5 ms·

I’m not sure it was a mistake though. You have to ask yourself what marks goals are here. To me, being cash flow positive is pretty far down the list. Meta coul

I’m not sure it was a mistake though. You have to ask yourself what marks goals are here. To me, being cash flow positive is pretty far down the list. Meta could have results like the one last week for a decade and mark would still be a billionaire. He’d still be the ceo of his company. Pleasing Wall Street is not a priority for him. To me the main goals here are first creating a hardware platform meta controls in order to ensure his company can’t be destroyed by other companies taxing him like apple did, and second I do think that mark is legitimately committed to connecting people whatever that means to him. Reality labs still seems like a good way to accomplish these goals even if it isn’t financially worth it.

tptacek 4y ago
This isn't an especially useful frame. Lots of things make sense if you put yourself in Zuckerberg's shoes and assume he minmaxes for whatever random thing has captured his attention. The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? What would happened with respect to the shareholders if Zuckerberg took his foot off the gas pedal with the "Metaverse" stuff?
- TigeriusKirk 4y ago
  It's an incredibly useful frame if the question is "Should Meta admit the metaverse is a mistake?"
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  I mean they only really have two choices. Stick with meta and hope mark gets distracted from the reality labs stuff or sell. Most seem to have chosen to sell.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Right. Over the coming years, the number of people who choose to sell, buy, or hold will determine the outcome of the Metaverse experiment. So that's the right frame here, not whether Zuckerberg can continue pursuing it --- if only because the Zuckerberg question is much less interesting to think about.
    - colinmhayes 4y ago
      But I’m saying that’s not true. My thesis is that meta’s share price has next to 0 effect on how much mark chooses to shove into reality labs.
      - tptacek 4y ago
        We're talking past each other. I agree with you. But the ultimate benchmark will be the stock performance, not Zuckerberg's willpower.
- Bubble_Pop_22 4y ago
  > The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? What would happened with respect to the shareholders if Zuckerberg took his foot off the gas pedal with the "Metaverse" stuff? Meta shareholders signed up for the double class share agreement which enables Zuck to do whatever he wants. And besides it's is kind of right, given the past execution ever since 2004 he kinda earned the right to bet the company on something new. Billions of people use the different flavors of Meta , and they do sohundreds if not thoudands of times per day. Nobody else can claim to having provided quality of life to so many people.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    They gave up one means they had to influence Meta's behavior: they can't vote him out. But shareholders almost never vote anybody out regardless of how the share class structure is set up. So the real question is: will they continue to hold Meta's stock?
- voisin 4y ago
  > The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? Isn’t the better question “what should Meta employees do?” Shareholders have zero power given the corporate structure. Employees can leave to greener pastures and leave Zuckerberg to wallow with the B-players that are only in it for the paycheck. How many A-players want to tilt at windmills with him?
  - likpok 4y ago
    Wouldn't the people only in it for a paycheck leave (because the stock becomes less valuable), leaving only the mission-oriented true believers?
andsoitis 4y ago
As a publicly traded company, there’s a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  Which is why mark leaves the credible deniability of saying he believes reality labs is an investment that will pay off for shareholders. My reading of corporate fiduciary responsibility cases is that believing your actions are in the shareholders best interest is all that is required and proving that mark doesn’t seems impossible.

tptacek 4y ago

This isn't an especially useful frame. Lots of things make sense if you put yourself in Zuckerberg's shoes and assume he minmaxes for whatever random thing has captured his attention. The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? What would happened with respect to the shareholders if Zuckerberg took his foot off the gas pedal with the "Metaverse" stuff?

TigeriusKirk 4y ago
It's an incredibly useful frame if the question is "Should Meta admit the metaverse is a mistake?"
colinmhayes 4y ago
I mean they only really have two choices. Stick with meta and hope mark gets distracted from the reality labs stuff or sell. Most seem to have chosen to sell.
- tptacek 4y ago
  Right. Over the coming years, the number of people who choose to sell, buy, or hold will determine the outcome of the Metaverse experiment. So that's the right frame here, not whether Zuckerberg can continue pursuing it --- if only because the Zuckerberg question is much less interesting to think about.
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    But I’m saying that’s not true. My thesis is that meta’s share price has next to 0 effect on how much mark chooses to shove into reality labs.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      We're talking past each other. I agree with you. But the ultimate benchmark will be the stock performance, not Zuckerberg's willpower.
Bubble_Pop_22 4y ago
> The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? What would happened with respect to the shareholders if Zuckerberg took his foot off the gas pedal with the "Metaverse" stuff? Meta shareholders signed up for the double class share agreement which enables Zuck to do whatever he wants. And besides it's is kind of right, given the past execution ever since 2004 he kinda earned the right to bet the company on something new. Billions of people use the different flavors of Meta , and they do sohundreds if not thoudands of times per day. Nobody else can claim to having provided quality of life to so many people.
- tptacek 4y ago
  They gave up one means they had to influence Meta's behavior: they can't vote him out. But shareholders almost never vote anybody out regardless of how the share class structure is set up. So the real question is: will they continue to hold Meta's stock?
voisin 4y ago
> The real question is, what should Meta shareholders do in response to this stuff? Isn’t the better question “what should Meta employees do?” Shareholders have zero power given the corporate structure. Employees can leave to greener pastures and leave Zuckerberg to wallow with the B-players that are only in it for the paycheck. How many A-players want to tilt at windmills with him?
- likpok 4y ago
  Wouldn't the people only in it for a paycheck leave (because the stock becomes less valuable), leaving only the mission-oriented true believers?

andsoitis 4y ago

As a publicly traded company, there’s a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

colinmhayes 4y ago
Which is why mark leaves the credible deniability of saying he believes reality labs is an investment that will pay off for shareholders. My reading of corporate fiduciary responsibility cases is that believing your actions are in the shareholders best interest is all that is required and proving that mark doesn’t seems impossible.