3 ms·
What a shitty article, right from the beginning. >Google Hates Facebook Sensationalism. >Facebook’s rapid ascension is arguably what prompted Larry Page to t
by reso 15y ago
What a shitty article, right from the beginning.
>Google Hates Facebook
Sensationalism.
>Facebook’s rapid ascension is arguably what prompted Larry Page to tell Eric Schmidt to step aside in January so that he could take the reins of Google and make it more streamlined and efficient.
No its not. Larry has always wanted to be CEO and they decided that he was ready, after 10 years of waiting.
>But, hold on for a second. What if advertisers don’t care about personalization? That’s a big what if — but what if they don’t?
They do. That's not an 'if', its a 'no'.
>There are several possible ways for Facebook to make money: (1) highly targeted ads, (2) charging publishers to have a Facebook Connect integration (which is currently free), and (3) data analytics of users’ behavior/patterns. At the moment, their over $4 billion in revenue comes from option 1. The other 2 might be great businesses as well, but let’s focus on the first.
The suggestion that Facebook would charge for connect integration is absurd. Similarly absurd as that they would charge users.
- AJ007 15y agoLink bait article that barely even deserves acknowledgement for its existence. Note to news sites: trade your credibility for more unique visitors, and eventually you will just be a tabloid.
- joe_the_user 15y agoYes, the article is bad however the problem itself remains. Article: But, hold on for a second. What if advertisers don’t care about personalization? That’s a big what if — but what if they don’t? Parent: They do. That's not an 'if', its a 'no'. Yes, advertisers care about personalization currently. They've been taught its great. The big question is whether they can actually turn their belief into money because if they can't that belief won't hold even if they're currently shoveling money into Facebook. Many, many people have made argument that Facebook can't monetize on the order of Google because people don't go to Facebook to buy things. Of course, many others have attempted to debunk this objection, I don't think we glibly say things are settled one way or the other 'till Facebook is making Google-scale dollars on a multi-year basis.
- nl 15y agoThe big question is whether they can actually turn their belief into money They can I don't think we glibly say things are settled one way or the other It's settled enough for people to be spending large amounts of money on Facebook (as well as on Google) At the moment you can get very precise estimates of click-though rate for an ad on Facebook. The rate is less than on Google search, but generally more than the broad internet.
- pork 15y agoParent doesn't deserve to be downvoted. Multi-billion dollar businesses (revenue that is, not "valuation") have been built on targeted advertising. Isn't not a fad. Jeez.
- medinism 15y agoAgreed. this guy clearly has a passing understanding of the business.