Comments on: Who is getting bought next? YouTube, Facebook?

By: SortiPreneur

SortiPreneur — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:54:44 +0000

Facebook in Play Again…

This is a bit late but it looks like while I have been away, WSJ reported on rumors of an MA conversation between Yahoo! and Facebook, with a price tag around $1b. There is much conversation on the topic in…

By: AlFromChicago

AlFromChicago — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:26:56 +0000

I just wrote a post commenting on this: http://www.participatemedia.com/?p=26

net net I think $1B for Facebook is conservative

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 01:40:47 +0000

Robert: How do you know who your real friends are until they accept you on Facebook?

By: Richie

Richie — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:36:52 +0000

So let me get this straight. Yahoo basically announces that ad sales are declining yet is justifying paying $900 million - $1 billion for a company with around $50 million in revenues (hoping to be $100 million next year) based on the assumption that it can increase Facebook's ad sales significantly? Seems like one of the dumbest moves Yahoo management could make, especially since Facebook opening up to everybody is going to alienate their audience. Why doesn't Yahoo fix its current problem before going out and betting that not only is it going to increase its internal ad sales but is going to be able to do it significantly on an acquisition?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:33:48 +0000

I would've added one from left field…Viacom merges with Yahoo.

By: not4sale

not4sale — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:46:14 +0000

Why are they for sale? Because, investors & founders are not stupid. YouTube in particular is burning cash & their model will never make money.

Forget about numbers such as 100m download per day etc. These numbers can go down to zero very fast.

Good luck to any company who spends $1B! They will need it!

By: kenny

kenny — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 05:18:16 +0000

timwizard, because facebook is open to high schoolers, college students, and also select companies/organizations.

By: Dimitar Vesselinov

Dimitar Vesselinov — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 02:36:43 +0000

“Facebook is a social networking service for high school, college, university, corporate, non-profit, military and geographic communities primarily in English-speaking countries.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook

List of social networking websites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listofsocialnetworkingwebsites

By: timwizard

timwizard — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:45:15 +0000

The chart doesn't make sense; facebook is currently open to only high school and college students. How could they have 50 year olds than college students?

By: Miles

Miles — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:04:19 +0000

Is the % users of in each age bucket a reasonable stat? Assume they merge. Multiply the 173M audience by the share percents to get # users in each bucket. Add FB to Y, then regenerate the %s.

The new yahoo’s % breakdown then looks like this:

Age

Old Yahoo

Merged
Difference

12-17 years old
14%
13.9%
-0.1%

18-24 years old
34%
32.7%
-1.5%

25-34 years old
8.6%
10.1%
1.0%

35-44 years old
12.3%
13.2%
1.1%

45-54 years old
21.1%
21.7%
0.6%

55-64 years old
5.3%
5.8%
0.8%

65+ years old
2.3%
2.5%
0.4%

Doesn’t appear to really shift the age groups significantly.

By: Ted

Ted — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:54:00 +0000

Uh, is that chart correct? It doesn't make sense.

By: Brian Jones

Brian Jones — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:47:15 +0000

It should be noted that over the long-term, most major acquisitions tend to result in decreased value for shareholders. I certainly hope, as a Yahoo shareholder, that this is a case of the WSJ not wanting to pull the story. Yahoo buying Facebook for this insane amount when its recent announcement indicates there are other major problems that need to be resolved would be a sign that management is not acting in the best interests of its shareholders. If this happens, I will sell my Yahoo holdings and move my money into a well-run company that shows restraint as opposed to desperation when it comes to acquisitions of companies, especially those that have been shown to have major vulnerabilities and questionable long-term prospects.

By: greg

greg — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:25:32 +0000

"I just can’t see Facebook being worth $1B"

The question is whether Yahoo will spend the $1B, though I do echo Robert's opinions on the usefulness and longevity of the model.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 18:33:16 +0000

I agree that its only a matter of time before facebook is shut down. As soon as they open up to non .edu registrants the exclusivity is gone and people will migrate to niche sites that cater to their interests (dogster, mimun2, upoc etc.)

By: Robert Dewey

Robert Dewey — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:58:38 +0000

You would win the bet, Greg - I have no need for Facebook, that's what AIM, phones, and e-mail is for. I know who and where my friends are, why do I need a service to tell me? ;-)

My area of interest is emerging technologies that will shape the way people interact with computers… Those are the types of innovations that last over 10, 20, and +30 years (PC, operating systems, etc.). I'm sorry, but I just can't see Facebook being worth $1B when there are far greater opportunities both in the present and future.

By: Michael Urlocker

Michael Urlocker — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:57:59 +0000

Rising M&A activity might be evidence of the media industry facing disruption. When CEOs can't figure out how to deliver growth on their own, investment bankers and shareholders nudge them along to consider big ticket acquisitions.

Other warning signs of disruption which may apply in the media sector:

* Customers stop appreciating and paying for innovations they used to value;
* Strange niche suppliers start gaining share;
* Tried and true management techniques fail;
* A growth gap emerges between shareholder expectations and what management thinks it can deliver;

More at: http://www.ondisruption.com/myweblog/2006/09/mediama_warnin.html