4 ms·
They have also seen a 78% increase in stock price over the past year so maybe using Facebook shareholders as an example isn't the best way to make your point
by gtCameron 12y ago
They have also seen a 78% increase in stock price over the past year so maybe using Facebook shareholders as an example isn't the best way to make your point
- api 12y agoFacebook has revenue, so it's sort of immaterial to the Snapchat discussion... at least in the short term. Yet in the long term I'm not so sure. Facebook's revenue is built on doing things that cannibalize the value of their platform-- annoying ads, creepy surveillance, even creeper "experiments" on their users, etc. That's making them decidedly uncool. Network effects are holding their popularity high for now, but while network effects are powerful they are not unstoppable. Things can "tilt" at any time. I think that's why Facebook is acquiring things like Oculus. If they're to become the next Yahoo they want to make sure they've invested in some other properties. That of course is why there's still a Yahoo-- the core Yahoo brand is almost worthless.
- dualogy 12y agoYeah but that's the funny thing about pension money going into equities. They have "seen" the 78% increase but not realized it unless they cashed out their accounts and retired right then. Wall St / US pension funds turned everyone into "investors" while mom & pop still think the funky numbers on their statements are their "savings". I mean I'm simplifying, I'm not a US subject, but that's what it seems like from afar.