justin88 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Am I the only one that thinks this is too cheap? > If GOOG’s worth $200B, surely Facebook is worth a > quarter of that. FB also has a better shot of > breaking into China. +1 And Google doesn’t stand anywhere in terms of targeting audience. Google can target which ad to be placed where, but they can’t target which ad to be shown to whom, the amount of mapped personal info FB contains leaves google nowhere in competition to FB, in fact they are altogather different sects in marketing. You just moved to france, don’t know french, and you see french training ads and french travel agencies on your ad board. you just got married, changed status on FB, and you see holiday packages to romantic destinations on your screen on right, google can’t do that! And combine that with text analytics and other AI algos on your status messages, comments, photos, blogs, links you share, and everything. FB knows you closely, it’s definately worth more than $50B!
The audience and user’s database is an intangible asset, therefore really hard to value…as are the brand such as coca-cola or pepsi…You can put whatever the price you want, no?
Bernanke Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > And Google doesn’t stand anywhere in terms of > targeting audience. Google can target which ad to > be placed where, but they can’t target which ad to > be shown to whom This is 100% not correct. Google has access to your entire search history, so it basically knows everything you do on the internet. They use this information to target ads. This is more valuable than Facebook’s information. For instance, if you’re shopping for a new car, you will probably search for information about makes and models on the internet, so Google knows you are shopping for a car. However, you are unlikely to post this information in your Facebook profile. In fact, people have expressed concerns that Google will treat search information as their own property and start selling it. Google knows more about you than you do.
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- i’m not so sure…FB already has your profile (age, gender, location, etc.) so their data is much more complete. plus they know your ‘likes’ and where you ‘check-in.’
But Google also has that stuff! For instance, if I use Google Maps in New York, 99% of the time, Google knows that I am in New York. They can guess other things with the search data. I’m pretty sure that if you take my past 100 searches and compare it to existing data, you can guess with 99% accuracy that I am male within a certain age group. Certainly, there is some information on Facebook that Google cannot see. However, overall, I am certain that internet search history provides a better understanding of consumer behavior than Facebook profiles.
I think Google is in a much better position for targeting. They have all of my emails, searches, documents, and maps. They are the gateway to the “cloud” which is where I want to store all of my information to access on various mobile devices. A big difference to me is that I never log on to Facebook looking for products or product information, whereas I constantly use Google for that. I could care less if I just moved to France and Facebook shows a bunch of French travel agencies, because I already used Google to try and identify the travel agencies I needed. I literally don’t think I have ever clicked on a Facebook ad, I just tolerate them because they are there and fairly unobtrusive. Whatever the statistics on FB vs Google time spent, I personally spend only a tiny fraction of my internet time on Facebook, just a couple of times a week. After several years, I would imagine the “wow” factor of FB will wear off for most people and it will become less central.
just cause you old timers arent on facebook or dont use it for search, doesnt mean that every other justin bieber fan won’t do it. the growth of the social search concept and this annoying ‘like’ button is yet to be unleashed. i vote FB over GOOG
the question is, assuming we agree FB is worth around $50B, will FB be able to generate $100 in profit from every single one of its members. i have had facebook since 2005 and have never clicked on an ad once, and i’m sure they don’t get paid much for just the impressions seeing as my clickthrough rate is 0%. i’ve played farmville but go to other websites for all my bejewelled-type game needs. i.e. ebaumsworld, armor games, etc. also, information in my profile is unreliable as i put in whatever the heck i want. i could be xing bo guo from mongolia if i wanted to be. that said, i’ve used google since 2000, and i bet i’ve generated at least $1000 in ad revenue from impressions and ad clicks over that time. most of the time you get tricked into an ad click, but hey, you still look at what you clicked and google still gets paid. and lest we not forget youtube, the website which consumes maybe 60-80% of my non-work internet time and is chalkful of targeted ads which i have clicked often. other issues with facebook are that i personally wouldn’t let my kids use it until they are well into their teens b/c of the exposure to swearing, sex, violence, etc that you cannot prevent. attempting to run a business off of an age group of 16-23 yr olds will be difficult in the long-run considering their needs, wants and likes change drastically from generation to generation. i remember when icq and msn were top dog. then it was facebook. now facebook is lame. but hey, i’m 25 so i’m old now right? oh and another thing, i love when financiers who never use a product attempt to value it. as if they’d have any idea about how to measure the value of a social network they know nothing about. if facebook goes public and has a valuation north of 50B, i’ll be on the short side.
i wonder why some of you remind me of timotimo, a fine AF character he was. he was going to install pop up blockers on his browsers, predicting doom to ad revenues. hence he was very bearish on GOOG, saying it will implode in a year or so. how is his reasoning any different than yours - i dont use FB, i dont click on its ads, therefore i’ll short it.
Mobius Striptease Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i wonder why some of you remind me of timotimo, a > fine AF character he was. he was going to install > pop up blockers on his browsers, predicting doom > to ad revenues. hence he was very bearish on GOOG, > saying it will implode in a year or so. how is his > reasoning any different than yours - i dont use > FB, i dont click on its ads, therefore i’ll short > it. there’s something about the frame of mind you bring to FB. its not leisure and its not work, but its somewhere in between. either way, you don’t search for non-person related information on facebook. advertising and facebook are like oil and vinegar. thats my experience as a first adopter of the program. but hey, maybe thats because i joined FB before they were even trying to make any money… all i’m saying is be wary of the notion that a long list of members automatically means you’re going to be rich. the fact that people grow out of it and the fact that people rarely search on it, or don’t in my generation, according to my friend group, except for the lamos who try to use it as a marketing medium. the fact that there is already a somewhat successful ‘unfriend’ movement shows you that FB’s loyalty lies only in 13 yo girls who shouldn’t be on it anyway. its not long until society fixes the mistakes that bad parents have made…