7 ms·
Facebook's numbers
- adventureful 14y agoShould really specify that the revenue listed is for one quarter. Also worth mentioning that James Breyer does not own 7.632% of Facebook. Accel Partners owns most of that stake, and Breyer has his own personal, smaller stake in Facebook.
- greatreorx 14y agoAgreed, he should clarify 1Q 2012. And it looks like he has it wrong.... The filing says $872M not $972M (page 51 of pdf).
- dcurtis 14y agoThat graph on page 51 is comparing advertising revenue ($872M) to payments+other revenue (the smaller bar, $186M). Total was $1,058M. Edit: updated the total.
- greatreorx 14y agoI'm confused then. Where are you getting $972M? If you are doing total revenue (advertising + payments and other), it's $872M + $186M = $1,058M And also, page 56 of the pdf lists $1,058M as total revenue for 1Q 2012.
- dcurtis 14y agoThanks. I've updated the post to specify that revenue was for last quarter. The S-1 describes James Breyer's shares as a combination of his and Accel's, with the following footnote: (12) Consists of (i) 11,703,132 shares of Class B common stock held of record by James W. Breyer, Trustee of James W. Breyer 2005 Trust dated March 25, 2005 (Breyer 2005 Trust); (ii) 149,527,730 shares of Class B common stock held of record by Accel IX L.P. (Accel IX); (iii) 15,931,653 shares of Class B common stock held of record by Accel IX Strategic Partners L.P. (Accel SP); (iv) 13,939,214 shares of Class B common stock held of record Accel Investors 2005 L.L.C. (Accel 2005); (v) 9,949,820 shares of Class B common stock held of record by Accel Growth Fund L.P. (Accel Growth); (vi) 194,230 shares of Class B common stock held of record by Accel Growth Fund Strategic Partners L.P. (Accel Growth SP); and (vii) 132,570 shares of Class B common stock held of record by Accel Growth Fund Investors 2009 L.L.C. (Accel Growth 2009).
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- stevenj 14y agoSlightly off-topic: I had always thought Adam D'Angelo was a co-founder of Facebook, so I was surprised to not see his name listed in the ownership section. But Wikipedia lists Dustin Moskovitz, Eduardo Saverin, and Chris Hughes as co-founders in addition to Mark.
- kloncks 14y agoI think Zuck met Adam during high school at Exeter, so they arguably knew one another for a much longer time than the other co-founders. Maybe that's why you thought that.
- 18pfsmt 14y agoI think it's helpful for our international HN cohorts to know that Phillips Exeter[1] is , pretty much, the most elite high school in the US. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_Exeter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_Exeter
- duck 14y agoI think that was helpful for even fellow Americans like myself who had no idea either.
- flyt 14y agohttp://www.quora.com/What-was-Adam-DAngelos-career-timeline-at-Facebook http://www.quora.com/What-was-Adam-DAngelos-career-timeline-... Answered by Adam: "I was in college as an undergrad at California Institute of Technology full time until I graduated in 2006. Facebook launched in spring 2004. In summer 2004 I lived with the Facebook founders in Palo Alto and helped out a little, though I was mainly working on Wirehog, which was a social filesharing network. In summer 2005 I was officially a full time employee at Facebook, and then I took off the next semester from college to keep working at Facebook through the end of 2005. Then I went back to college for the second half of the 2005-2006 academic year, graduated, and went back to Facebook full time after that."
- sinzone 14y agoMissing Accel Partners in the "Ownership after IPO" (probably it was merged into "James Brayer")
- Devilboy 14y agoI'm surprised that Parker has a bigger share than Thiel.
- b0b0b0b 14y agoiono; I'm happy to see Parker up there.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- statictype 14y agoJust out of curiosity: It's considered good manners to disclose that you have a vested interest in something you're writing. Are you also socially obligated to disclose that you plan on investing in something in the future?
- reason 14y agoYeah, almost felt like he was trying to brag under the guise of "transparency".
- esrauch 14y agoTrying to brag that he's thinking about buying something that anyone can buy?
- joering2 14y agoserious question: what it means to be "socially obligated" ?
- MaxGabriel 14y agoJust that you're expected to do something by others, mostly by convention, like saying thank you. (presuming this is an English question, not a philosophical one).
- jessriedel 14y ago"Social norm" is the technical term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_(social) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_(social)
- statictype 14y agoI guess my phrasing could have been better. 'polite' may be a better way to put it.
- dcurtis 14y agoIf I owned Facebook stock, I would disclose that. Since I can't own it yet, but probably will after the IPO, I figured it would be worth disclosing.
- MaxGabriel 14y agoI didn't realize Zuckerberg received so much less in compensation. He owns a huge portion of the company, sure, but is compensated ~29m or so less than the COO. Is anyone familiar with why this is?
- flyt 14y agoMark isn't going anywhere. He would be building Facebook if the pay was $0/yr. This is a token amount that covers his living expenses and little else.
- illicium 14y agoMust be nice to have 29m of "just" living expenses.
- chris24 14y ago$1.7M in living expenses, not $29M.
- philwelch 14y agoStill a lot, but a house in Palo Alto and personal security alone might justify most of that. Guys like Steve Jobs who take $1 in salary already have lots of liquidity, and Zuckerberg doesn't necessarily have that.
- adamtmca 14y agoHe has facebook pay for his security detail and private aviation... like a boss.
- rabidsnail 14y agoLiving expenses and AMT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax .
- sanxiyn 14y agoUser penetration: 0% China. Tencent, Chinese Facebook, is already a public company. Take a look at their numbers here: http://www.tencent.com/en-us/ir/reports.shtml http://www.tencent.com/en-us/ir/reports.shtml
- dmvaldman 14y agothey have almost a billion people without a single person in China?....wow
- josefonseca 14y agoIs that stat serious or is it some political statement? Facebook really has zero users in China?
- gbog 14y agoIt is not "zero": most of my colleagues in a Chinese web company have Facebook accounts and some do use them regularly. But they have to use proxies and are a minority. I think it is not unlikely that the rounded figure is 0%.
- goggles99 14y agoChina does resolve to counterfeit and steal any idea or technology we have... Even Facebook.
- mayanksinghal 14y agoAdditionally User penetration is referring to percentage of Internet Users not Total Country Populations - I got confused and had to refer to original documents.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- iterationx 14y agoWhere's Eduardo Saverin?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ssharp 14y agoAccording to the S1 filing, this was the criteria for disclosing: * each stockholder known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our outstanding shares of Class A common stock or Class B common stock; * each of our directors; * each of our named executive officers; * all of our directors and executive officers as a group; and * all selling stockholders. It's safe to say Eduardo doesn't fit into buckets 2-4, so as long as he doesn't own at least 5% or isn't selling stock as part of the IPO, he wouldn't need to be disclosed.
- joering2 14y agook, so: #1 how is it possible that there is 0% users in China.. IF they truly believe NOONE in China has facebook account, then any other of those numbers could be made out of the blue as well. #2 Why is it soo important to attach Zynga everywhere they disclose info? is it some sort of Zynga-FB agreement or what? #3 David Fischer is missing comma after "VP" #4 Peter Thiel, James Breyer, Reed Hastings, Erskine Bowles, Donald Graham -- what are they "Directors" of? #5 Frequency of words appearing in S-1: second place: mobile. This is a HUGE indicator to anyone thinking about startup... things ARE and will continue to happen over the mobile device more and more. This sound trivia, but think about another indicator: your startup idea versus mobile.
- anateus 14y agoThe actual Facebook report says on page 49: "[...] in China, where Facebook access is restricted, we have near 0% penetration." So they definitely know people are using it there.
- tomedme 14y agoIt would be limited to the Chinese who have access to a VPN and can speak English, and have a social group of foreigners. There are also alternative Chinese social networks where their friends are, and without the added chore of finding a VPN service which they can pay without a non-Chinese PayPal account or credit card.
- cncool 14y ago1. <0.5% rounds down
- cncool 14y ago1. <0.5% rounds down
- josefonseca 14y agoWhen you look at a statistic like: Penetration in Turkey: 85% If market research is not the first thing that comes to your mind, then you should probably go see a shrink.
- maratd 14y agoSo you made an appointment then?
- josefonseca 14y agoYup!
- ChuckMcM 14y agoInteresting that most on that list will end up paying California State income tax in one form or another. (I say 'interesting' because the legislature has already spent Zuck's estimated tax bill, but Andreesen, Breyer, others they too will have large bills to pay.
- sathishmanohar 14y agoOperation cost and profit?
- VeejayRampay 14y agoheh, love how the revenue out of America is WAY higher than that of Europe even though there are more active users in Europe.
- bherms 14y agoHow are there 500 million users but only 125million friendships? Am I missing something?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- imalolz 14y ago125,000 Million -> 125,000,000,000 :)
- usaar333 14y agoWow, 278 average friends per user? That's a lot higher than I would have thought..
- drsintoma 14y agoWell, it takes 2 users to make 1 friendship, so it would be half of that. Plus that's the number of daily users, the total number of users is like double. So the average friends per user must be around 65.
- simondlr 14y agoThe average is 190. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1111.4503v1.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1111.4503v1.pdf
- usaar333 14y agoHuh? There's 125 billion friendships and 900 million monthly active. 125 billion / 900 million = 139 friendship pairs / user A pair = 2 friends so you double it to get 278 friends/users. This is of course an overestimate as people are friends with people who use fb < once a month. Not sure what total user count is though.
- simonw 14y agoThat's 500 million daily active users - they ave nearly a billion monthly actives, and the total number of user accounts wasn't mentioned in the article.
- gbog 14y agoSo now for the elephant in the room: If, as some claimed regularly since a few years (including Fred Wilson, implicitly[1]), we are in a tech/financial bubble, what is the probability that the Facebook IPO will be the sting popping the bubble? If so, what are the likely results? [1] "If you are playing a game of musical chairs", http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/04/what-if-web-and-mobile-apps-are-like-tv-shows.html http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/04/what-if-web-and-mobile-apps-...
- Zimahl 14y agoFacebook could hardly be included as part of any current tech bubble. The early 2000s tech bubble included companies spending millions in investor cash on stupid ideas that would never pan out (online pet food, hundreds of dating websites) and having a grandiose IPO before earning even a dime of revenue. It wasn't over-valuation, it was shocking that some of these companies had value at all. I personally feel Facebook is over-valued but they have revenue and profit. I think it's a bad early investment and will settle way down south of the debut, but they will be around a very long time. They aren't Pets.com.
- DangerousPie 14y agoSeeing Microsoft in that list reminded me how they bought a bit more than 1% of Facebook shares for $240 mio a few years ago. I guess that was a pretty good investment after-all... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21458486/ns/business-us_business/ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21458486/ns/business-us_business...
- padobson 14y agoThe most interesting numbers to me: $30,957,952 Sheryl Sandberg, COO 0.089% Sheryl Sandberg The second most important person at Facebook takes most of their compensation in cash - with her stock in the company being worth roughly 3 yrs salary. She's older than Zuck, no reason to think she'll ever be CEO. I have to believe she has career aspirations beyond Facebook if she's willing to work there for less than defectors Moskovitz and Parker are making on the IPO, among others.
- horatiumocian 14y agoI think that Sheryl Sandberg has options worth close to $1B, but either they are not vested yet, or she didn't exercise them. Still not as much as Moskovitz or Parker, but probably more than she would get at any other company (except one where she is the founder).
- bmelton 14y agoI found it interesting that Zuck makes so little, myself. Though he clearly isn't starving, I'm always bemused at people who have the option to get their 'fuck you' money and don't take it. I was dazzled by it at Groupon's Google acquisition turndown, and am dazzled by it with Zuck as well (though perhaps he's already exercised some fortune I don't know about?) I suppose that perhaps there's an appearance of questionability when one gets cash out, but even if they don't "cash out" in any other sense, I'd think that at least that first bit of big money would be hard to turn away from.
- 13rules 14y ago"I was dazzled by it at Groupon's Google acquisition turndown, and am dazzled by it with Zuck as well" Clearly the move by Groupon was a mistake. Ok, you want to build a big company and have a vision, etc, etc... Great. Who cares? That kind of money doesn't come along very often — take it and move on to your NEXT great idea. You'll have another one. Millions in the bank and vacations on yachts and private islands do wonders for the imagination. Of course, I thought Zuck was crazy for turning down $1 billion from Yahoo 5 years ago. He turned out to be right on that one.
- simonbarker87 14y agoI don't understand the hype around Facebook. They make $1,058M revenue in a quarter and have (if you multiply the monthly active users by 3) 2,703M active quarterly users. So they only make $0.39 per active user per quarter? Maybe I am missing the point but it doesn't seem like the revenue generation side of things is very efficient.