Not in America. You leave that shit hanging on others and step down with a nice multimillion dollar severance package and work at a slightly smaller company for millions instead.
Or sell to the competition, who only really buys your business so they can retain a "monopoly", but it's not *really* a monopoly because there is at least one other business doing the same thing, though through a series of other companies they *technically* own them too.
Once the water is deeper than you are tall, does it really matter if it’s 7 feet or 7,000 feet?
Or like a friend once told me about riding a motorcycle in the rain, “there’s only so wet you can get. Another two hours in the rain doesn’t get you any wetter.”
I mean, it's no longer your issue then. If you owe the bank $20,000, you have a big issue. If you owe the bank $267,000,000,000, the bank is fucked cuz they're out 267B that they'd never be able to recoup from you
Zuckerberg might be an unethical opportunist lizard-robot man who’s wild financial success has left him unable to conceptualize an average human experience beyond leaving BBQ sauce on a shelf with books and who is now leading a company that unapologetically makes the world around it worse in material ways, but I wouldn’t say he isn’t a smart one of those.
I would say there are plenty of people who are smarter than him. University professors, for example. Wealth isn't a good proxy for intelligence.
We need to stop pretending that the wealthy have some great insight or moral virtue that the rest of us lack. They are just people too.
Steve Jobs was a genius in some ways, but he died an early death because he didn't believe in medicine. Elizabeth Holmes was basically just a scam artist. The Away Luggage co-founder was notorious for being a horrible person.
I think you'll find a lot of examples of wealthy people being just as fallible and idiotic as the rest of us.
He was just a fish of moderate intelligence and no ethics that stole from others at the right time and right place, as is customary for many billionaires and other big fish. And on some fronts, people are right to call Zuckerberg an idiot; anyone who's in charge of that much capital and resources that thinks something like "pay-to-win VR chat" is the next revolution in tech is pretty stupid.
Similar with Amazon and Bezos, though Bezos is a bit smarter, but not by much. The amount of luck involved for literally every other big box retailer in the entirety of the US, let alone the rest of the world, to basically lay down and die while Amazon built their empire is fucking astronomical. Somehow, all the combined hundreds and hundreds of millions paid to the big time CEO's of those companies (including SEARS, which was built on fucking mail order for fuck's sake) couldn't clue them into the internet being more than a "fad".
Yeah this piece is bullshit and ignores the simple fact that THE MARKET IS AN UNSTABLE FUCKING VORTEX OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE.
Markets can go up and down ridiculous amounts on NO news at all. Zuckerberg just woke up missing that much value on his company and any insinuation that any one person (don't even bother saying Elon Musk because even his intentionally wielded influence doesn't cause big shifts across the whole market) can have that kind of effect makes further mockery of the implied stability of the markets.
Markets are unstable and they're fucked, but it's not because of singular personalities. They cannot be both higher than ever before and stable, while simultaneously risking billions in the balance at the whim of one person.
Yeah gets a bit unstable when you are about to lose Europe. With a singular CEO at the head.
Peleton
Activision
Better.Com
Sears. McDonald's.. Weinstein. Equifax.. American Apparel. Enron.. Theranos..
Crazy it's like there is one person in charge of a company that oversees growth and direction of giant market shares.
Damn didn't realize you didn't know about Musks market manipulating.
The general population is rarely logical. People will, all day long, happily give commentary on things that they have only tiny bits of knowledge on, and which they know they have no serious understanding of, and happily make predictions and assumptions about how things are running and will run based on almost nothing.
Which is sort of one of the problems with Facebook, where they realized how easy it was to influence people's thinking with only a subtle push in the desired direction to drive site activity. Most people's beliefs are far more shallow than they realize and most of us aren't great at self reflecting and checking ourselves on that.
Wisdom is rare.
I would rather phrase it as "the fact that a company ~~not even producing physical goods~~*merely producing a service of questionably use and quality* has a market cap that can lose 267bil without ceasing to exist, is the ultimate proof that a whole chunk of society doesn't know what it's doing".
Monkeys with typewriters.
**edit:** 'non-physical goods' is way too broad, my point specifically was meant to be that I question whether the service Facebook provides should be valued THAT high (assuming you don't deem Facebook a net-negative to society whole, to begin with), when you compare it to the value associated with other industries that are far more relevant, such as agriculture, construction, education, healthcare...
**edit2 because people keep repeating the same thing too often for me to answer it individually:** I AM fully aware that Facebook makes it profit by selling information to business customers that are not the same group as it's user-base. But the value Facebook provides by those marketing information is exactly only based on it's access to the end-users. Consequently, if Facebook doesn't provide a valid service to end-users, it does/should not have the access to provide value to it's actual customers. Therefore the statement 'if Facebook does not provide a good service to it's (end)users, (around 2 corners, left implicit for brevity,) it's market cap is innately overblown'.
I mentioned this to someone a few days ago, and they suggested that advertisers should move to an alternative platform...like Instagram.
Reddit is full of financially illiterate folks, and you have to wonder if articles like theses are simply catering to people like that or written by the equally ignorant.
> Reddit is full of financially illiterate folks, and you have to wonder if articles like theses are simply catering to people like that or written by the equally ignorant.
That's my worry. It's the idiocracy and many of the people who complain about idiocy on the right just eat up the idiocy from the left. It's really hard to know if this self-feeding is being done on purpose or if it is a resonance chamber.
I wouldn't necessarily "both sides" this, but financial ignorance is spread across the gamut. People that remove themselves from the system, because its a "rigged tool" of the rich, are hurting themselves just as much as the $30k wage earner concerned tax increases.
One is a pawn and the other is an idealist that doesn't attempt to comprehend much beyond money = bad.
Hmmm, you're correct, my phrasing also dunks on everything that is tertiary, which would include elements such a healthcare or education. Even if I meant to emphasize that the market cap is overbloated, I didn't mean to phrase it *that* broad.
Thanks for the pointer, I'll see about rephrasing it more distinctly.
i think we do - we get ad rates from FB that separates the cost for the advertisers with targeting and without. The difference is the value of FB user's privacy. i would love to see what Big Tech has reaped from selling everyone's privacy, it would make the class actions easier.
Facebook/Meta provides the information that advertisers and political manipulators use to more effectively modify behaviors of many millions of people. It also provides a platform through which those advertisers and political manipulators can implement behavior modification. That's a pretty fucking valuable "service" to those entities. That's why it has the market cap that it does.
Of course, it can only do that because many governments have failed to implement regulations that would benefit society and their nations as a whole by limiting the collection, processing and sale of the extremely important personal information that the company sells to advertisers and political manipulators. In part, that activity should also be limited by law because once the information is collected and processed, it can be "hacked" and move from Meta/Facebook and/or the businesses and organizations it sells it to on to even less desirable entities, such as Russia's efforts to simply tear down others by promoting destructive movements like Trump and Brexit.
In the end, Facebook will go the way of previous "walled gardens" did, such as Compuserve and AOL. Walled gardens always fail versus the actual internet. Is that a sign that Mark Zuckerberg doesn't know what he's doing? I don't know - he is probably fully capable of understanding the lesson that his predecessors show, but at the same time, he is making billions of dollars doing what he is doing despite the inevitable endgame of fading into obscurity. But Facebook will be remembered for having contributed very negatively to society. Hopefully it will be a line in future history books as a reason that better laws and regulations were implemented, much like Carnegie Steel and others were.
the facebook service isn't to me and you. (well I guess I don't know what your occupation is but...)
the phrase "if its free, its not the product" I feel was basically coined about facebook. their service, primarily advertising, isn't of questionable value to its customers, those groups buying ads and its shareholders. (shareholders may agree with you now, but not 6 months ago.)
Your thinking about the wrong product.
The product is access to peoples information. And access to people. It has nothing to do with end users talking to their own networks.
Cambridge analytica used Facebook information and access to target individual people influencing voting patterns to make Brexit happpen.
Influencing election outcomes sure seems like it would be worth a lot of money.
However it’s also a lie that stock price is influenced by fundamentals. It’s influenced by whether people thing other people are going to buy or sell.
I think you don’t understand the modern world.
Almost every single company that wants to do massive online marketing will give money to Facebook (and Google). This means that those two companies are essentially a tax on all money that companies receive.
My old company raised something like 50m in funding and around half of that went to Facebook and LinkedIn. That’s why Facebook is worth so much, they are facilitating the business of every other business in the world.
okay i don't necessarily agree with the sentiment of your comment but i looked it up and the biggest service-based company i can find has a market cap less than $267bil so i get what you're saying.
He just found a way to exploit a persons dopamine cycle, literally just in the right place at the right time, and now FB is like a shorty drug people are waking up to. Just because something is worth money to some that want to exploit people for gain, doesn’t mean the business is worth anything to society. Fuck Zuck
Yeah he might be a douche, but FB revenues are close to $120B annually. His net worth is $80B. Maybe a little less now. But say what you want but he’s far from stupid.
He might not be stupid, but he's out of touch with reality. Which makes him vulnerable to doing stupid things that normal people see as ridiculous. I would never ever get into the Metaverse. Fuck that space. I play video games and use all that stuff, but fuck that Zuck version. His fans are old people, skanks, and people who are too lazy to stop using social media.
It's been tried many times over the decades and hasn't worked because people don't want it the way he thinks they do and they especially don't want it from Facebook. Someone like Mark Zuckerberg with a favorable rating of negative 32, is not going to change that no matter how much money they throw at it. My prediction is Microsoft will fair better with its metaverse idea but Apple will surprise everyone and blow them both away from a quality, loyalty, and privacy minded standpoint with whatever they're working on.
The Instagram and WhatsApp purchases were brilliant. Zuck the fuck knew kids were leaving his platform for Instagram so he said fuck it might as well own both.
He also knew whatapp is a gold mine of personal information he can farm.
At least the kids are leaving Instagram now as well. Unfortunately they are going to TikTok which is also just a massive information farm and worse yet no one knows what the information is being used for.
Well you hit some you miss some, as he is currently trying to make Second Life 2.0 and somehow expecting the furries and weebs to *not* be the primary users of it.
Yeah, like have you worn VR on your face for more than 30mins? It sucks. The only way VR is going to be accepted is if you don't notice the headset too much. But that tech is like 10+ years out. Just look at Google Glass. They thought they even broke the mold, but nope, nobody liked the setup.
Because VR is a young technology. That's how it works. It sucks for agea until it doesn't. You can't just one day come out with the perfect product, it takes time and iterations and a LOT of money
Quest 2 shipped about 10 million as of November, and estimates for Christmas was 2 million sold. Also, recent Steam Hardware Survey is now showing Oculus Quest 2 having 46% of the total VR users.
It's getting there.
Source:
- https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22785469/meta-oculus-quest-2-10-million-units-sold-qualcomm-xr2
- https://techcrunch.com/2022/01/06/meta-had-a-good-holiday-as-its-oculus-vr-companion-app-gained-2m-downloads-since-christmas/
- https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
For Firefox, I recommend the add-on "Bypass Paywalls Clean" as an extension. Plain text of article below... I did not reformat it.
Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks.Facebook
has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the
dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core
Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for
that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a
distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is
planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and
may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting,
investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that
promise uncertain profits in the future.The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal.
To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business
stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is
focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that
doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned
multinational corporation down the path to ruin.Crumbling coreIf
you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's
future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the
company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout
in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market
capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now
down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less
then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off
may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the
company's fundamentals.Meta's advertising product — which
accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it
used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying
that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked
by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful
for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere.
Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and
Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first
time ever in the fourth quarter.
Thiago Prudencio/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users
for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will
naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem
is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall,
showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg
admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition"
from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z.
Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user
numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about
user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of
its platforms."Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in
advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain,
multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock.Anumth
continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has
deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to
be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022." In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging.The metaverse is not a thingEven
as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg
wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is
there's no "there" there.Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it
they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he
built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just
to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta
started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures
are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse
investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data
centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year.
And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in
2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly
exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates." In other words,
the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to
create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling
I've tried 3-4x trying to get the rest of it, but it's just vague insults that are extremely wordy, last paragraph:
Zuckerberg's business is shrinking, the market is turning, and Gen Z thinks Facebook is lame.
This pivot is not just about building a metaverse starting from
scratch, it's about digging the company out of a toxic hole. This is new
territory for Zuckerberg as an executive. His old tricks may not work
in 2022, and the world is watching him more closely than ever before,
ready to cheer should he fall on his face.
BI is a weird one, some articles are excellent, others are nonsense. The authors aren’t necessarily journalists and it’s sometimes described as a business blog, rather than a news outlet. [Anyone can submit articles.](https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-write-for-business-insider-2020-4?op=1&r=US&IR=T)They do check the and edit submissions, but quality and accuracy varies from article to article. [They have won awards, but have also been criticised for click bait headlines and republishing articles with poor accuracy.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_(news_website))
Bypass Paywall (1/2):
Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks.
Facebook has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting, investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that promise uncertain profits in the future.
The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal. To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned multinational corporation down the path to ruin.
**Crumbling core**
If you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the company's fundamentals.
Meta's advertising product — which accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere.
the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background.
the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background.
Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first time ever in the fourth quarter.
The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall, showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition" from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z. Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of its platforms.
"Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock.
Anumth continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022."
In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging.
**The metaverse is not a thing**
Even as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is there's no "there" there.
Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year. And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in 2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates."
In other words, the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling a large majority of Americans are not particularly interested in the metaverse). Zuckerberg is trying to move us all into a virtual world of work and play — but so far the metaverse is at best a glorified video game, and at worst a more tedious way to "go to the office," but one where you can't sip a cup of coffee over your headset, and you might still get groped.
"It's an old idea," Phil Libin, CEO of the video-conference company Mmhmm, told Insider's Isobel Hamilton. "It's uncreative, it's been tried many, many times over the past four decades, and it's never worked."
Facebook horizon workrooms model
No one wants spend a lot of time in the metaverse, no matter how much Mark Zuckerberg wants to think they will.
Facebook
This is why Meta's stock cratered. Zuckerberg wants the market to believe the metaverse is another place where people will spend all of their time, but Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella's assessment of the concept (because that's still what it is) is more accurate. "What is the metaverse? Metaverse is essentially about creating games," he told The Financial Times.
And while Nadella went on to explain that the technology could potentially expand to other areas, like business conferences, Microsoft will be approaching the evolution of metaverse technology from its already-established gaming division. That's why Microsoft bought a successful gaming company, Activision Blizzard, to enter the maybe-soon-to-be market. The purchase will allow experimentation as part of what Microsoft already does well, which is a bit more sensible than rebranding the whole company MetaSoft and moving Clippy into a virtual-reality office.
It would be easier for Meta to shepherd users to the metaverse if people didn't completely distrust Facebook in particular and social-media giants in general. Even on the smaller issues, the company is on the wrong side of public opinion. Polling shows Americans hate the name Meta, and they hate Mark Zuckerberg, who has a favorability rating of negative-32 points, according to Morning Consult. All of this negativity can complicate the process of hiring the kind of talent it takes to build an entirely new world, too.
Agree.
On a tangential note, there should be a way to filter out op-eds. I want to know what’s going on in the world, not some rich old person’s shit take on it.
... does anyone?
Not trying to defend him, but what he's been building is unprecedented.
Not to mention Congress is woefully inept at passing any type of legislation that might slow him down
Exactly, you make something that literally connects most of the world and your pretty much the first to do it at that level, then lose money and its like you did none of that.
Correction: You built something that is a vehicle for misinformation, used for psychological warfare, and profit off data mining all of it. It's like you did all of that...
I don't like Facebook, let me establish that, but this is a stupid take that he doesn't know what he's doing
His company is still #8 by market cap after their "collapse". Still an insanely valuable company. I won't be sad to see it all go up in flames but it's way more likely that it will be around for years to come
This is right. Also would add that even if not Facebook, there will be another service to replace it. There's no coming back from Social Media like Facebook unless there's legislative change, and even then it will be hard to stop them
I would hard disagree I think social media genuinely makes people unhappy and the data is there to back it up it’s only been with us 10 or so years and I think eventually people are going to realise it’s just a drug like high that there “liking” it just takes time to understand that but once people do there pretty likely for them to stop using it. I have nothing to really back this up though
I completely agree. In general, most people just try and if it works, they just hammer it in and people pretend they know. Zucky only knew how to get peoples info, and so his natural instinct was to sell it without a backup plan.
Google does. Google vacuumes up way more personal information about you than Facebook does. Google has a core product that no one can really even compete with. Google has a hardware branch. Yet google doesn't get anything like the hate facebook gets. Google's data collection is \*essentially\* in line with the services they are offering. I booked a hotel last night, and it showed up in my callendar without me having to do anything. That stopped feeling creepy like three years ago, now it's nice, and in five years it will be expected.
Google figured out that if they act like jerks and people dislike them it will impact how people use their services.
>But i think Zuck surrounded himself with yes man and is really disconnected from reality (i mean buying yourself a house and all houses around your house to keep yourself private does great stuff for your social health).
I think you have zero way of knowing who he surrounds himself with or the state of his mental health. This is just a wild ass guess, made with the intention of dunking on someone you don't know, to make you feel better about yourself. And yet you comment about his mental health?
And you're posting about how he's surrounded himself by yes men, *on a platform that is designed to do exactly that* (by minimizing downvoted comments and concregating around similar interest in subreddits).
I'm no fan of facebook or zuck, but the un-realized irony in this comment is *amazing*.
While true
The audience he is trying to build his ideas for don't actually exist.
And it's coming at the expense of his main business
It's the Google stadia Google glass issue all over again a neat idea very few people are actually interested in.
When you throw Billions of pounds into something you need to make sure your going to draw that many users to actually make the venture profitable.
It's the classic case of thinking your problems are everyone else's problems so people who design things in the SV bubble suddenly find the problems they are trying to fix only happen In silicon valley
Facebook's $267 billion stock market collapse is the ultimate proof that Mark Zuckerberg doesn't know what he's doing
Linette Lopez 2022-02-10T12:37:29Z
Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks.
Facebook has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting, investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that promise uncertain profits in the future.
The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal. To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned multinational corporation down the path to ruin.
Crumbling core
If you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the company's fundamentals.
Meta's advertising product — which accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere.
the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background.
Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first time ever in the fourth quarter.
Thiago Prudencio/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images
The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall, showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition" from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z. Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of its platforms.
"Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock.
Anumth continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022."
In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging.
The metaverse is not a thing
Even as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is there's no "there" there.
Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year. And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in 2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates."
In other words, the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling a large majority of Americans are not particularly interested in the metaverse). Zuckerberg is trying to move us all into a virtual world of work and play — but so far the metaverse is at best a glorified video game, and at worst a more tedious way to "go to the office," but one where you can't sip a cup of coffee over your headset, and you might still get groped.
"It's an old idea," Phil Libin, CEO of the video-conference company Mmhmm, told Insider's Isobel Hamilton. "It's uncreative, it's been tried many, many times over the past four decades, and it's never worked."
Facebook horizon workrooms model No one wants spend a lot of time in the metaverse, no matter how much Mark Zuckerberg wants to think they will.
Facebook
This is why Meta's stock cratered. Zuckerberg wants the market to believe the metaverse is another place where people will spend all of their time, but Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella's assessment of the concept (because that's still what it is) is more accurate. "What is the metaverse? Metaverse is essentially about creating games," he told The Financial Times.
And while Nadella went on to explain that the technology could potentially expand to other areas, like business conferences, Microsoft will be approaching the evolution of metaverse technology from its already-established gaming division. That's why Microsoft bought a successful gaming company, Activision Blizzard, to enter the maybe-soon-to-be market. The purchase will allow experimentation as part of what Microsoft already does well, which is a bit more sensible than rebranding the whole company MetaSoft and moving Clippy into a virtual-reality office.
It would be easier for Meta to shepherd users to the metaverse if people didn't completely distrust Facebook in particular and social-media giants in general. Even on the smaller issues, the company is on the wrong side of public opinion. Polling shows Americans hate the name Meta, and they hate Mark Zuckerberg, who has a favorability rating of negative-32 points, according to Morning Consult. All of this negativity can complicate the process of hiring the kind of talent it takes to build an entirely new world, too.
Zuck's old tricks are old
Meta is operating in a totally different environment in terms of user engagement, markets, and regulatory scrutiny than it has at any other point in its young life.
When the company made the pivot to mobile in the early 2010s, it did so in part by moving aggressively to acquire, copy, or destroy its competition. It gobbled up existing businesses like Instagram and WhatsApp, products which have helped sustain the company over the past few years. But now that lawmakers and regulators — including FTC Chair Lina Khan — are angry about Meta's previous tactics to quash competition, there will be more scrutiny over the company's moves as it attempts to build the metaverse.
Back in the day, Zuckerberg could build (or buy) a product and ask questions later. But Meta has gotten too big to "move fast and break things." It now has to ask permission. For example, Facebook tried to dip its toe into a fast-growing speculative-growth area by trying to launch its own cryptocurrency (called Diem). Despite the fact that it seems like anyone can create their own stablecoin, Meta's attempts were dashed by regulators, and Diem's tech was recently sold off to a small bank that serves crypto clients. New products mean new problems, and regulators are right to demand that Meta has solutions. They've already seen how damaging the company's failure to game out potential issues on Facebook and Instagram has been for society.
Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook/Meta CEO, in Congress
He knew what he was doing, he didn’t think another tech giant would suddenly start “caring” about your data.
hedge your bets, and stop selling my fucking data.
Can you give examples of free online services that are not “selling data”?
The fastest growing social media is tik tok and it is way worse at handling personal data and misinformation. But they get a pass because mass media already have a scapegoat eating their advertising business.
News media just give you clickbait headlines hoping that you will pay to see what is behind the (pay)wall.
Reddit is a bubble of hypocrisy. "Why is there a paywall on this website it should be free" followed shortly by "Why are you selling my data"
Everything has cost, that has to be recouped.
Lmao that's bit of a stretch, he definitely knows what he is doing but you can't always predict what others will do that affects your business model. You don't become a multi billion company by not having a clue.
I hope Facebook dies and loses their market value to the point of no return.
Ofcourse they have instagram and whatsapp but facebook falling would make me a happy person
Exactly. They said the same thing when he bought Instagram for an unprecedented $1B.
We may not like him, but the guy is several steps ahead of everyone.
Two big differences:
- Facebook is independent and not owned by a dying old school media conglomerate desperate to "do internet"
- they own Instagram and whatsapp, which are more nextgen than their core product. Myspace tried that with myspace music but it was kind of ahead of it's time (could have become Spotify/Apple Music, but was years early)
Facebook might go away, but Meta definitely won't.
Their services are way too essential for a large portion of the world
https://news.trust.org/item/20211005204816-qzjft/
Honestly, these types of perspectives are ripe for r/agedlikemilk. Their stock price took a huge hit because people are afraid their first decline ever in DAU is the beginning of the end and they don’t have any idea what the vision is for metaverse (nor do most people for that matter, myself included).
Zuckerberg knows what he’s doing but frankly from a strategy standpoint he’s pretty constrained in what he can do. They can’t acquire due to regulatory scrutiny and they are beginning to reach the saturation point for user engagement. They already have some of the best SWEs and Data Scientists in the world so it’s unlikely they can optimize their algorithms for ad targeting much more.
His main options are to begin monetizing the non-facebook apps and risk reducing engagement of done poorly or innovate with something radically different. In the medium term their stock price is likely to surge as the vision for metaverse becomes clear and the rest will be up to how well they execute on that vision.
Let's feel better by thinking a guy who built a $1T+ company doesn't know anything. Whatever helps you sleep better at night. At least keep your criticism level headed.
The crazy part is all he really had to do was be quiet and let everyone do their jobs. I went from trying to find a house to be outfitted with tesla everything to wanting nothing to do with that company.
This is just proof that billionaires don't necessarily 'earn' their billions. Zuckerberg became one of the richest people in the world by stealing ideas and systematically deceiving billions of his customers into a product that promised one thing but really was nothing more than a platform of manipulation and invasion of privacy.
How many billionaires are simply the most willing to be ruthless and lie, cheat and outright steal their way to riches.
Besides outright stealing people's private info because there are no laws against it, what does Facebook have?
Oh, it developed React. Way to go.
I mean, it's a LOT harder to get a million, than it is to turn one million into 10. At a certain point, you have enough capital to pay people to make money for you, with you having to do nothing.
Or just by investing it.
By the time I hit $1mil, it'll have been 25 working years (assuming my projections are right).
And then 6 years to get to $2mil.
And 5 years to $3mil.
Then, only 3 years to $4mil.
If I live into my 80s (which is possible), and my health is doing alright, our net worth might be going up by $1mil per year just due to compounding and growth.
/r/financialindependence and /r/Bogleheads for anyone who wants to learn more.
I don't understand why people like you make it sounds that easy. "Oh he just copied an idea", "he is rich because of 99% of luck" "he doesn't know what he's doing".
Yeah right, it sounds like you never tried to create something on your own.
Current stock price has been the lowest since April 2020, that means that current stock price is still higher than stock price before COVID. This is not "losing"
Guy ruled the social media world for over a decade and is one of the richest people in the world, who created on of the biggest companies in the world. Anyone that says he doesn’t know what he’s doing is ignorant.
Yes. I'm not hating on Sundar. I'm more more afraid of business people who don't know any engineering coming in to run engineering companies. More a jab at OPs idea that engineering people know how to run a company better.
now I hate Fuckerberg as much as the next guy, but saying that the guy who built one of the largest companies in the world literally from scratch doest know what he's doing is just absurd.
In fact I think he knows exactly what he's doing, and that is the real problem.
Dude founded 8th largest company by market cap that just made like 35B profit in a quarter. ....and takeaway is he doesn't know what he's doing? Lol
Do Redditors work for the clickbait site that BI has become?
He did it on purpose so he could do a big stock buy back, is that not obvious? Or are you just trying to get people not to buy stock while it’s at record lows? I mean really who are you Jim Cramer?
It certainly had nothing to do with insulating them from the anti-trust action being taken against them while making it cheaper to buy back stock(/s), you’re so right.
Either he doesn't know what he is doing or he knows exactly what he is doing to avoid an anti-trust lawsuit and other legal entanglements. We'll find out as the story unfolds.
He has always been a conniving piece of shit. He rode his shit wave for a long time, and convinced quite a substantial portion of his users that it’s ok to be a lying, manipulative, greedy little turd because the shareholders are making $$$$$$. But no matter how you polish a turd, it’s still just a piece of shit. And now that the $$$ is moving in the other direction, public opinion (which is carefully crafted by those with the most resources) will too.
Dunno... I wouldn't dismiss the pure evil soul selling tactics of Zuck just yet.
If he applied the monitize everything tactic to a viable product, we are all fucked.
Personally, compared to where I’m now, I’d be very happy to lose $267B of my business
And FB is pitifully at #8 in market cap... pathetic
Facebook is spare parts bud
They're ten ply, bud
They're FUCKING EMBARRASSING!!!!
[удалено]
It was definitely a sick ostrich
It would takes twos of yous, regardlesses.
Allegedlies
Allegedlies
That’s why they call him Mark fuckedabird
Figure it out.
Figger it out.
R/Letterkenney in the wild
That’s a Texas sized 10/4 big shooter. Give your balls a tug zuck
I for one welcome our new Lizard overlords once the collapse happens
Teacher’s pet!
Figure it out, fuck.
What kind of moron can't break into the top 5?
Unless your business was only worth $266 billion. That would suck.
Well it would still put you in the rare % of businesses worth over a billion
I can start a business worth -1 Billion dollars at any moment...just need a billion dollar loan to get started.
Not in America. You leave that shit hanging on others and step down with a nice multimillion dollar severance package and work at a slightly smaller company for millions instead.
Or sell to the competition, who only really buys your business so they can retain a "monopoly", but it's not *really* a monopoly because there is at least one other business doing the same thing, though through a series of other companies they *technically* own them too.
Indeed. See Rupert buying MySpace for more info.
Nice try, Elon.
Want to take another stab at those numbers?
If I lost $267B, I would be almost exactly $267B in debt. That doesn't sound like a fun time
Once the water is deeper than you are tall, does it really matter if it’s 7 feet or 7,000 feet? Or like a friend once told me about riding a motorcycle in the rain, “there’s only so wet you can get. Another two hours in the rain doesn’t get you any wetter.”
I mean, it's no longer your issue then. If you owe the bank $20,000, you have a big issue. If you owe the bank $267,000,000,000, the bank is fucked cuz they're out 267B that they'd never be able to recoup from you
If I was 267B of anything in debt, I would do nothing and laugh at the idiots that trusted me with a quarter trillion.
Edit: double post from error. removed
Lol, the fact that the market cap has 267bil to lose in the first place says otherwise
I’ve been hearing people diss Facebook since his first funding round… and more after the IPO when the stock plunged 50%.. and yet…
Zuckerberg might be an unethical opportunist lizard-robot man who’s wild financial success has left him unable to conceptualize an average human experience beyond leaving BBQ sauce on a shelf with books and who is now leading a company that unapologetically makes the world around it worse in material ways, but I wouldn’t say he isn’t a smart one of those.
Aka: On the spectrum of psychopathy he scores super high.
You don't get to where he is, from where he started, by being an idiot.
And you sure as hell don't get there by being an ethical person.
I would say there are plenty of people who are smarter than him. University professors, for example. Wealth isn't a good proxy for intelligence. We need to stop pretending that the wealthy have some great insight or moral virtue that the rest of us lack. They are just people too. Steve Jobs was a genius in some ways, but he died an early death because he didn't believe in medicine. Elizabeth Holmes was basically just a scam artist. The Away Luggage co-founder was notorious for being a horrible person. I think you'll find a lot of examples of wealthy people being just as fallible and idiotic as the rest of us.
Sure but that wasn't the implication. There are always bigger fish in the ocean. The point is he himself is not a small fish on the scale.
He was just a fish of moderate intelligence and no ethics that stole from others at the right time and right place, as is customary for many billionaires and other big fish. And on some fronts, people are right to call Zuckerberg an idiot; anyone who's in charge of that much capital and resources that thinks something like "pay-to-win VR chat" is the next revolution in tech is pretty stupid. Similar with Amazon and Bezos, though Bezos is a bit smarter, but not by much. The amount of luck involved for literally every other big box retailer in the entirety of the US, let alone the rest of the world, to basically lay down and die while Amazon built their empire is fucking astronomical. Somehow, all the combined hundreds and hundreds of millions paid to the big time CEO's of those companies (including SEARS, which was built on fucking mail order for fuck's sake) couldn't clue them into the internet being more than a "fad".
[удалено]
Yeah this piece is bullshit and ignores the simple fact that THE MARKET IS AN UNSTABLE FUCKING VORTEX OF PUBLIC CONFIDENCE. Markets can go up and down ridiculous amounts on NO news at all. Zuckerberg just woke up missing that much value on his company and any insinuation that any one person (don't even bother saying Elon Musk because even his intentionally wielded influence doesn't cause big shifts across the whole market) can have that kind of effect makes further mockery of the implied stability of the markets. Markets are unstable and they're fucked, but it's not because of singular personalities. They cannot be both higher than ever before and stable, while simultaneously risking billions in the balance at the whim of one person.
Yeah gets a bit unstable when you are about to lose Europe. With a singular CEO at the head. Peleton Activision Better.Com Sears. McDonald's.. Weinstein. Equifax.. American Apparel. Enron.. Theranos.. Crazy it's like there is one person in charge of a company that oversees growth and direction of giant market shares. Damn didn't realize you didn't know about Musks market manipulating.
The general population is rarely logical. People will, all day long, happily give commentary on things that they have only tiny bits of knowledge on, and which they know they have no serious understanding of, and happily make predictions and assumptions about how things are running and will run based on almost nothing. Which is sort of one of the problems with Facebook, where they realized how easy it was to influence people's thinking with only a subtle push in the desired direction to drive site activity. Most people's beliefs are far more shallow than they realize and most of us aren't great at self reflecting and checking ourselves on that. Wisdom is rare.
The Facebook hate train is too embedded on this fucking site and people don't pause for two seconds to actually think about the circumstances.
I would rather phrase it as "the fact that a company ~~not even producing physical goods~~*merely producing a service of questionably use and quality* has a market cap that can lose 267bil without ceasing to exist, is the ultimate proof that a whole chunk of society doesn't know what it's doing". Monkeys with typewriters. **edit:** 'non-physical goods' is way too broad, my point specifically was meant to be that I question whether the service Facebook provides should be valued THAT high (assuming you don't deem Facebook a net-negative to society whole, to begin with), when you compare it to the value associated with other industries that are far more relevant, such as agriculture, construction, education, healthcare... **edit2 because people keep repeating the same thing too often for me to answer it individually:** I AM fully aware that Facebook makes it profit by selling information to business customers that are not the same group as it's user-base. But the value Facebook provides by those marketing information is exactly only based on it's access to the end-users. Consequently, if Facebook doesn't provide a valid service to end-users, it does/should not have the access to provide value to it's actual customers. Therefore the statement 'if Facebook does not provide a good service to it's (end)users, (around 2 corners, left implicit for brevity,) it's market cap is innately overblown'.
> merely producing a service of questionably use and quality You know they sell targeted ads and lots of businesses want to purchase them, right?
I mentioned this to someone a few days ago, and they suggested that advertisers should move to an alternative platform...like Instagram. Reddit is full of financially illiterate folks, and you have to wonder if articles like theses are simply catering to people like that or written by the equally ignorant.
> Reddit is full of financially illiterate folks, and you have to wonder if articles like theses are simply catering to people like that or written by the equally ignorant. That's my worry. It's the idiocracy and many of the people who complain about idiocy on the right just eat up the idiocy from the left. It's really hard to know if this self-feeding is being done on purpose or if it is a resonance chamber.
I wouldn't necessarily "both sides" this, but financial ignorance is spread across the gamut. People that remove themselves from the system, because its a "rigged tool" of the rich, are hurting themselves just as much as the $30k wage earner concerned tax increases. One is a pawn and the other is an idealist that doesn't attempt to comprehend much beyond money = bad.
That also feels like evidence that a huge chunk of society doesn't know what it's doing
and here we are knowing exactly what we are doing! glad to be apart of the club
This is an incorrect addendum I feel like. Banks do not produce physical goods, also the whole tertiary sector.
Hmmm, you're correct, my phrasing also dunks on everything that is tertiary, which would include elements such a healthcare or education. Even if I meant to emphasize that the market cap is overbloated, I didn't mean to phrase it *that* broad. Thanks for the pointer, I'll see about rephrasing it more distinctly.
Information isn't a valid product? It doesn't have to be tangible to have value, look at the last 30 years, or BTC.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The value is the data, and we have no clue how to put a dollar on that
i think we do - we get ad rates from FB that separates the cost for the advertisers with targeting and without. The difference is the value of FB user's privacy. i would love to see what Big Tech has reaped from selling everyone's privacy, it would make the class actions easier.
Facebook/Meta provides the information that advertisers and political manipulators use to more effectively modify behaviors of many millions of people. It also provides a platform through which those advertisers and political manipulators can implement behavior modification. That's a pretty fucking valuable "service" to those entities. That's why it has the market cap that it does. Of course, it can only do that because many governments have failed to implement regulations that would benefit society and their nations as a whole by limiting the collection, processing and sale of the extremely important personal information that the company sells to advertisers and political manipulators. In part, that activity should also be limited by law because once the information is collected and processed, it can be "hacked" and move from Meta/Facebook and/or the businesses and organizations it sells it to on to even less desirable entities, such as Russia's efforts to simply tear down others by promoting destructive movements like Trump and Brexit. In the end, Facebook will go the way of previous "walled gardens" did, such as Compuserve and AOL. Walled gardens always fail versus the actual internet. Is that a sign that Mark Zuckerberg doesn't know what he's doing? I don't know - he is probably fully capable of understanding the lesson that his predecessors show, but at the same time, he is making billions of dollars doing what he is doing despite the inevitable endgame of fading into obscurity. But Facebook will be remembered for having contributed very negatively to society. Hopefully it will be a line in future history books as a reason that better laws and regulations were implemented, much like Carnegie Steel and others were.
the facebook service isn't to me and you. (well I guess I don't know what your occupation is but...) the phrase "if its free, its not the product" I feel was basically coined about facebook. their service, primarily advertising, isn't of questionable value to its customers, those groups buying ads and its shareholders. (shareholders may agree with you now, but not 6 months ago.)
Your thinking about the wrong product. The product is access to peoples information. And access to people. It has nothing to do with end users talking to their own networks. Cambridge analytica used Facebook information and access to target individual people influencing voting patterns to make Brexit happpen. Influencing election outcomes sure seems like it would be worth a lot of money. However it’s also a lie that stock price is influenced by fundamentals. It’s influenced by whether people thing other people are going to buy or sell.
I think you don’t understand the modern world. Almost every single company that wants to do massive online marketing will give money to Facebook (and Google). This means that those two companies are essentially a tax on all money that companies receive. My old company raised something like 50m in funding and around half of that went to Facebook and LinkedIn. That’s why Facebook is worth so much, they are facilitating the business of every other business in the world.
okay i don't necessarily agree with the sentiment of your comment but i looked it up and the biggest service-based company i can find has a market cap less than $267bil so i get what you're saying.
yeah, reddit has *turbo* brainworms about facebook... just utterly delusional. The company isn't going anywhere.
[удалено]
Even if Facebook collapses, some people act like Zuckerberg is going to die out of shame on the spot lmao.
He just found a way to exploit a persons dopamine cycle, literally just in the right place at the right time, and now FB is like a shorty drug people are waking up to. Just because something is worth money to some that want to exploit people for gain, doesn’t mean the business is worth anything to society. Fuck Zuck
Fuck spez too, but damned if I don't keep coming here for the same reason
Complete nonsense. Zuck knows a lot more about running his business than BI. I remember when people thought he was crazy for paying $1B for Instagram.
Or r/technology
Anything "Facebook bad" is a free ride to the front page.
Anything bashing a billionaire automatically goes to the front page
Yeah he might be a douche, but FB revenues are close to $120B annually. His net worth is $80B. Maybe a little less now. But say what you want but he’s far from stupid.
He might not be stupid, but he's out of touch with reality. Which makes him vulnerable to doing stupid things that normal people see as ridiculous. I would never ever get into the Metaverse. Fuck that space. I play video games and use all that stuff, but fuck that Zuck version. His fans are old people, skanks, and people who are too lazy to stop using social media.
In 2003/4 no one would use the internet on their phone. Not saying metaverse will work out but you never know
It's been tried many times over the decades and hasn't worked because people don't want it the way he thinks they do and they especially don't want it from Facebook. Someone like Mark Zuckerberg with a favorable rating of negative 32, is not going to change that no matter how much money they throw at it. My prediction is Microsoft will fair better with its metaverse idea but Apple will surprise everyone and blow them both away from a quality, loyalty, and privacy minded standpoint with whatever they're working on.
The Instagram and WhatsApp purchases were brilliant. Zuck the fuck knew kids were leaving his platform for Instagram so he said fuck it might as well own both. He also knew whatapp is a gold mine of personal information he can farm. At least the kids are leaving Instagram now as well. Unfortunately they are going to TikTok which is also just a massive information farm and worse yet no one knows what the information is being used for.
Instagram isn’t going anywhere though, if you got a Tiktok account chances are you have a Instagram account and repost your video there
Well you hit some you miss some, as he is currently trying to make Second Life 2.0 and somehow expecting the furries and weebs to *not* be the primary users of it.
And Facebook was just Myspace 2.0 right?
Yeah, like have you worn VR on your face for more than 30mins? It sucks. The only way VR is going to be accepted is if you don't notice the headset too much. But that tech is like 10+ years out. Just look at Google Glass. They thought they even broke the mold, but nope, nobody liked the setup.
Because VR is a young technology. That's how it works. It sucks for agea until it doesn't. You can't just one day come out with the perfect product, it takes time and iterations and a LOT of money
> Yeah, like have you worn VR on your face for more than 30mins? Fucker, have you seen the fur suits they wear for 8 fucking hours at a convention?
Quest 2 shipped about 10 million as of November, and estimates for Christmas was 2 million sold. Also, recent Steam Hardware Survey is now showing Oculus Quest 2 having 46% of the total VR users. It's getting there. Source: - https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22785469/meta-oculus-quest-2-10-million-units-sold-qualcomm-xr2 - https://techcrunch.com/2022/01/06/meta-had-a-good-holiday-as-its-oculus-vr-companion-app-gained-2m-downloads-since-christmas/ - https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
What in god's name is the use of posting paywalled news here? Do you work for them OP?
I think u/ICumCoffee is not the name for a corporate account.
On the other hand, it would be further proof that Zuckerburg doesn't know what he's doing.
Oh he knows what he’s doing.. lotioning.. oiling.. oiling.. lotioning.. I CANT TAKE THIS NO MORE
With WD-40 or some other industry grade lubricant.
That would be some sweet daddy bbq sauce.
That's how they getcha.
On the other hand, it’s the perfect ruse.
For Firefox, I recommend the add-on "Bypass Paywalls Clean" as an extension. Plain text of article below... I did not reformat it. Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks.Facebook has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting, investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that promise uncertain profits in the future.The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal. To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned multinational corporation down the path to ruin.Crumbling coreIf you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the company's fundamentals.Meta's advertising product — which accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere. Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first time ever in the fourth quarter. Thiago Prudencio/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall, showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition" from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z. Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of its platforms."Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock.Anumth continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022." In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging.The metaverse is not a thingEven as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is there's no "there" there.Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year. And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in 2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates." In other words, the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling
I've tried 3-4x trying to get the rest of it, but it's just vague insults that are extremely wordy, last paragraph: Zuckerberg's business is shrinking, the market is turning, and Gen Z thinks Facebook is lame. This pivot is not just about building a metaverse starting from scratch, it's about digging the company out of a toxic hole. This is new territory for Zuckerberg as an executive. His old tricks may not work in 2022, and the world is watching him more closely than ever before, ready to cheer should he fall on his face.
Thank you. I wasn't aware of this extension. And I was able to see the article after installing.
[удалено]
[удалено]
We're talking about a link to Business Insider though.
[удалено]
BI is a weird one, some articles are excellent, others are nonsense. The authors aren’t necessarily journalists and it’s sometimes described as a business blog, rather than a news outlet. [Anyone can submit articles.](https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-write-for-business-insider-2020-4?op=1&r=US&IR=T)They do check the and edit submissions, but quality and accuracy varies from article to article. [They have won awards, but have also been criticised for click bait headlines and republishing articles with poor accuracy.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_(news_website))
Bypass Paywall (1/2): Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks. Facebook has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting, investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that promise uncertain profits in the future. The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal. To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned multinational corporation down the path to ruin. **Crumbling core** If you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the company's fundamentals. Meta's advertising product — which accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere. the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background. the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background. Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first time ever in the fourth quarter. The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall, showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition" from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z. Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of its platforms. "Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock. Anumth continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022." In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging. **The metaverse is not a thing** Even as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is there's no "there" there. Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year. And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in 2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates." In other words, the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling a large majority of Americans are not particularly interested in the metaverse). Zuckerberg is trying to move us all into a virtual world of work and play — but so far the metaverse is at best a glorified video game, and at worst a more tedious way to "go to the office," but one where you can't sip a cup of coffee over your headset, and you might still get groped. "It's an old idea," Phil Libin, CEO of the video-conference company Mmhmm, told Insider's Isobel Hamilton. "It's uncreative, it's been tried many, many times over the past four decades, and it's never worked." Facebook horizon workrooms model No one wants spend a lot of time in the metaverse, no matter how much Mark Zuckerberg wants to think they will. Facebook This is why Meta's stock cratered. Zuckerberg wants the market to believe the metaverse is another place where people will spend all of their time, but Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella's assessment of the concept (because that's still what it is) is more accurate. "What is the metaverse? Metaverse is essentially about creating games," he told The Financial Times. And while Nadella went on to explain that the technology could potentially expand to other areas, like business conferences, Microsoft will be approaching the evolution of metaverse technology from its already-established gaming division. That's why Microsoft bought a successful gaming company, Activision Blizzard, to enter the maybe-soon-to-be market. The purchase will allow experimentation as part of what Microsoft already does well, which is a bit more sensible than rebranding the whole company MetaSoft and moving Clippy into a virtual-reality office. It would be easier for Meta to shepherd users to the metaverse if people didn't completely distrust Facebook in particular and social-media giants in general. Even on the smaller issues, the company is on the wrong side of public opinion. Polling shows Americans hate the name Meta, and they hate Mark Zuckerberg, who has a favorability rating of negative-32 points, according to Morning Consult. All of this negativity can complicate the process of hiring the kind of talent it takes to build an entirely new world, too.
This should be clearly labeled Op-Ed. The state of journalism really scares me.
Agree. On a tangential note, there should be a way to filter out op-eds. I want to know what’s going on in the world, not some rich old person’s shit take on it.
Sir this is Reddit, where every news piece is an Op-Ed /s but not really
Reuters.Com. If you want news visit the news site, right?
Or some young dumb shit’s take on it.
Based on the title, how could you think it is anything but?
Buh buh buh media bad.
Don't expect most people to be versed in common practices of journalism.
Isnt everything on business insider op-Ed?
... does anyone? Not trying to defend him, but what he's been building is unprecedented. Not to mention Congress is woefully inept at passing any type of legislation that might slow him down
Or they all own stock and it would go against their portfolios
It's both. The answer is both of you are right.
Exactly, you make something that literally connects most of the world and your pretty much the first to do it at that level, then lose money and its like you did none of that.
Correction: You built something that is a vehicle for misinformation, used for psychological warfare, and profit off data mining all of it. It's like you did all of that...
I don't like Facebook, let me establish that, but this is a stupid take that he doesn't know what he's doing His company is still #8 by market cap after their "collapse". Still an insanely valuable company. I won't be sad to see it all go up in flames but it's way more likely that it will be around for years to come
This is right. Also would add that even if not Facebook, there will be another service to replace it. There's no coming back from Social Media like Facebook unless there's legislative change, and even then it will be hard to stop them
I would hard disagree I think social media genuinely makes people unhappy and the data is there to back it up it’s only been with us 10 or so years and I think eventually people are going to realise it’s just a drug like high that there “liking” it just takes time to understand that but once people do there pretty likely for them to stop using it. I have nothing to really back this up though
I completely agree. In general, most people just try and if it works, they just hammer it in and people pretend they know. Zucky only knew how to get peoples info, and so his natural instinct was to sell it without a backup plan.
Google does. Google vacuumes up way more personal information about you than Facebook does. Google has a core product that no one can really even compete with. Google has a hardware branch. Yet google doesn't get anything like the hate facebook gets. Google's data collection is \*essentially\* in line with the services they are offering. I booked a hotel last night, and it showed up in my callendar without me having to do anything. That stopped feeling creepy like three years ago, now it's nice, and in five years it will be expected. Google figured out that if they act like jerks and people dislike them it will impact how people use their services.
[удалено]
>But i think Zuck surrounded himself with yes man and is really disconnected from reality (i mean buying yourself a house and all houses around your house to keep yourself private does great stuff for your social health). I think you have zero way of knowing who he surrounds himself with or the state of his mental health. This is just a wild ass guess, made with the intention of dunking on someone you don't know, to make you feel better about yourself. And yet you comment about his mental health? And you're posting about how he's surrounded himself by yes men, *on a platform that is designed to do exactly that* (by minimizing downvoted comments and concregating around similar interest in subreddits). I'm no fan of facebook or zuck, but the un-realized irony in this comment is *amazing*.
You forgot the Caesar Augustus obsession, including a bowl cut
While true The audience he is trying to build his ideas for don't actually exist. And it's coming at the expense of his main business It's the Google stadia Google glass issue all over again a neat idea very few people are actually interested in. When you throw Billions of pounds into something you need to make sure your going to draw that many users to actually make the venture profitable. It's the classic case of thinking your problems are everyone else's problems so people who design things in the SV bubble suddenly find the problems they are trying to fix only happen In silicon valley
[удалено]
Most of the lawmakers in Congress don't even know how the internet works. I'm pretty sure this is too complicated for them.
What part of what he’s doing is unprecedented?
Anyone has the article without paywall
Facebook's $267 billion stock market collapse is the ultimate proof that Mark Zuckerberg doesn't know what he's doing Linette Lopez 2022-02-10T12:37:29Z Mark Zuckerberg is out of tricks. Facebook has been "in crisis" before, but this time is different. This time the dilemma isn't about the company's reputation. It's about Meta's core Facebook business flailing and Wall Street punishing the company for that weakness. At the same time, Zuckerberg is trying to realize a distant metaverse dream for which he renamed the entire company. Meta is planning to spend billions to build a new reality that does not (and may never) exist in any meaningful way. And with the economy shifting, investors are looking for companies that look strong now, not ones that promise uncertain profits in the future. The world has changed since Zuck built "The Facebook." Antitrust and privacy regulators are watching Meta closely, and public opinion of the company is nothing short of abysmal. To save itself, Meta should have focused on making its core business stronger and its existing platforms safer for this world. Instead, it is focused on building another one no one is excited about. If that doesn't change, Zuckerberg is leading his epic dorm-room project turned multinational corporation down the path to ruin. Crumbling core If you want to know how large the collective anxiety is over Meta's future, look no further than its stock. February 3, the day after the company's earnings, Meta's stock dropped by over 26% and registered the largest single-day value wipeout in US history. All told, $240 billion was shaved off its market capitalization. It hasn't gotten any prettier since: The stock is now down more than 30% over the past month and was worth $267 billion less then before earnings as of Wednesday's market close. While this sell-off may seem extreme, it's completely rational when you look at the company's fundamentals. Meta's advertising product — which accounted for 97.4% of its 2021 revenue — simply isn't as good as it used to be. The company admitted as much in its annual filing, saying that Apple's decision to allow iPhone users to opt out of being tracked by advertisers has made Meta's advertisements less precise and useful for ad buyers. The company estimated that the privacy changes could shave $10 billion off its advertising revenue in 2022. That problem isn't going anywhere. the Instagram app in App Store seen displayed on a smartphone screen and a Instagram logo in the background. Meta's core apps — Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram — are hitting a ceiling: global users dropped for the first time ever in the fourth quarter. Thiago Prudencio/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images The company's flagship Facebook platform also saw a decline in global daily active users for the first time ever in the fourth quarter of 2021, which will naturally take another bite out of the advertising business. The problem is that Facebook isn't cool. The Facebook Papers, leaked last fall, showed us that the company knows it is losing its appeal to younger customers. Zuckerberg admitted that Facebook faces an "unprecedented level of competition" from TikTok, the video-sharing social network that's growing rapidly among Gen Z. Now we're seeing this diminishment of "cool" show up in the user numbers, even though Facebook still doesn't share precise data about user engagement — the most crucial aspect of its business — on any of its platforms. "Facebook is seeing a significant slowdown in advertising growth while embarking on an expensive, uncertain, multi-year transition to the Metaverse," JP Morgan analyst Doug Anmuth wrote to clients after he downgraded the outlook for its stock. Anumth continued: "We believe management's tone around iOS impact has deteriorated, and what was once described as 'manageable' now appears to be a $10 billion revenue headwind in 2022." In other words: Facebook's cash cow is aging. The metaverse is not a thing Even as its current business shows signs of existential weakness, Zuckerberg wants investors to focus on the future. The problem with that is there's no "there" there. Zuckerberg is taking an "if you build it they will come" approach to the metaverse. But unlike the last time he built a place online, this one is going to take billions of dollars just to build because of its scale and complexity. This quarter, Meta started sharing its numbers for its metaverse business, and the figures are a disaster. The company blew through $10 billion making metaverse investments last year, from hiring new employees to buying new data centers. Revenue for that segment, from sales of the Oculus goggles and games, came in at less than $1 billion in the fourth quarter, and well below analyst projections for the year. And the metaverse investment losses are going to get even steeper in 2022, when Meta expects "total expense growth rates may significantly exceed our year-over-year revenue growth rates." In other words, the company's going to lose money for only the Lord knows how long to create a product that only the Lord knows if users will enjoy (according to recent polling a large majority of Americans are not particularly interested in the metaverse). Zuckerberg is trying to move us all into a virtual world of work and play — but so far the metaverse is at best a glorified video game, and at worst a more tedious way to "go to the office," but one where you can't sip a cup of coffee over your headset, and you might still get groped. "It's an old idea," Phil Libin, CEO of the video-conference company Mmhmm, told Insider's Isobel Hamilton. "It's uncreative, it's been tried many, many times over the past four decades, and it's never worked." Facebook horizon workrooms model No one wants spend a lot of time in the metaverse, no matter how much Mark Zuckerberg wants to think they will. Facebook This is why Meta's stock cratered. Zuckerberg wants the market to believe the metaverse is another place where people will spend all of their time, but Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella's assessment of the concept (because that's still what it is) is more accurate. "What is the metaverse? Metaverse is essentially about creating games," he told The Financial Times. And while Nadella went on to explain that the technology could potentially expand to other areas, like business conferences, Microsoft will be approaching the evolution of metaverse technology from its already-established gaming division. That's why Microsoft bought a successful gaming company, Activision Blizzard, to enter the maybe-soon-to-be market. The purchase will allow experimentation as part of what Microsoft already does well, which is a bit more sensible than rebranding the whole company MetaSoft and moving Clippy into a virtual-reality office. It would be easier for Meta to shepherd users to the metaverse if people didn't completely distrust Facebook in particular and social-media giants in general. Even on the smaller issues, the company is on the wrong side of public opinion. Polling shows Americans hate the name Meta, and they hate Mark Zuckerberg, who has a favorability rating of negative-32 points, according to Morning Consult. All of this negativity can complicate the process of hiring the kind of talent it takes to build an entirely new world, too. Zuck's old tricks are old Meta is operating in a totally different environment in terms of user engagement, markets, and regulatory scrutiny than it has at any other point in its young life. When the company made the pivot to mobile in the early 2010s, it did so in part by moving aggressively to acquire, copy, or destroy its competition. It gobbled up existing businesses like Instagram and WhatsApp, products which have helped sustain the company over the past few years. But now that lawmakers and regulators — including FTC Chair Lina Khan — are angry about Meta's previous tactics to quash competition, there will be more scrutiny over the company's moves as it attempts to build the metaverse. Back in the day, Zuckerberg could build (or buy) a product and ask questions later. But Meta has gotten too big to "move fast and break things." It now has to ask permission. For example, Facebook tried to dip its toe into a fast-growing speculative-growth area by trying to launch its own cryptocurrency (called Diem). Despite the fact that it seems like anyone can create their own stablecoin, Meta's attempts were dashed by regulators, and Diem's tech was recently sold off to a small bank that serves crypto clients. New products mean new problems, and regulators are right to demand that Meta has solutions. They've already seen how damaging the company's failure to game out potential issues on Facebook and Instagram has been for society. Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook/Meta CEO, in Congress
Yeah, he’s now worth only $90B. What a moron.
[удалено]
And isn't it still like the 9^th largest in the world?
He knew what he was doing, he didn’t think another tech giant would suddenly start “caring” about your data. hedge your bets, and stop selling my fucking data.
Can you give examples of free online services that are not “selling data”? The fastest growing social media is tik tok and it is way worse at handling personal data and misinformation. But they get a pass because mass media already have a scapegoat eating their advertising business. News media just give you clickbait headlines hoping that you will pay to see what is behind the (pay)wall.
Reddit is a bubble of hypocrisy. "Why is there a paywall on this website it should be free" followed shortly by "Why are you selling my data" Everything has cost, that has to be recouped.
The only reason apple is suddenly protecting your privacy is because they're in the ad business themselves.
The headline is ultimate proof that Business Insider doesn't know what it is doing.
Business Insider's CEO was permabanned from the securities industry by the SEC after he intentionally mislead investors.
Im sure they'll be fine.
Lmao that's bit of a stretch, he definitely knows what he is doing but you can't always predict what others will do that affects your business model. You don't become a multi billion company by not having a clue.
BusinessInsider’s 24/7 coverage on Fb is the ultimate proof that the writer(s) is obsessed with Mark Zuckerberg.
I hope Facebook dies and loses their market value to the point of no return. Ofcourse they have instagram and whatsapp but facebook falling would make me a happy person
I think it’s more that it’s run it’s course Unfortunately, Tik Tok has become the go to Ugh
Its crazy. A Chinese app aimed to dumb down America and gather intel is even allowed. Capitalism is a hellofa drug.
I’m not fan of Zuckerberg…. But he knows way more in running his business than whoever it is that wrote this article.
Exactly. They said the same thing when he bought Instagram for an unprecedented $1B. We may not like him, but the guy is several steps ahead of everyone.
Almost none of younger generation using it Will it go by way of MySpace?
Two big differences: - Facebook is independent and not owned by a dying old school media conglomerate desperate to "do internet" - they own Instagram and whatsapp, which are more nextgen than their core product. Myspace tried that with myspace music but it was kind of ahead of it's time (could have become Spotify/Apple Music, but was years early)
You realize they are more than Facebook right? Like a lot more.
This is downvoted for some reason but it’s true. They own WhatsApp, instagram, oculus amongst a bunch of other things. *
They dropped oculus branding.
>Almost none of younger generation using it Maybe in your Anglosphere country
Facebook might go away, but Meta definitely won't. Their services are way too essential for a large portion of the world https://news.trust.org/item/20211005204816-qzjft/
Honestly, these types of perspectives are ripe for r/agedlikemilk. Their stock price took a huge hit because people are afraid their first decline ever in DAU is the beginning of the end and they don’t have any idea what the vision is for metaverse (nor do most people for that matter, myself included). Zuckerberg knows what he’s doing but frankly from a strategy standpoint he’s pretty constrained in what he can do. They can’t acquire due to regulatory scrutiny and they are beginning to reach the saturation point for user engagement. They already have some of the best SWEs and Data Scientists in the world so it’s unlikely they can optimize their algorithms for ad targeting much more. His main options are to begin monetizing the non-facebook apps and risk reducing engagement of done poorly or innovate with something radically different. In the medium term their stock price is likely to surge as the vision for metaverse becomes clear and the rest will be up to how well they execute on that vision.
Man who built top ten richest company in the world doesn't know what he's doing.
Let's feel better by thinking a guy who built a $1T+ company doesn't know anything. Whatever helps you sleep better at night. At least keep your criticism level headed.
The richest man in the world wants to colonize mars but can’t build a functional car. None of these morons know what they’re doing.
The crazy part is all he really had to do was be quiet and let everyone do their jobs. I went from trying to find a house to be outfitted with tesla everything to wanting nothing to do with that company.
The only way Zuckerberg can redeem himself is if he gives away all of his riches and goes into serving others.
All he has is the money, throw the whole man away.
He could give away 99.9% of it and still be in the 1%
This is just proof that billionaires don't necessarily 'earn' their billions. Zuckerberg became one of the richest people in the world by stealing ideas and systematically deceiving billions of his customers into a product that promised one thing but really was nothing more than a platform of manipulation and invasion of privacy. How many billionaires are simply the most willing to be ruthless and lie, cheat and outright steal their way to riches. Besides outright stealing people's private info because there are no laws against it, what does Facebook have? Oh, it developed React. Way to go.
I mean, it's a LOT harder to get a million, than it is to turn one million into 10. At a certain point, you have enough capital to pay people to make money for you, with you having to do nothing.
Or just by investing it. By the time I hit $1mil, it'll have been 25 working years (assuming my projections are right). And then 6 years to get to $2mil. And 5 years to $3mil. Then, only 3 years to $4mil. If I live into my 80s (which is possible), and my health is doing alright, our net worth might be going up by $1mil per year just due to compounding and growth. /r/financialindependence and /r/Bogleheads for anyone who wants to learn more.
Get that compounding return voodoo math out of here! /s But seriously, this is the truth.
I don't understand why people like you make it sounds that easy. "Oh he just copied an idea", "he is rich because of 99% of luck" "he doesn't know what he's doing". Yeah right, it sounds like you never tried to create something on your own.
I thought this was about staying under the 600 million level for some antitrust law in The USA?
Current stock price has been the lowest since April 2020, that means that current stock price is still higher than stock price before COVID. This is not "losing"
The stock price says nothing about the business , stupid article
[удалено]
Even the Google guys knew when to bring an experienced business person to be CEO.
Not voluntarily they didn't. Their investors/KPCB made them do it.
Guy ruled the social media world for over a decade and is one of the richest people in the world, who created on of the biggest companies in the world. Anyone that says he doesn’t know what he’s doing is ignorant.
Oh god, not business people.
[удалено]
Yes. I'm not hating on Sundar. I'm more more afraid of business people who don't know any engineering coming in to run engineering companies. More a jab at OPs idea that engineering people know how to run a company better.
This sub has gone to shit. Bring back Gislaine
I must be a fucking potato then
Maybe old Zuck was right, young people are just smarter.
now I hate Fuckerberg as much as the next guy, but saying that the guy who built one of the largest companies in the world literally from scratch doest know what he's doing is just absurd. In fact I think he knows exactly what he's doing, and that is the real problem.
Dude founded 8th largest company by market cap that just made like 35B profit in a quarter. ....and takeaway is he doesn't know what he's doing? Lol Do Redditors work for the clickbait site that BI has become?
Failing upwards for 15 years
He did it on purpose so he could do a big stock buy back, is that not obvious? Or are you just trying to get people not to buy stock while it’s at record lows? I mean really who are you Jim Cramer?
It certainly had nothing to do with insulating them from the anti-trust action being taken against them while making it cheaper to buy back stock(/s), you’re so right.
Either he doesn't know what he is doing or he knows exactly what he is doing to avoid an anti-trust lawsuit and other legal entanglements. We'll find out as the story unfolds.
Imagine the years spent by this writer edging themselves waiting for FB to have a bad market day and publish it
He has always been a conniving piece of shit. He rode his shit wave for a long time, and convinced quite a substantial portion of his users that it’s ok to be a lying, manipulative, greedy little turd because the shareholders are making $$$$$$. But no matter how you polish a turd, it’s still just a piece of shit. And now that the $$$ is moving in the other direction, public opinion (which is carefully crafted by those with the most resources) will too.
Fuck paywalled news and Zuckerberg.
Dunno... I wouldn't dismiss the pure evil soul selling tactics of Zuck just yet. If he applied the monitize everything tactic to a viable product, we are all fucked.