7 ms·

I dislike Facebook, but this is a really smart way to grab a market share. Most businesses need minimal online presence so FB front is sufficient. I won't see

I dislike Facebook, but this is a really smart way to grab a market share. Most businesses need minimal online presence so FB front is sufficient. I won't see those businesses, but I know I am a minority, when it comes to this.

seph-reed 6y ago
> really smart Maybe effective? Smart implies a bit too much imo. For a while now, users have been using pages to promote their businesses and using FB pay for transactions. It seems this was inevitable, and I'm more surprising how long it took than how "really smart" it is.
- jasonv 6y ago
  I work in banking. Everything we do, that's easier elsewhere, is harder in banking, because it's a bank (regulated, money, etc). Everything Facebook builds has to scale to billions immediately. Could be a contributing factor to why it took them this long to do this.
  - seph-reed 6y ago
    That makes a lot of sense. Does raise the stakes quite a bit too, which makes the decision maybe a little bit difficult. So the engineers who make the thing happen are for sure smart. And the researchers who prove it should be profitable are also pretty smart. But the idea itself -- trying to take over some other market that they already have a foothold in -- is pretty obvious.
  - cameronbrown 6y ago
    Why would it? They can do controlled rollouts if they want. Core design has to scale, but I seriously doubt they'd be planning for millions/QPS right out the gate.
scarface74 6y ago
Random non rant: Thank you for being self aware enough to know that you are in the minority when it comes to not having Facebook. Most posts by people who don’t use FB and post to HN feign ignorance and say something like “I haven’t used FB in 10 years. Does anyone still use it?”
- braythwayt 6y ago
  I don’t use Facebook, but bragging about that and questioning whether anybody else still uses Facebook feels a lot like asking if anybody still buys Apple phones. I vaguely recall a HN comment on a different subject which drew a parallel to the famous Yogi Berra quip, “Nobody goes there anymore, too crowded.” It sounds like one of his classic oxymorons, but there is a deeper implication with respect to tastemakers/early adopters/elite users who flee anything once it has its “Eternal September.” Yes, it’s too crowded, but what we’re really saying with a line like that is, “Too crowded with the wrong kind of people.” But for me, Facebook is crowded with plenty of the right kind of people. Lots of my climbing tribe coördinate trips on FB, and I miss out on that. There are multiple Volvo enthusiast groups on FB, and I miss out on get-togethers if nobody remembers to text me. So, scarface74, I’m with you on the importance of being self-aware about the fact that while we may not use a thing for ethical reasons, or because it no longer adds value to our lives, but nevertheless it is still crowded with people who have perfectly valid reasons for liking it.
  - JKCalhoun 6y ago
    I don't use Facebook either. Wondering at what point we're not in the minority?
    - hjek 6y ago
      Out of the 7.8 billion people on Earth "only" 2.6 billion are used by Facebook so technically we're already there.
      - mv4 6y ago
runawaybottle 6y ago
It also will blur the line between sponsored reviews and sales. So imagine when you watch a review for something on YouTube, or see someone share a product on Insta, you just straight up buy that item/service from their page. You’ll now have your payment hooked into these platforms and they can take advantage of serious impulse buying. Could subvert Patreon in a way also. The implications are there I think.
- hckr_news 6y ago
  It looks quite seamless from first glance. Was eventually going to happen I think given how much time people spend on these platforms. Instagram influencers will have an easier time and may perhaps forgo Shopify-built sites for the sake of simplicity by routing fans to their Instagram marketplace. Can see YouTube introducing YouTube-shop to keep people within the Google ecosystem and compete with Facebook.
  - type0 6y ago
    > Can see YouTube introducing YouTube-shop to keep people within the Google ecosystem and compete with Facebook. Next, Youtube to partner with IKEA to bring you a virtual reality furniture shop /s
g-garron 6y ago
You are right, it is a great move. I do not like it either, nor use it, except when I need to find small commerce sites in my city. I know they do not have their own webpages, so it is useless to look them on Google, but they all have a Facebook Fan Page. With this move, Facebook will get even more business, and less and less small companies will see the need to build and maintain their own sites. It is also a great move against Shopify
mbreese 6y ago
I see this as a good move too. I've only recently had to start re-using Facebook just because so many of our local restaurants have been posting information about new hours or menus, etc (covid-related changes) only on their FB page. Even for those businesses that have a separate web site (and domain), they most often publish updates to only FB. It would make sense for FB to formalize this de-facto relationship.

seph-reed 6y ago

> really smart Maybe effective? Smart implies a bit too much imo. For a while now, users have been using pages to promote their businesses and using FB pay for transactions. It seems this was inevitable, and I'm more surprising how long it took than how "really smart" it is.

jasonv 6y ago
I work in banking. Everything we do, that's easier elsewhere, is harder in banking, because it's a bank (regulated, money, etc). Everything Facebook builds has to scale to billions immediately. Could be a contributing factor to why it took them this long to do this.
- seph-reed 6y ago
  That makes a lot of sense. Does raise the stakes quite a bit too, which makes the decision maybe a little bit difficult. So the engineers who make the thing happen are for sure smart. And the researchers who prove it should be profitable are also pretty smart. But the idea itself -- trying to take over some other market that they already have a foothold in -- is pretty obvious.
- cameronbrown 6y ago
  Why would it? They can do controlled rollouts if they want. Core design has to scale, but I seriously doubt they'd be planning for millions/QPS right out the gate.

scarface74 6y ago

Random non rant: Thank you for being self aware enough to know that you are in the minority when it comes to not having Facebook. Most posts by people who don’t use FB and post to HN feign ignorance and say something like “I haven’t used FB in 10 years. Does anyone still use it?”

braythwayt 6y ago
I don’t use Facebook, but bragging about that and questioning whether anybody else still uses Facebook feels a lot like asking if anybody still buys Apple phones. I vaguely recall a HN comment on a different subject which drew a parallel to the famous Yogi Berra quip, “Nobody goes there anymore, too crowded.” It sounds like one of his classic oxymorons, but there is a deeper implication with respect to tastemakers/early adopters/elite users who flee anything once it has its “Eternal September.” Yes, it’s too crowded, but what we’re really saying with a line like that is, “Too crowded with the wrong kind of people.” But for me, Facebook is crowded with plenty of the right kind of people. Lots of my climbing tribe coördinate trips on FB, and I miss out on that. There are multiple Volvo enthusiast groups on FB, and I miss out on get-togethers if nobody remembers to text me. So, scarface74, I’m with you on the importance of being self-aware about the fact that while we may not use a thing for ethical reasons, or because it no longer adds value to our lives, but nevertheless it is still crowded with people who have perfectly valid reasons for liking it.
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  I don't use Facebook either. Wondering at what point we're not in the minority?
  - hjek 6y ago
    Out of the 7.8 billion people on Earth "only" 2.6 billion are used by Facebook so technically we're already there.
    - mv4 6y ago

runawaybottle 6y ago

It also will blur the line between sponsored reviews and sales. So imagine when you watch a review for something on YouTube, or see someone share a product on Insta, you just straight up buy that item/service from their page. You’ll now have your payment hooked into these platforms and they can take advantage of serious impulse buying. Could subvert Patreon in a way also. The implications are there I think.

hckr_news 6y ago
It looks quite seamless from first glance. Was eventually going to happen I think given how much time people spend on these platforms. Instagram influencers will have an easier time and may perhaps forgo Shopify-built sites for the sake of simplicity by routing fans to their Instagram marketplace. Can see YouTube introducing YouTube-shop to keep people within the Google ecosystem and compete with Facebook.
- type0 6y ago
  > Can see YouTube introducing YouTube-shop to keep people within the Google ecosystem and compete with Facebook. Next, Youtube to partner with IKEA to bring you a virtual reality furniture shop /s

g-garron 6y ago

You are right, it is a great move. I do not like it either, nor use it, except when I need to find small commerce sites in my city. I know they do not have their own webpages, so it is useless to look them on Google, but they all have a Facebook Fan Page. With this move, Facebook will get even more business, and less and less small companies will see the need to build and maintain their own sites. It is also a great move against Shopify

mbreese 6y ago

I see this as a good move too. I've only recently had to start re-using Facebook just because so many of our local restaurants have been posting information about new hours or menus, etc (covid-related changes) only on their FB page. Even for those businesses that have a separate web site (and domain), they most often publish updates to only FB. It would make sense for FB to formalize this de-facto relationship.