fb is going all in on india too, more trolls yay
a big issue with FB is that they’ve already captured the most lucractive ad market (13-40 year olds in the West). additional users will only be about 10-20% as good as a current user in terms of revenue potential, so when you think about it, they’ve already captured 80-90% of their total user base in terms of revenue potential depending on how big you think the market for users is.
See MySpace
Ever heard of idiosyncratic risk?
No, you’re correct. Google was in pole a while back then facebook blew them out of the water.
Still don’t see it though.
Personally I’m not into this whole investing style of “look this stock did really great in the past, and now it’s expensive, so let’s BUY now so we don’t miss out because it will probably go up even more!”. I buy stuff when it’s cheap, back before the herd gets in, or after a crash when the herd flees. Example: buying the dotcom crash, not the peak.
P/E 107, P/B 7.3, this seems somewhat excessive. They only have $12B in revenue, yet somehow have a $290B market cap, for a freakin’ web page? As a comparison AAPL has $233B in revenue and a $670B cap.
FB has more staying power than AAPL. AAPL makes products. if at some point in the future, the product sucks, or the products are no longer useful for what humans need, AAPL will need to do something completely different. FB is likely providing something that will last decades at the very least. if you take a picture, a video or have a conversation on any device, that picture, video or conversation will be stored on or take place on a FB server. you forget that FB also owns Instagram and WhatsApp. saying AAPL will be around forever is like in 1980 that Atari will dominate the video game industry indefinitely. and in 1993 saying Nintendo will dominate the video game industry indefinitely. or in 2003 saying Blackberry will dominate mobile phones forever. in technology, once you fall short on the product side, its very hard to claw your way back to the top. most never do. what i know is that we probably won’t be carrying around phones to play Angry Birds 30 years from now but we will probably communicate digitall more than we ever have.
is FB more expensive than AAPL. should it be much more expensive than AAPL? yes. is it too expensive relative to AAPL? maybe.
^ Well, I hear what you said, but I can’t really get my brain to think that way. FB is lame and uncool already. I see AAPL being dominant for many decades. FB? I dunno, it’s totally replaceable.
If you do a simple DDM with a typical discount rate, you find that 50% of a stock’s value comes from about 8 years of earnings. I usually trot out this statistic to point out that a good portion of the stock price reflects earnings that are nearly impossible to estimate with any reliability. However, it’s also useful to ask whether Apple’s earnings for the next 8 years is likely to be larger than Facebook’s, and what does that say about the current valuation of the two.
^ as bchad said; most traditional valuation measures for tech stock have a very large amount of uncertainty in them. Rather than identifying if a strong tech company is going to remain strong, I would focus my time on looking for companies that venture into unexplored niches of the market-- Their potential for growth is more likely to go unappreciated.
Personally, I do not like the fact that FB spends a lot of money on buying out other social media competitors for unbelievably high prices (22B for whatsapp!!!). When a company is buying out its competitors just to stay afloat, that’s almost never a good sign.
this dude is awesome, he can throw a few my way
Mark Zuckerberg and wife Priscilla Chan to donate 99% of Facebook shares to charity
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan, say they plan to give away much of their fortune to a new charity they are creating.
In a public letter posted on Facebook to their newborn daughter, Max, the couple said they are starting a charity called the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative “to join people across the world to advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation.”
“We will give 99 per cent of our Facebook shares — currently about $45 billion — during our lives to advance this mission,” the letter said.
Zuckerberg, who co-founded the social-networking website, married longtime girlfriend Chan, a pediatrician, on May 19, 2012.
“Our initial areas of focus will be personalized learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities,” Zuckerberg said. “We’ll share more details in the coming months once we settle into our new family rhythm and return from our maternity and paternity leaves.”
very touching and inspiring
i am not a big enough person to do anything close to this.
can you give me some evidence on the bold (both bold statement and in bold style) statement of yours?
yessir
^ respect
Nice igor! I was tempted to grab some in the mid 90’s in mid january but didnt. Wishing I had now for sure
what do you guys think of the new non-voting shaes ala google?
i think its a good idea zuck keeps the power in the medium term, hes been good for business.
I like it, keeps the innovative person at the helm in charge instead of some idiot with an MBA who is a lifelong manager. Too lazy to find it right now but studies show shares perform significantly better with the people who started them at the helm, once you pop in a cookie cutter manager the companies shares dont perform nearly as well.
Personally FBs valuation is a bit rich for my portfolio, but if they keep having blowout quarters like this and producing the growth the valuation is certainly worth it.
Will there ever be a competitor? Google+? What happened to that? Facebook is amazing. Not even particularly innovative and they’re killing it. Half of you could create a better website tomorrow, but good luck getting users.