12 ms·
While I don't disagree with you, if you are going to say something like you should really at least give the right number. Or at very least include a disclaimer
by toth 3y ago
While I don't disagree with you, if you are going to say something like you should really at least give the right number. Or at very least include a disclaimer that 12 hours is not the right number.
2022 Meta revenue was 116 billion USD [1]. So the fine was 1.1% of yearly or revenue, or pretty close to 4 days of revenue.
In terms of yearly net income, it is 5.6% or 20 days of income. Don't think this is a trivial fine.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/277229/facebooks-annual-revenue-and-net-income/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/277229/facebooks-annual-...
- vmfunction 3y ago1.1% seems like slap on the wrist or cost of doing shady business. 20% would be more appropriate, then again this seems like political discussion between US and EU.
- microtonal 3y agoThe fines can be up to 4% of global yearly turnover. I think they don't go for the full amount immediately, because you always want to have room to increase the penalty if the don't comply after this fine.
- Yujf 3y agoReminder that this is revenue, not profit AND it is a fine from the EU so really only EU revenue should be counted when discussing how hard this hits Meta.
- johannes1234321 3y ago> a fine from the EU so really only EU revenue should be counted You can't really fully seperaten EU revenue. I as a European write very intelligent and relevant posts on Facebook, thus people from other regions go there to read them. (well, I don't post anything on Facebook these days, but the point stands)
- cheriot 3y agoMeta revenue is from showing an ad. "Is the ad shown in the EU?" seems like a pretty clear line. IFRS rules already require tracking the action that recognizes revenue so seems hard to play games with it.
- ndr 3y agoThis implies that Meta doesn't make money outside of EU by exfiltrating EU users' data. If Meta made zero money in EU whilst still offering a service to EU users, and still exfiltrating their data, should the fine be zero?
- ben_w 3y agoEven if the calculations for how to attribute income from different places would be difficult to decide upon precisely, and doubly so if the calculations are used to determine a penalty fine thanks to the possibility of being gamed, it can probably be guessed at without too much error in cases where Goodhart's Law doesn't bite.
- cheriot 3y agoHow does anyone make money with EU data outside the EU? Seems like the value of that data is trivial anywhere else.
- nicce 3y agoIt should hit the global revenue. Otherwise they could play even more regionally with the rules, and fines are just a cost of doing the business.
- Yujf 3y agoYes the fine should be based on global revenue, but when discussing if this fine actually hurts Meta, you should try to estimate the EU revenue, because it is about if it Meta cares about the fine. If it is a significant part of EU revenue then Meta should want to comply or leave the EU. If it is not then Meta doesn't care.
- andrewinardeer 3y agoAgree. A few years ago I was on around AUD90,000 and driving my wife's car which to me she had failed to register. I got a AUD990 fine. So I equate this fine to Meta getting busted for driving an unregistered car. Not even close to a drink driving charge.
- anpe 3y agoAlso to add, this fine is concerned with the EU. I'm not sure why we care how much money Meta makes in other regions. EU accounts for about 25% of their revenue [1]. So in terms of yearly net income it then gets closer to about 15%. Again, the job of EU is to regulate businesses in the EU and not the rest of the world. [1] https://businessquant.com/facebook-revenue-by-region https://businessquant.com/facebook-revenue-by-region
- arlcode 3y agoThe GDPR allows for fines based on global revenue to prevent companies playing games with where there income is "technically" generated.
- bboygravity 3y agoSounds to me like a clever EU work-around to force Meta to pay taxes over its EU revenue :p This "fine" just feels like "cost of doing business in the EU" to me...
- johannes1234321 3y agoThey got 5 months to fix the issues. So after 5 months they can collect a bigger fine ... and then 5 months later again, with three increasing charges within 12 months it's more notable. Ok, realistically it's unlikely to happen exactly that way, ...
- pyrale 3y agoFortunately, we can count on FB to move fast and break this hazard much faster than that.
- nirimda 3y agoWell, companies are known for organising their affairs to avoid taxes. I suppose they can organise their affairs to avoid fines as well.
- 3y ago
- toxik 3y ago20 days of income for this seems extremely low. Were it a person, they would have been jailed and indebted for life.
- EduardoBautista 3y agoNo, they wouldn't. An appropriate fine would have been given to a sole proprietor.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoNot really. The EU isn't trying to kill Meta, it's trying to get it to follow GDPR where it applies. For most people, fining them an equivalent of their monthly salary, is a blow painful enough the person won't forget it soon, and will try to avoid getting fined again.
- JCWasmx86 3y agoYeah agreed. They will simply continue to violate the GDPR. If the last years global revenue was 116 Billion USD, the fine should be at least 200 Billion. Otherwise companies just will see the fine as cost of doing business.
- trogdor 3y agoWhether something is a 'cost of doing business' is based on whether the cost is expected or unexpected, not its magnitude.
- ChatGTP 3y agoBit off topic, but how on earth did Meta gross 116 billion USD ? lol Of course we all find tech valuable, but that is absolutely stupid money for what I get out of their services, which is almost nothing hence I've not opened FB for weeks and I open Instagram for 2-3 minutes every day and turn it off, lately maybe every other day. Even with more engaged users it's hard to believe it's worth that much money. Is the advertising really this effective ? Insane.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y agoI would guess that a chunk of income comes from selling datasets to interested parties, especially politically affiliated ones e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Ana...
- ChatGTP 3y agoThat's nice and terrifying then.
- aierou 3y agoMeta only lost income and credibility from that scandal, unless you believe the data breach was conspiratorial.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y agoSeems likely to me. I can't recall Facebook acting in good faith at any point in time. If there's a bunch of money to be made assisting well-funded politicians, then I'd fully expect Facebook to be wanting a piece of that pie when their business model is generally to act against the users of the site by selling their data to manipulators.
- loeg 3y agoYour guess is wildly mistaken. They did not intend to sell data to CA; and the CA events happened in 2014-2015 and the program CA abused was subsequently shut down.
- rmm 3y agoWasn’t the fine for breaches since July 2020? So more like 2 days revenue and like 3%profit. Actually meta had bigger year last year so a bit less than that. Cost of business ?
- nicce 3y agoThe investigation lasted 10 years. https://noyb.eu/en/edpb-decision-facebooks-eu-us-data-transfers-stop-transfers-fine-and-repatriation https://noyb.eu/en/edpb-decision-facebooks-eu-us-data-transf... So, the fine is ridiculously low. 130 million per year?
- blitz_skull 3y agoOkay am I insane or does “20 days of income” for a company that generates income 24/7 seem like the definition of a “trivial fine”?
- loeg 3y agoIt doesn't seem like the definition of "trivial fine," no.
- chias 3y agoGiven that you are on HN, you are likely salaried employee. This means you are also generating income 24/7. If you were fined for 20 days of your income, would you still argue that this is "the definition of a trivial fine" for you? I certainly wouldn't.
- blitz_skull 3y agoI mean given the context we’re talking about? That’s absolutely trivial. A 20-operating-days fine wouldn’t touch my day-to-day life, I wouldn’t have to alter my behavior going forward at all, there would be almost 0 repercussions. Would I enjoy it? Certainly not. Would I change my behavior if it was generating billions in revenue? Certainly not. How is this supposed to dissuade FB at all?
- whimsicalism 3y agoNietzsche wrote about this stuff, doubt there is any magnitude of fine that would be acceptable to the baying masses.
- hartator 3y ago4 days is actually pretty high.