Some interesting points. The most important point you make, that for me proves it's a bubble is this: "And this is the situation where companies like Facebook

Some interesting points. The most important point you make, that for me proves it's a bubble is this: "And this is the situation where companies like Facebook or Google, or VCs are more interested in acquiring assets (ie investments in startups), rather than caring about the actual money itself." Hello? You're "acquiring assets" and not caring about money? What? Some make the argument that Google bought youtube for a big sum, and use that to justify Facebook buying Instagram for $1 billion, but clearly this is not sustainable. For the "acquiring Instagram for a billion" stage to continue (proving there isn't a bubble), acquiring company needs: - To be doing 3 figure millions/billions in revenue (there are only so many of these) - Have a really clear idea of what they're buying and why (Yahoo sucks at this) - Have patient shareholders that allow you can take huge bets like Instagram (if Zuck went off and negotiated the purchase of Instagram without board approval and Facebook was a public company, I'd imagine the shareholders would scream blue murder and possibly sue). All this is fine and well, but as you note it distorts people's thinking - people use the dollar figure per user from the Instagram deal, which only is applicable IF the above conditions are met (i.e. you are bought by someone who's buying you for something other than financial reasons. Which is a clear sign of the bullsh*t phase of the cycle, in my opinion.)