

by spolsky 16y ago

bhickey 16y ago
First of all, Joel, it's THEY'RE not THERE. ;)
- shadowmatter 16y ago
  Hey, lay off man! If Chicago doesn't have to teach multiplication, New York doesn't have to teach grammar, alright?
- blusie 16y ago
  Read the original post, Joel didn't make that mistake.
  - lrm242 16y ago
    lol, he edited it.
lovskogen 16y ago
Haven't got a dime from me, and they don't have an idea on how to.
- moe 16y ago
  Also a dime per user/year is more than it seems when you can only collect it through indirect means (ads, charging other companies for using your platform). Remember their ~500mio user figure also includes the overwhelming portion of users who generate no more than a handful of page impressions per month. It's not like facebook could invent a yearly membership fee or start selling t-shirts or such... Well, they could, but I doubt more than ~20% of their audience would actually pay.
  - marclove 16y ago
    They'd be lucky if ~0.5% of their audience would actually pay.
- timcederman 16y ago
  You don't think so, but they probably have. I always used to think I was a 'leech' user of TripAdvisor, until I worked there.
- portman 16y ago
  Have you viewed more than 300 pages on the facebook.com domain in your lifetime? If so, they've gotten a dime from you. 3 ads per page, each ad selling at a $0.10 CPM.
krschultz 16y ago
I think their CPM is in the $30-$40 range, but the key missing piece of information is how many views they get per user. I know my Facebook use has gone from multiple views per day (20, 40?) to 1 page every other day. Still lets say each user looks at Facebook twicer per day, each user is about 1/2 a CPM per year, or $20 revenue per year. But CPC, well I've never clicked on an ad on Facebook in my entire life.
- mikeklaas 16y ago
  Never use tech-savvy people as representative examples when evaluating advertising. Otherwise, even google would be out of business.
  - krschultz 16y ago
    The problem with the comparison of Facebook VS Google is that Google advertising is fantastically targeted. You literally type into Google "I have this problem" and get a bunch of ads solving that problem. It is practically the holy grail of advertising. Now consider that it is a catch all for personal and corporate questions, it is a cash cow. It is perfectly acceptable to google something at your job, click on a link, and buy a $15,000 system. Facebook might know a lot about you, but they don't know what you are looking for at any given moment. Add on top that most people are spending their time on personal relationships, and it isn't the same even if they get more impressions. I can't log into Facebook from work and say "who has 5" diameter pipe?" and expect a response, but if I google that I find a vendor and place a multi thousand dollar order. Also the market on Facebook is somewhat inverted. The "best" customers are generally on their the least. The most frequent people are college students - mostly broke at that. If you aren't advertising clothes, personal electronics, or local bars I don't see the draw.
    - portman 16y ago
      Speaking as someone who has spent $30,000 on Facebook ads in the last several months: Facebook advertising is fantastically targeted as well. Google ads work when there is so-called "purchase intent": I know I want a new waffle maker, so I search for it. Facebook ads work when there is demographic correlation: I just got engaged, and I might not know that I now need a waffle maker, but a Facebook ad can target me and tell me that I should be adding a waffle maker to my wedding registry. Different kids of targeting, both extremely powerful.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

They're almost certainly making $2 per user. Another dime is gonna be easy.

by spolsky 16y ago

They're almost certainly making $2 per user. Another dime is gonna be easy.

bhickey 16y ago

First of all, Joel, it's THEY'RE not THERE. ;)

shadowmatter 16y ago
Hey, lay off man! If Chicago doesn't have to teach multiplication, New York doesn't have to teach grammar, alright?
blusie 16y ago
Read the original post, Joel didn't make that mistake.
- lrm242 16y ago
  lol, he edited it.

lovskogen 16y ago

Haven't got a dime from me, and they don't have an idea on how to.

moe 16y ago
Also a dime per user/year is more than it seems when you can only collect it through indirect means (ads, charging other companies for using your platform). Remember their ~500mio user figure also includes the overwhelming portion of users who generate no more than a handful of page impressions per month. It's not like facebook could invent a yearly membership fee or start selling t-shirts or such... Well, they could, but I doubt more than ~20% of their audience would actually pay.
- marclove 16y ago
  They'd be lucky if ~0.5% of their audience would actually pay.
timcederman 16y ago
You don't think so, but they probably have. I always used to think I was a 'leech' user of TripAdvisor, until I worked there.
portman 16y ago
Have you viewed more than 300 pages on the facebook.com domain in your lifetime? If so, they've gotten a dime from you. 3 ads per page, each ad selling at a $0.10 CPM.

krschultz 16y ago

I think their CPM is in the $30-$40 range, but the key missing piece of information is how many views they get per user. I know my Facebook use has gone from multiple views per day (20, 40?) to 1 page every other day. Still lets say each user looks at Facebook twicer per day, each user is about 1/2 a CPM per year, or $20 revenue per year. But CPC, well I've never clicked on an ad on Facebook in my entire life.

mikeklaas 16y ago
Never use tech-savvy people as representative examples when evaluating advertising. Otherwise, even google would be out of business.
- krschultz 16y ago
  The problem with the comparison of Facebook VS Google is that Google advertising is fantastically targeted. You literally type into Google "I have this problem" and get a bunch of ads solving that problem. It is practically the holy grail of advertising. Now consider that it is a catch all for personal and corporate questions, it is a cash cow. It is perfectly acceptable to google something at your job, click on a link, and buy a $15,000 system. Facebook might know a lot about you, but they don't know what you are looking for at any given moment. Add on top that most people are spending their time on personal relationships, and it isn't the same even if they get more impressions. I can't log into Facebook from work and say "who has 5" diameter pipe?" and expect a response, but if I google that I find a vendor and place a multi thousand dollar order. Also the market on Facebook is somewhat inverted. The "best" customers are generally on their the least. The most frequent people are college students - mostly broke at that. If you aren't advertising clothes, personal electronics, or local bars I don't see the draw.
  - portman 16y ago
    Speaking as someone who has spent $30,000 on Facebook ads in the last several months: Facebook advertising is fantastically targeted as well. Google ads work when there is so-called "purchase intent": I know I want a new waffle maker, so I search for it. Facebook ads work when there is demographic correlation: I just got engaged, and I might not know that I now need a waffle maker, but a Facebook ad can target me and tell me that I should be adding a waffle maker to my wedding registry. Different kids of targeting, both extremely powerful.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]