4 ms·

> So what is that magical ingredient, that secret sauce, that “genius” trade secret, that turned an over-funded money-losing startup into one of America’s great

> So what is that magical ingredient, that secret sauce, that “genius” trade secret, that turned an over-funded money-losing startup into one of America’s greatest business success stories? False. Facebook made $50M in profit the year before it took its Series A. It has always been a profitable company[0]. [0] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/FB/facebook/profit-margins https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/FB/facebook/profit...

jasode 7y ago
>It has always been a profitable company[0]. No, Facebook was founded in 2004 and it took 5 years to make its first profits in 2009: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/09/facebook-turns-a-profit-users-hits-300-million/26721/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/09/faceboo... Your cited chart only begins at 2009 instead of 2004. Also, if we count Accel Partners $12.7 million in 2005 as the "Series A" investment, Facebook was not yet profitable at that point. (https://fortune.com/2011/01/11/timeline-where-facebook-got-its-funding/ https://fortune.com/2011/01/11/timeline-where-facebook-got-i...)
- 5trokerac3 7y ago
  > According to the S-1, Facebook made a modest $382,000 in revenue 2004, $9 million in revenue in 2005, $48 million in revenue in 2006 and $153 million in revenue in 2007, with no reporting of net loss.[0] Seems like we're both wrong. FB was profitable before '09, but it did have a couple years of loss. [0] https://techcrunch.com/2012/02/01/facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo https://techcrunch.com/2012/02/01/facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo-...
  - jasode 7y ago
    No sure where the journalist (Alexia Tsotsis) got the data to write: "$382,000 in revenue 2004, $9 million in revenue in 2005, $48 million in revenue in 2006 and $153 million in revenue in 2007, with no reporting of net loss." Those figures are not anywhere in the actual S-1: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000119312512034517/d287954ds1.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000119312512... In fact, page 40 of the S-1 clearly shows a 2007 loss of -$138 million which contradicts what the Techcrunch author wrote.

jasode 7y ago

>It has always been a profitable company[0]. No, Facebook was founded in 2004 and it took 5 years to make its first profits in 2009: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/09/facebook-turns-a-profit-users-hits-300-million/26721/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/09/faceboo... Your cited chart only begins at 2009 instead of 2004. Also, if we count Accel Partners $12.7 million in 2005 as the "Series A" investment, Facebook was not yet profitable at that point. (https://fortune.com/2011/01/11/timeline-where-facebook-got-its-funding/ https://fortune.com/2011/01/11/timeline-where-facebook-got-i...)

5trokerac3 7y ago
> According to the S-1, Facebook made a modest $382,000 in revenue 2004, $9 million in revenue in 2005, $48 million in revenue in 2006 and $153 million in revenue in 2007, with no reporting of net loss.[0] Seems like we're both wrong. FB was profitable before '09, but it did have a couple years of loss. [0] https://techcrunch.com/2012/02/01/facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo https://techcrunch.com/2012/02/01/facebook-ipo-facebook-ipo-...
- jasode 7y ago
  No sure where the journalist (Alexia Tsotsis) got the data to write: "$382,000 in revenue 2004, $9 million in revenue in 2005, $48 million in revenue in 2006 and $153 million in revenue in 2007, with no reporting of net loss." Those figures are not anywhere in the actual S-1: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000119312512034517/d287954ds1.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000119312512... In fact, page 40 of the S-1 clearly shows a 2007 loss of -$138 million which contradicts what the Techcrunch author wrote.