First, it's fun. I can't argue that that may be the case. Second, you'll learn a ton by working with millions of users. This is predicated on the huge assumpti

First, it's fun. I can't argue that that may be the case. Second, you'll learn a ton by working with millions of users. This is predicated on the huge assumption that your viral platform attracts millions of users, and that a large number of these (assuming every new internet entrepreneur is doing one...) are sustainable. Third, it will pay off. Mark's pay-off, I'm sure, was more than he initially envisioned. That amount, to my knowledge, however, remains undisclosed. I don't believe enough evidence exists to assure such a payoff and create such confidence. Fourth, you can use the user base to launch another startup. Sure, 1% of ~10M users is cool. But that, again, rests on the assumption that you can build up that base of 10M users. I realize that this formula may have worked, and that value could likely be created from cloning it. Cloning just may work. I can't shake off the feeling, though, that a bit of misinformation is being spread here. [edit for clarification]: Of course, both the author's post and my response is solely opinion, which makes my use of the word misinformation, well, misinformation. What I mean to say is that I can't help but draw comparisons to "get rich quick" schemes, where opinion was packaged in such a way that people took it as fact.