4 ms·

Facebooks decisions and current issues makes their shareholders look a bit stupid. The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth

Facebooks decisions and current issues makes their shareholders look a bit stupid. The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party company, or how the company failed to secure research which will harm their reputation (such as it is), if it got out. Whether you like or hate Facebook, it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point. He continues to create problems which harms the Facebook brand. He has allowed the companys core product to be partly dependent on the actions of an unrelated company (Apple) who have a completely different business case and agenda. Either through action or inaction he is now forcing countries to start legislation to control companies like Facebook, well Facebook and Facebook companies. Despite all of that, I hear no critic of Zuckerberg as a CEO.

MikusR 5y ago
> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party company That's why they are building their own VR/AR platform.
- 8eye 5y ago
  there are rumors about mobile devices as well
JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point I am a consistent Facebook hawk. But to claim shareholders have done anything other than exceptionally well under Zuckerberg is to ignore the evidence. The stock is up. Buybacks are at a record. A $10bn capital spending programme was just announced.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  Hmm, you're absolutely right, which is kinda weird. I think most would have expected the stock to take a hit. Can I think Zuckerberg is a terrible CEO and not understand how his companys stock price isn't tanking due to mismanagement?
  - xbar 5y ago
    I spent a few moments on this question. I do not think so. Confusing the brand value with the product value in a marketplace with no competition led you to think that he does harm as a face of Facebook. He is a CEO. He is a good CEO by metrics that matter for CEOs. Disclaimer: I do not like him. I do not use Facebook.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  Watching the stock market as a whole, seems like all companies stock is up. Reminds me of the dot-com days when ordinary Joe boasted about the gains of their portfolio when, as it turned out, a monkey throwing darts at the financial page could pick as many winners.
  - mediaman 5y ago
    There is something to this. FB has underperformed the S&P500 recently. Over the 1 year mark, the S&P is up 31%, vs less than 13% for FB. It has underperformed over 6 months as well: less than 7% for FB compared to 9% for the market. It's only until you look back two years and more that FB has outperformed. Most of this is because of a roughly 15% decline in FB stock since mid-September.
  - jokethrowaway 5y ago
    That's inflation for you All the assets which are not cash seems to be going up.
Shish2k 5y ago
> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party company Is this something Facebook-specific, or are you suggesting that _every_ company currently making money on iOS is stupid (And presumably Android too, since you’re almost-equally screwed if Google decide they don’t like you)? If that’s the case, what do you suggest doing instead?
- mrweasel 5y ago
  I don't thinks is Facebook specific, I'm sure other do it too. What I had in mind is that fact that Facebook isn't just an app buy or website you go to. They actively try to collect information about the users. Apple has long been moving towards more privacy, so Facebook shouldn't have been upset that Apple is limiting tracking abilities. It should have been something Facebook saw coming and planned for years ago.
- jokethrowaway 5y ago
  Facebook specifically had to push for an open web and just offer FB on web. Someone did a very nice clone a few years ago of a Facebook UI done entirely in the browser and it was snappy even in lower tier androids. It might be harder for other companies, eg games where you need native code to perform well but facebook really has no excuses. They were never going to benefit from walled gardens on mobile. It could be that they lacked skills to optimise a web page, judging from how terrible and heavy their frontend apps are, but I think it was mostly a strategic decision to go native.
Someone 5y ago
So, what should he have done? Even if Facebook had gotten into the smartphone business and conquered a large part of the market, they still would want to have apps for competing platforms. Not doing that would leave money (lots of money, I would think) on the table, and would give the competition an opportunity.
Jyaif 5y ago
> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party They tried to sell their own phones to not depend on Apple and Google. That did not work out because it turns out it's super hard. Now they are betting that the next platform is going to be VR/AR, a space where they are currently #1. What else are you suggesting they do? > it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point I think he's been doing a really great job. For instance everybody thought their acquisition of Instagram (led by Zuckerberg) was a waste of money at the time. In 2020 Instagram represented 37% of the group's total revenues (which includes Oculus, Whatsapp... and Facebook!).
criddell 5y ago
> I hear no critic of Zuckerberg as a CEO Al Franken was on CNN this morning and he was saying it's time for Zuckerberg to go. He blames a lot of Facebook's problem on Zuckerberg.
exolymph 5y ago
> Whether you like or hate Facebook, it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point. > Despite all of that, I hear no critic of Zuckerberg as a CEO. Your perception on both of these points is wildly out of whack from reality.
yibg 5y ago
Aren't the growth of most companies tied to some third party? At the very least most companies can be negatively impacted by a third party decision. Just look at the chip shortage impacting car productions.

MikusR 5y ago

> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party company That's why they are building their own VR/AR platform.

8eye 5y ago
there are rumors about mobile devices as well

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

> it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point I am a consistent Facebook hawk. But to claim shareholders have done anything other than exceptionally well under Zuckerberg is to ignore the evidence. The stock is up. Buybacks are at a record. A $10bn capital spending programme was just announced.

mrweasel 5y ago
Hmm, you're absolutely right, which is kinda weird. I think most would have expected the stock to take a hit. Can I think Zuckerberg is a terrible CEO and not understand how his companys stock price isn't tanking due to mismanagement?
- xbar 5y ago
  I spent a few moments on this question. I do not think so. Confusing the brand value with the product value in a marketplace with no competition led you to think that he does harm as a face of Facebook. He is a CEO. He is a good CEO by metrics that matter for CEOs. Disclaimer: I do not like him. I do not use Facebook.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
JKCalhoun 5y ago
Watching the stock market as a whole, seems like all companies stock is up. Reminds me of the dot-com days when ordinary Joe boasted about the gains of their portfolio when, as it turned out, a monkey throwing darts at the financial page could pick as many winners.
- mediaman 5y ago
  There is something to this. FB has underperformed the S&P500 recently. Over the 1 year mark, the S&P is up 31%, vs less than 13% for FB. It has underperformed over 6 months as well: less than 7% for FB compared to 9% for the market. It's only until you look back two years and more that FB has outperformed. Most of this is because of a roughly 15% decline in FB stock since mid-September.
- jokethrowaway 5y ago
  That's inflation for you All the assets which are not cash seems to be going up.

Shish2k 5y ago

> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party company Is this something Facebook-specific, or are you suggesting that _every_ company currently making money on iOS is stupid (And presumably Android too, since you’re almost-equally screwed if Google decide they don’t like you)? If that’s the case, what do you suggest doing instead?

mrweasel 5y ago
I don't thinks is Facebook specific, I'm sure other do it too. What I had in mind is that fact that Facebook isn't just an app buy or website you go to. They actively try to collect information about the users. Apple has long been moving towards more privacy, so Facebook shouldn't have been upset that Apple is limiting tracking abilities. It should have been something Facebook saw coming and planned for years ago.
jokethrowaway 5y ago
Facebook specifically had to push for an open web and just offer FB on web. Someone did a very nice clone a few years ago of a Facebook UI done entirely in the browser and it was snappy even in lower tier androids. It might be harder for other companies, eg games where you need native code to perform well but facebook really has no excuses. They were never going to benefit from walled gardens on mobile. It could be that they lacked skills to optimise a web page, judging from how terrible and heavy their frontend apps are, but I think it was mostly a strategic decision to go native.

Someone 5y ago

So, what should he have done? Even if Facebook had gotten into the smartphone business and conquered a large part of the market, they still would want to have apps for competing platforms. Not doing that would leave money (lots of money, I would think) on the table, and would give the competition an opportunity.

Jyaif 5y ago

> The shareholders should ask Facebook management how they allowed their growth to be tied to the decisions of a completely unrelated third party They tried to sell their own phones to not depend on Apple and Google. That did not work out because it turns out it's super hard. Now they are betting that the next platform is going to be VR/AR, a space where they are currently #1. What else are you suggesting they do? > it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point I think he's been doing a really great job. For instance everybody thought their acquisition of Instagram (led by Zuckerberg) was a waste of money at the time. In 2020 Instagram represented 37% of the group's total revenues (which includes Oculus, Whatsapp... and Facebook!).

criddell 5y ago

> I hear no critic of Zuckerberg as a CEO Al Franken was on CNN this morning and he was saying it's time for Zuckerberg to go. He blames a lot of Facebook's problem on Zuckerberg.

exolymph 5y ago

> Whether you like or hate Facebook, it's hard to see Zuckerberg as anything but a failing CEO at this point. > Despite all of that, I hear no critic of Zuckerberg as a CEO. Your perception on both of these points is wildly out of whack from reality.

yibg 5y ago

Aren't the growth of most companies tied to some third party? At the very least most companies can be negatively impacted by a third party decision. Just look at the chip shortage impacting car productions.