52 Comments

Summary:

Some quick math makes Facebook’s $15 billion valuation look even crazier. Apparently the guys over at Silicon Valley Insider also bothered to crunch the numbers. Bebo sold to AOL this morning for $850 million and have about 40 million users, costing $21.25 per user. In July […]

Some quick math makes Facebook’s $15 billion valuation look even crazier. Apparently the guys over at Silicon Valley Insider also bothered to crunch the numbers.

  • Bebo sold to AOL this morning for $850 million and have about 40 million users, costing $21.25 per user.
  • In July 2005, News Corp. purchased the parent of MySpace for $580 million. At the time, MySpace had about 21 million users, costing $27.62 per user.
  • Those are as direct as we can make it, but let’s say we bring out a crazy deal where the buying company admitted they overpaid. When eBay shelled out $4.1 billion for Skype, it paid about $52 per user.

Admittedly Microsoft has plenty of money and probably didn’t worry too much about the valuation when agreeing to terms with Facebook, so we’ll raise our estimates a bit. Also, Facebook has shown an unwillingness to sell or go public, indicating that it’s building for the long haul, meaning its users could grow in value over time. But at the time of the Microsoft deal, Facebook had about 50 million users who were valued at $300 each. Readers, care to tell me how Facebook users can achieve that value?

Kara Swisher has her own math on the Bebo deal as well.

  1. I don’t know anyone who thinks that Facebook is, or ever has been, worth $15B. I admit that I’ve never gone into an asylum to ask the question, but I am on the web a lot…
    I don’t think that anyone at Microsoft was smoking so much Redmond reefer that they thought it was worth $15B. They bought a significant stake at a price they thought that stake was worth to them. That’s a long way away from considering Facebook to be worth $15B.
    So it’s misleading to suggest that Microsoft paid $300 per Facebook user.

    Share
  2. As far as I can tell, the whole $15B valuation is based solely on an extrapolation of Microsoft’s investment in FB, however Microsoft itself has stated that the amount invested was not simply a purchase of a percentage of ownership, but rather it reflected numerous other factors (placing ads on FB being the biggie).

    With that said, it seems to be a mixture of PR and the ‘next big thing’ that keeps that number floating around. The business press isn’t helping either, with Zuck being called the youngest billionaire based on his guesstimated percentage ownership of a guesstimated valuation :-)

    Share
  3. I was under the impression that Microsoft paid what they paid because they wanted access to be able to place ads on Facebook, not merely to own a small percentage of the company. They were getting a portion of the company AS WELL as, if not more importantly, the ability to serve ads on the network. I felt that the payment was so high because of the access to ads, not the percentage of the company they owned. Silicon Valley then jumped all over it and declared that Facebook was worth $15 Billion. A gross exaggeration by even an asylum resident. I doubt any other company would be allowed to buy a percentage of the company AND place ads after MSFT ran in there.

    Share
  4. Stacey,

    I would say that $300 per user for any media company is an impossible value to achieve historically. I did a media research project about 2 years ago which looked at the historical changes in media due to the impact of new technologies. Valuation of the media companies was a small component of that research, particularly the loss in value of a media type when a new media technology emerged. Of note, none of the media companies had a per user value in the $300 range. In fact, none were very much more than about $130 per user at peak valuation. Unfortunately, I cannot provide a link to the research as it is confidential, however I will note that Facebook’s so called $15 billion dollar valuation is idiocy at best. It has no historical benchmark as validation, nor does Facebook’s revenue growth and run rate (as reported publically by the media) justify such a lofty valuation.

    Just remember GeoCities and TheGlobe.com. Facebook is in good company. ;-)

    Share
  5. Not that I think it’s reasonable by any means, but I can see Facebook being valued somewhat higher because it’s a much more targeted audience (i.e. for ads)…college students and those that just graduated college. And there’s lots of personal information in different forms (text, pictures, etc.) tied to specific users that something like the EBay-Skype deal doesn’t involve.

    All that said, it’s still ridiculous to say any of that makes it even remotely close to $300 a user.

    Share
  6. You Too can make 300 million …… goto fakepaycheckstubs com
    OMG….how funny!!!

    Share
  7. [...] Stacey Higginbotham at GigaOm notes, AOL is acquiring Bebo for $21.25 per user, which is actually a bit less than the $27.62 per user [...]

    Share
  8. Hold on a sec.

    Like some others have said, the money Microsoft invested was for a 1.6% stake in Facebook and for the right to advertise on the site. To figure out the valuation per sub, you have to extract the value of the advertising portion from the overall deal.

    Google paid $900mm for 3 years of exclusive advertising on myspace and got no equity in myspace. At the time, myspace had 100mm users. So that’s about $9 per sub at the time of the deal. Based on the fact that Google is struggling with social networking monetization and myspace is thought to be the chief problem, this was probably too much.

    Microsoft already had the rights to the domestic facebook advetising through an earlier alliance signed. They paid $240mm for exclusive advertising on a global basis with no stated timeframe limitation, though I’m sure there must be one. Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and say it was a 3 year deal also and lets say it negated their earlier deal on the domestic market. If so, Microsoft paid $240mm for 50mm users… or about $4.80 per sub. AND they walked away with a 1.6% stake in facebook.

    In fact, Microsoft paid far less for facebook advertising rights than google paid for myspace advertising rights. It’s not a $15 billion dollar idiotic move. Admittedly, it’s really a payola move — they’re buying advertising revenues — I don’t love that as a business practice. But if what Microsoft was trying to do was shore up their faltering online business, it’s not the worst thing they could have done to goose the top line.

    Buying Yahoo… that’ll probably be the worst thing they could have done.

    Share
  9. As many have pointed out, Microsoft didn’t invest at a $15 billion valuation. They gave Facebook a payoff and, in addition to advertising concessions, got some stock tossed in as a kicker.

    Share
  10. Stacey Higginbotham Thursday, March 13, 2008

    You guys are right that Microsoft was buying a stake and likely had few cares with regard to valuation. But if Facebook raised additional money at that same valuation (comapnies hate to do down rounds) then someone else is expecting the company to achieve those exalted levels. That’s a big reason why comapnies should aim for a reasonable valuation.

    Share
  11. you are right companies hate to do down rounds, and it should be a key consideration when a startup does a typical round, but this does not apply in this case. this deal is so far outside of a typical venture deal its not even funny. it should simply be viewed as an opportunity for FB to raise an absolutely massive amount of money for cheap. now they’ve got it, and the next step is an IPO where either they may or may not pay off the $15B valuation…it really doesn’t matter (except to MS who clearly has other factors in mind). from an FB perspective the warchest increases the chances of a great payday for them and their early investors…MS IRR may be an entirely different story.

    Share
  12. Imho a cunning strategic invest. A small price to pay for locking out, or making life difficult and immensively expensive to potential FB suitors by setting an impossibly high bar.

    Advertising exclusivity and other factors come in as handy extras.

    Share
  13. No. The $15b was pulled out of Zuck’s a__ months ago. It was completely made up. He said it was a random amount. Further proof that fb and their investors are high.

    Share
  14. @Roy,

    Your analysis is flawed simply because the MS deal involved equity, which set Facebook’s value per share. Perhaps they received less equity for the exclusive rights to advertising. Perhaps they have future investment options. Perhaps… whatever. Microsoft invested $240 million for a 1.6% stake, thereby setting Facebook’s valuation at $15 billion. This is irrational investing at any investment level.

    Share
  15. To be honest, I don’t think $300 is reasonable by any means. However, if you compare a Facebook user to a Myspace user, the likelihood that a Facebook user’s account is fake has a much lower probability. Myspace may report 80+M registered profiles, but how many of those are fake celebrity profiles, marketing platforms for web cam girls, etc. I personally have two. One is where I develop on (hacking up that CSS).

    Facebook knows its users are real, and are less likley to lie about important profiling data in fear that their classmates will call them out on it. On myspace, I can say whatever I want because nobody close to me is in my network. Targeting ads is easier, and maybe Facebook has an edge because of that…

    Share
  16. I think the MS/fb analogs divert attention away from some key metrics that ought to be important:
    – what is the user acquisition cost for fb/bebo/hi5/myspace? I would guess a fraction of a cent/user
    – what is the current cost (infrastructure/bandwidth) of servicing the user? I guess a few cents/user.
    – what is the current monetization possibility per user ?
    – what is the potential monetization per user ?

    The ratio, imho, of monetization per user to acquisition+operation cost per user looks like a useful metric to compare for all the social networks being talked about here…

    -r

    Share
  17. [...] Stacey Higginbotham at GigaOm notes, AOL is acquiring Bebo for $21.25 per user, which is actually a bit less than the $27.62 per user [...]

    Share
  18. Agree with most all of the comments above! Facebook’s $300-per-user valuation is not justifiable. How much do they make off each user per year in advertising. How long would it take to break-even? I wrote up an article comparing the valuations per user for MySpace, Facebook, and Bebo: http://fishtrain.com/2008/03/13/social-network-valuation/

    Share
  19. You could look at it this way: A Facebook user, especially those that joined earlier on, is more likely to have some college education. The more education you have the higher your expected lifetime earnings are, thus you buy proportionally more stuff than your uneducated counterparts.

    Is the difference in quality of user real? I don’t know. Could the value be there in the future? It’s worth betting on.

    Share
  20. [...] porcentaje y fué más que nada un acuerdo publicitario) porque Bebo se vendió por menos de $22 dólares por usuario y MySpace por menos de $30. Pero el tema es más complicado para mi. Parece que la justificación [...]

    Share
  21. Curtis –

    I agree, my analysis is rooted in flaws… I don’t have the terms of the deal. I don’t know exactly what they agreed upon. I can tell you, though, that to look at it just as an equity deal is even more flawed. Microsoft paid money to Facebook for two things: 1) rights to exclusive advertising on Facebook globally and 2) a small equity stake. The next investor in Facebook will not get rights to the billboard space that Microsoft does. The next investor will absolutely pay less because they will get less potential upside.

    Say I sell my iPod to you for $200. I get my price, I can say I sold the iPod for $200. You’d say you bought an iPod for $200. Easy.

    If I sell the same iPod for $200 and I throw in a $100 iTunes credit, I can still say I sold my iPod for $200 and be technically correct… but you’d say you bought the iPod for $100 and you got a $100 iTunes credit.

    Microsoft bought traffic… and they did it because Google had bought traffic just a few weeks before and set a precedent. They didn’t want to lose all that ground. It wasn’t a piece of Facebook they wanted, it was the eyeballs.

    Share
  22. Microsoft paid $ 20 per user to keep the users.
    That is in the same ball-park as Bebo and MySpace
    per user valuation.

    Rest to prevent two guys (Sergey and Larry) from
    setting up profiles on Facebook.

    Share
  23. “You could look at it this way: A Facebook user, especially those that joined earlier on, is more likely to have some college education. The more education you have the higher your expected lifetime earnings are, thus you buy proportionally more stuff than your uneducated counterparts.

    Is the difference in quality of user real? I don’t know. Could the value be there in the future? It’s worth betting on.

    This is what I used to think. Until I realized that the digerati and ‘intelligent’ people don’t actually spend much money. They are smart enough to google their way into the freest or cheapest offering in the world. It’s the dumb stupid people (ie. myspace users) that pay more per transaction for stuff as they don’t know how to google properly and get those cheaper mortgages…

    Share
  24. I think AOL’s aquitision of bebo portends the end of bebo…
    http://webpoet.wordpress.com/2008/03/13/bebo-aol/

    TWL

    Share
  25. Roy -

    You’re exactly right. Microsoft ponied up some cash mostly for the chance to put their ads in front of Facebooks very targeted demographic. The small stake in the company was not the main focus in the deal at all. And I really don’t think that it reflects the value of Facebook in totality.

    And today we’ve seen AOL do the same thing with Bebo. AOL, like Microsoft, is apparently shifting at least part of their business model to become an ad company and they need to get as many faces as possible to look at their ads.

    Just like when MS infused all that cash into Apple years ago, it wasn’t to help save Apple or too even get some sort of a stake in the company. It was to make sure that there was one more outlet that MS software would be available on. Same game, different players.

    Share
  26. I think you are also forgetting one crucial component of the deal…
    Microsoft purchased the share in Facebook.
    Not Yahoo. Not AOL. Not Fox Media. And more importantly, not Google.

    This is a deal about potential, about advertising revenue, and about keeping a company out of the hands of the competition.

    Share
  27. The level personal information provided for each user on facebook far surpasses the level provided on any other social networking site. Because of this highly detailed information, advertisers can more effectively tailor ads for each user. This makes the per user value far higher than any other social networking site. If you take into account that the user information on facebook is much more likely to be accurate (and not full of Tila Tequila’s), the value increases significantly. I personally haven’t crunched the numbers, but I don’t think $300/user is out of the question.

    Share
  28. That figure is just ridiculous…All this hype about social networking will die out soon in a year or two. All media/tech startups are overvalued and will fall as a result….a coming tech debacle…!

    Share
  29. [...] crazier. Apparently the guys over at Silicon Valley Insider also bothered to crunch the numbers. http://gigaom.com/2008/03/13/lets-justify-facebooks-300-per-user-valuation/ You must be login to comment Stumble [...]

    Share
  30. [...] crazier. Apparently the guys over at Silicon Valley Insider also bothered to crunch the numbers. http://gigaom.com/2008/03/13/lets-justify-facebooks-300-per-user-valuation/ You must be login to [...]

    Share
  31. [...] Stacey Higginbotham at GigaOm notes, AOL is acquiring Bebo for $21.25 per user, which is actually a bit less than the $27.62 per user [...]

    Share
  32. Please name the investors who have bought stakes in Facebook at a $15b valuation and then we can talk about how ridiculous that is.

    Until I see an article that says definitively that someone invested at that valuation, it is all BS and the media keeps hyping on the number they magically arrived at by purposely excluding the fact that Msft was buying advertising rights just like Google did with MySpace.

    Maybe the media needs to be more responsible.

    Share
  33. so its agreed!! the $300 is not entirely justifiable from a cost per customer acquisition point of view. But from a strategically defensive move to gain more advertising space, strengthen the anti-google alliance, and present others from moving on FB, this deal might not be worth $240m to another company, but it certainly was worth $240m for MS!!

    Share
  34. I just registered on facebook. can I get 10% of my user’s valuation to FaceBook?

    Might as well get a nice drink and a good lunch

    Share
  35. I agree more with the theories of Mr Roy Howard.

    “Microsoft paid money to Facebook for two things: 1) rights to exclusive advertising on Facebook globally and 2) a small equity stake. The next investor in Facebook will not get rights to the billboard space that Microsoft does. The next investor will absolutely pay less because they will get less potential upside.”

    Share
  36. My profile can’t be worth so much. After the privacy issues people experienced on Facebook, I loggued in and erased all personal relevant information. Political, films, personal information, …. as well as nearly all my third party applications.
    I’m just keeping a profile on FC to stay in touch with some friends.
    Can’t be worth vey much.

    Share
  37. That’s Silicon ALLEY Insider. Different coast, better food.

    Share
  38. I think the number-crunchers are missing the point, this was NOT a $15 billion deal, so comparing it with AOL-Bebo deal is plain wrong. For a fraction of the valuation, Microsoft got exclusive rights to serve ads on the popular social site and it essentially shut out the competition because which idiot would be willing to pay that kind of money for a site that hasn’t even begun monetizing? Very smart move by MS for sure.

    Share
  39. [...] Algunos analistas dicen que Microsoft pagó por meter un pie en la gran tarta publicitaria de Facebook, más que por ese 1,6% del capital que le dieron en el trato. Es decir, la extrapolación del valor de ese 1,6% a los 15.000 del 100% no tendría ningún sentido. ¿O realmente si Facebook ahora saliera a bolsa valdría 15.000 millones? Hay analistas que no ven esta valoración del todo descabellada. [...]

    Share
  40. One way to justify it is to look at the lifetime value of the users. Facebook users tend to be more affluent than MySpace users, with more spending power. It’s also a site that users are less likely to grow out of, although neither site has been around long enough to demonstrate they can keep users throughout all their life changes. With Facebook, Microsoft has plans to actually realise the value of users with advertising, and can do so much more by building collaborative hosted software applications around trusted communities. When MySpace was acquired, there was no clear idea on how to realise the value of the community. The exclusive right to advertise to the Facebook community is a valuable asset for Microsoft, particularly since Microsoft is behind Google in the advertising market. It’s a smart strategic investment for a company with more cash than it knows how to spend.

    Share
  41. [...] similar to Microsoft’s reason for investing in Facebook. And who wouldn’t put a $15 billion valuation on sex appeal? Share/Send Sphere Print Previous [...]

    Share
  42. [...] that made just $5MM last year – but cheap when you consider that’s $21 per member – not the $300 that Microsoft paid with its investment in Facebook. Perhaps the amazing thing is that Time-Warner is letting AOL spend [...]

    Share
  43. [...] le potentiel des boîtes rachetées. Mais même Facebook, dans son évaluation la plus délirante, estimait chaque utilisateur à $300. Trois fois moins que les lecteurs de journaux, même lors de ventes au [...]

    Share
  44. [...] Some estimates of the value of Facebook run as high as $15 billion. How can that be? It’s just some software and some people, right? [...]

    Share
  45. [...] too much even for virtual gifts and lucrative online advertising all in the same package. So what is Facebook’s real valuation? Less than 15 billion USD that Microsoft though it would be, I [...]

    Share
  46. [...] too much even for virtual gifts and lucrative online advertising all in the same package. So what is Facebook’s real valuation? Less than 15 billion USD that Microsoft though it would be, I [...]

    Share
  47. [...] $300/user, but realistic figures show $21 for Bebo and $27 for Myspace or a rough $24/user average (reference).  The money is coming purchases made from the fastest growing product of the web: advertisements. [...]

    Share
  48. I would say that $300 per user for any media company is an impossible value to achieve historically.

    Share
  49. I think the rapid current and future projected growth along with the fact that it is a good platform for advertising revenues is why it is valued differently.

    Share
  50. You say Facebook had 50 million users at the time of the Microsoft deal. They are now at 10x that amount. So whatever method Microsoft used to put a value on the stake they bought, surely they have got a better deal in the long run. Investing is not always about current value but also about speculation. At the present time, I would prefer to have paid $300 per user for Facebook at the time than $21.25 for Bebo because we all know what has happened to that now!! You can’t put a per user value on an investment when the user base is growing so rapidly. In a few months their per user value would have halved. Plus, buying a rock for £10 and a diamond for £100 can hardly be compared.

    Share
  51. Facebook is definitely a huge platform for advertisements. It’s now getting more PPC than Google these days and the users are increasingly rapidly.

    Share
  52. Skype user base 2005: 75mm users. 2005 Revenue: 70mm. 2005 purchase price:$2.6b
    Skype user base 2009: 521mm users 2009 Revenue: 740mm 2009 Purchase price: …?
    (SP, Web 2.0)

    Since Microsoft deal- Facebook user metric has increased from 50mm to 500mm (to date).

    What people should be focusing on:
    http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=164752430243044&comments

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post