Jump to content

Things not going well for Facebook

Parliament

By Parliament
in Business and Markets

 Share

Recommended Posts

Parliament

Parliament 14260

Posted
Posted

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/26/facebook-on-pace-for-biggest-one-day-loss-in-value-for-any-company-sin.html

Facebook on Thursday posted the largest one-day loss in market value by any company in U.S. stock market history after releasing a disastrous quarterly report.

The social media giant's market capitalization plummeted by $119 billion to $510 billion as its stock price plummeted by 19 percent. At Wednesday's close, Facebook's market cap had totaled nearly $630 billion, according to FactSet.

No company in the history of the U.S. stock market has ever lost $100 billion in market value in just one day, but two came close.

 

https://variety.com/2018/digital/news/facebook-market-cap-120-billion-user-growth-slow-1202886792/

The stock drop, to its lowest levels in nearly three months, wiped out nearly $120 billion in market capitalization for Facebook and dragged down other internet and tech stocks including Twitter and Snap. Facebook’s market cap was $629 billion at market close Wednesday, and ended the day Thursday at around $510 billion. The massive drop in market value represented the biggest single-day decline in history for any publicly held company, according to Thomson Reuters data.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s net worth plummeted more than $15 billion with the stock dive, although it’s still around $67 billion, according to Forbes’ real-time net worth tracker.

What drove the selloff: Investor concern about Facebook’s growth cooling down.

Facebook’s daily active users for the second quarter of 2018 were effectively flat in the U.S. sequentially, and even declined in Europe compared with Q1 — marking the first time the company has seen such a decline in recent quarters.

The big story from the earnings report was the forecast that revenue will decelerate in the second half of 2018, Pivotal Research analyst Brian Wieser wrote in a research note. “[W]hile the company is still growing at a fast clip, the days of 30%+ [revenue] growth are numbered,” he wrote.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phdhorn

phdhorn 6224

Posted
Posted

I wish I had ever posted on that Facebook thing or whatever it is.  Then I'd know more about all this.  But as it is, I've never, ever put even a dotted i on that site (besides signing up awhile back so I can get access to shit).


It sounds like a interesting, but now fucked up, enterprise.  But I don't know about this "Facebook" thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RD3

RD3 64

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Orange^White said:

Wasn't there a long running thread on the shag where we compared the eventual market share of Google vs. Facebook?

I started that thread. But I didn't have the handle RD3 at the time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
closetojumping

closetojumping 62740

Posted
Posted
On 7/27/2018 at 8:05 AM, Orange^White said:

Wasn't there a long running thread on the shag where we compared the eventual market share of Google vs. Facebook?

 

 

The thread was about FB eventually getting near Google in revenue over a 10 year period starting in 2012 or 2013. FB has outpaced Google in percentage growth for some time, so the premise that they’d be near each other in 2022/2023 wasn’t absurd and still isn’t. 

Rocko was one of the passionate protagonists for Google. I was ardent that both were good investments and where FB was going would rival Google based on Insta, Occulus, and WhatsApp vs the Google moonshots. My belief then and now is that anyone who gives a fuck should own both. I still maintain that. I bought FB at $23, $60, bought the big dip that took them down to $150, and will be buying more on Tuesday if it continues to slide. I’m not a trader and hilariously shorted Amazon in 2016, but having FB and Alphabet as long term holds is like having IBM and Coke in the 60’s. It should be obvious as safe plays. 

That thread still has to be out there. I imagine it is hilarious for like 10 reasons if read now, so someone with time and a dark sense of humor should find it and link it. Rocko is probably jacking off to a fat Norwegian, his leased Corvette, and that thread right now.

That considered, buy the dip and forget about it. Few companies have as much going in their favor as FB, and this kind of adversity with their kind of brains will probably only make them stronger over the long haul. 

Disclaimer: I work in ecommerce and use FB heavily in all kinds of ways. 

Disclaimer 2: I still think Rocko is a fucking rube who didn’t understand the argument on the thread but kept going anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Viper

Viper 12109

Posted
Posted
On 7/29/2018 at 12:58 AM, closetojumping said:

I still think Rocko is a fucking rube who didn’t understand the argument on the thread but kept going anyway.

 

On 7/29/2018 at 2:27 AM, 52-80 said:

That thread is hilarious because it's prob full of scat porn by now

yeah that's what CTJ said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HoustonHorn

HoustonHorn 1062

Posted
Posted

I was involved in that thread. Didn't Google split off a research division called Alphabet? Probably need to consider that in any comparison. Percentage growth is easier when you are smaller.

Either way, both companies have impressive growth since that thread was started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
PittsburghTiger

PittsburghTiger 6188

Posted
Posted

CAIRO — When a new bout of fighting between rival militias engulfed the Libyan capital in recent days, badly shaking the fragile United Nations-backed government, some combatants picked up rifles and rocket launchers and headed into the streets.

Others logged on to Facebook.

As rockets rained on parts of Tripoli, hitting a hotel popular with foreigners and forcing the airport to close, and 400 prisoners escaped from a jail, a parallel battle unfolded online. On their Facebook pages, rival groups issued boasts, taunts and chilling threats — one vowing to “purify” Libya of its opponents.
Some “keyboard warriors,” as Facebook partisans are known in Libya, posted fake news or hateful comments. Others offered battlefield guidance. On one discussion page on Thursday, a user posted maps and coordinates to help target her side’s bombs at a rival’s air base.

“From the traffic light at Wadi al Rabi, it is exactly 18 kilometers to the runway, which means it can be targeted by a 130 mm artillery,” the user, who went by the handle Narjis Ly, wrote on Facebook. “The coordinates are attached in the photo below.”

Social media enjoys outsize influence in Libya, a sparsely populated yet violently fractured country that is torn by a plethora of armed groups vying for territory and legitimacy. They battle for dominance on the streets and on smartphones.

But Facebook, by far the most popular platform, does not just mirror the chaos — it can act as a force multiplier.

Armed groups use Facebook to find opponents and critics, some of whom have later been detained, killed or forced into exile, according to human rights groups and Libyan activists. Swaggering commanders boast of their battlefield exploits and fancy vacations, or rally supporters by sowing division and ethnic hatred. Forged documents circulate widely, often with the goal of undermining Libya’s few surviving national institutions, notably its Central Bank.

Facebook is coming under scrutiny globally for how its platform amplifies political manipulation and violence.

In July, the company began culling misinformation from its pages in response to episodes in Sri Lanka, Myanmar and India where online rumors led to real-life violence against ethnic minorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
  • 2 months later...
PittsburghTiger

PittsburghTiger 6188

Posted
Posted (edited)
By Olivia Solon and Cyrus Farivar

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg oversaw plans to consolidate the social network’s power and control competitors by treating its users’ data as a bargaining chip, while publicly proclaiming to be protecting that data, according to about 4,000 pages of leaked company documents largely spanning 2011 to 2015 and obtained by NBC News.

The documents, which include emails, webchats, presentations, spreadsheets and meeting summaries, show how Zuckerberg, along with his board and management team, found ways to tap Facebook’s trove of user data — including information about friends, relationships and photos — as leverage over companies it partnered with.

 

In some cases, Facebook would reward favored companies by giving them access to the data of its users. In other cases, it would deny user-data access to rival companies or apps.

For example, Facebook gave Amazon extended access to user data because it was spending money on Facebook advertising and partnering with the social network on the launch of its Fire smartphone. In another case, Facebook discussed cutting off access to user data for a messaging app that had grown too popular and was viewed as a competitor, according to the documents.

All the while, Facebook was formulating a strategy to publicly frame these moves as a way of protecting user privacy.

Private communication between users is “increasingly important,” Zuckerberg said in a 2014 New York Times interview. “Anything we can do that makes people feel more comfortable is really good.”

But the documents show that behind the scenes, in contrast with Facebook’s public statements, the company came up with several ways to require third-party applications to compensate Facebook for access to its users’ data, including direct payment, advertising spending and data-sharing arrangements. While it’s not unusual for businesses that are working together to share information about their customers, Facebook has access to sensitive data that many other companies don’t possess.

Facebook ultimately decided not to sell the data directly but rather to dole it out to app developers who were considered personal “friends” of Zuckerberg or who spent money on Facebook and shared their own valuable data, the documents show.

Facebook denied that it gave preferential treatment to developers or partners because of their ad spending or relationship with executives. The company has not been accused of breaking the law.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/mark-zuckerberg-leveraged-facebook-user-data-fight-rivals-help-friends-n994706

Edited by PittsburghTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13515

Posted
Posted

The main issue I see with Facebook is not that they make some mistakes. Everyone does. The issue is that they appeared to have consistently always picked monetization at the expense of consumer data security.   

And I can understand the point that some of the issues come to light may not full represent today’s practices, but you have to wonder what decisions are being made today that won’t be discovered until 2022.

if you’re not ashamed of a policy or practice, be transparent about it. And if you don’t think you can be transparent, perhaps that is a sign that you shouldn’t do it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Parliament

Parliament 14260

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, happyfunball said:

It isn’t just user Facebook abuses but publishers despite their argument of being a neutral platform.

They are not neutral and should be regulated as such.
 

As Casey Newton reported in an investigation for the Verge, the average content moderator in a Facebook contractor’s outpost in Arizona makes $28,000 per year, and many of them say they have developed PTSD-like symptoms due to their work. Others have spent so much time looking through conspiracy theories that they’ve become believers themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
crash_davis

crash_davis 23113

Posted
Posted

Facebook business model: Enable and sometime encourage disinformation. Anything for the hits, right?

So what happens when Facebook decides to do the right thing? The idiots who spew uneducated shit sue claiming censorship. 

Americans are too fucking stupid for their own good. We are watching a country implode from within. Fuck scientists and doctors. Facebook moms are experts on everything.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/08/anti-vaccine-group-sues-facebook-claims-fact-checking-is-censorship/

 

A notorious anti-vaccine group spearheaded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. filed suit today in federal court in California alleging that Facebook's fact-checking program for false scientific or medical misinformation violates its constitutional rights.

Children's Health Defense claims in its suit (PDF) that Facebook, its CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and the organizations Science Feedback, Poynter, and PolitiFact acted "jointly or in concert with federal government agencies" to infringe on CHD's First and Fifth Amendment rights. The suit also alleges Facebook and the fact-checking organizations colluded to commit wire fraud by "clearing the field" of anti-vaccine ads.

Ads touting false claims about vaccines were banned, and pages and groups that promote vaccine misinformation or hoaxes have their content deprecated in search and recommendations. Posts about vaccines may also be subject to Facebook's fact-checking process and potentially have a link appended to lead readers to informative sites such as the World Health Organization.

Facebook's fact-checking actions both violate CHD's rights and also are defamatory, the group alleges. The organization's reputation "depends on the credibility of its science-based research articles," CHD writes in the suit, "which explore both the known and presently-unknown public health risks of vaccines and 5G and wireless technology."

Essentially, the 115-page complaint argues that Facebook's actions amount to censorship and defamation because CHD doesn't like having its content called out as misinformation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Orange&White

Orange&White 5528

Posted
Posted

Facebook and Twitter blocked a Youtube video that was an interview between Harris and Colbert because it was embarrassing to Harris just last week.

I understand what you are saying and I know a lot of stupid people post a bunch of stupid shit on social media, but the idea of social media agencies being able to have carte blanche to censor information on whatever whim they choose should be a non starter. 

I am not sure what the answer is but I, for one, want to see the information and decide for myself if I think it is wrong or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23525

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, freyguy said:

If I was Zuckerberg, I would have sold long ago and spent the rest of my days snorting coke off strippers' asses.  Let some retread CEOs drive it into the ground.

Yeah but you are probably a normal person. I'm not convinced Zuckerberg is even human. I think he is an alien pretending to act how he thinks a human should act. Just a weird fucker in general. 

Edited by Blotto
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19162

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, freyguy said:

If I was Zuckerberg, I would have sold long ago and spent the rest of my days snorting coke off strippers' asses.  Let some retread CEOs drive it into the ground.

fucker has share class with majority super-voting rights.  it aint about the the money, his ego is on that power trip.

if he had cashed out, he'd probably be LARPING with a bunch of limp-wristed furries

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38129

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Orange&White said:

I am not sure what the answer is but I, for one, want to see the information and decide for myself if I think it is wrong or not.

This is the worst idea I’ve heard in a long time. The majority of Americans and people in general are three steps away from joining a suicide cult on most days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13515

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Orange&White said:

Facebook and Twitter blocked a Youtube video that was an interview between Harris and Colbert because it was embarrassing to Harris just last week.

I understand what you are saying and I know a lot of stupid people post a bunch of stupid shit on social media, but the idea of social media agencies being able to have carte blanche to censor information on whatever whim they choose should be a non starter. 

I am not sure what the answer is but I, for one, want to see the information and decide for myself if I think it is wrong or not.

Do you have some proof of this?  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13515

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

Someone sent me the link and when I attempted to open it said it had been removed for content reasons.

What else did the person post besides the video?  In that tweet and in general.

i don’t believe it’s possible for Facebook or twitter to remove all copies of a Colbert video. I suppose they could try but that attempt could actually produce the opposite result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...