Comments on: Facebook $100 billion?

By: Free_Dating_Service

Free_Dating_Service — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:34:30 +0000

Wow that's alot of money!

By: Is Facebook “Translation Worthy” or Just Plain Cheap? | Global by Design

Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:28:12 +0000

[...] You can’t fault Facebook for trying to get some free translation help, and I suspect that it will find plenty of volunteer translators, though it will take time. But a part of me can’t help wondering why the company hasn’t just coughed up a few dollars to get its localization efforts moving sooner rather than later. After all, doesn’t the company have a market value of, like, $100 billion? [...]

By: A Facebook and Yahoo Partnership That Could Trouble Google at Idea Tagging

A Facebook and Yahoo Partnership That Could Trouble Google at Idea Tagging — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:47:58 +0000

[...] We all know that nothing demonstrates intent online better than search and that this is why search is the best platform for serving and generating revenue from Internet advertising. We also know that Facebook is struggling to monetize because although it knows a lot about its members, it has precious few applications or functionality that demonstrate intent. As Andrew Chen so excellently put it recently, “don’t confuse Interest with Intent… interest in a topic is different than having intent. Having “skiing” on your profile is completely different than searching for “ski tickets.” The latter means you’re ready to buy, whereas the former simply means that you sometimes buy.” Robert Scoble also made a similar point in a recent post about Facebook. [...]

By: Is Facebook Overrated? at Gomeler.com

Is Facebook Overrated? at Gomeler.com — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:24:54 +0000

[...] outright for Facebook yet he has stuck to his guns and kept Facebook private. Scoble discussed the market value of Facebook by comparing it with the rise of Google and how it has achieved it’s ~$200 billion market [...]

By: ASE

ASE — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:36:34 +0000

@ Kevin Daly:

Once you’ve got enough money for anything you could possibly want and anything you might want to do (including any non-selfish uses you may have in mind), what more do you need, unless you want to buy a country or two?

More than all the economic power (and compulsive pleasure) is a loving, brave and virtuous soul. Having a good loving heart, makes the other material things just come as an addition. Human power doesn’t fulfill us in itself, it must be part of a love story for our love-starving souls to feel satisfied.

Nevertheless, I get the point from your comment, that is perhaps a bit cartooned (or are you deeply, really serious in the “what more?” part?).

I think that perhaps the Facebook owner doesn’t sell by a direct agreement to one of few offerers, because he thinks he can make more money by taking Facebook to the public equity market, when many offerers will compete for a price to get their part of Facebook. As I stated in my previous comment, I think it’s also a matter of brand pride and identity, I guess: Facebook is no Googler or else.

By: Kevin Daly

Kevin Daly — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:24:42 +0000

I don’t think it’s rational to trade the certainty of becoming obscenely rich by selling now for the possibility of becoming even more obscenely rich later. Once you’ve got enough money for anything you could possibly want and anything you might want to do (including any non-selfish uses you may have in mind), what more do you need, unless you want to buy a country or two? That only makes sense to people like Larry Ellison who have testosterone issues.
And compulsive gamblers.
Unless of course he wants to build a secret underground island fortress with an army of killer robots (and who doesn’t?)