<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Facebook just revealed its Kryptonite: mobile</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 11:52:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin Fitchard</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/#comment-804739</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin Fitchard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:17:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=479831#comment-804739</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Tom, 

I agree, mobile will be a big opportunity for FB when it figures out how to monetize it. I thought the metaphor was apt though because as it stands now the closer it Facebook gets to mobile the weaker it becomes financially. 

As for the voting control, I&#039;m just leaving open all possibilities. I shares Zuckerberg controls are sold, he loses their votes, though his control won&#039; be diluted that much since they revert to Class B shares. It is a possibility that everyone cashes in and he loses voting control, isn&#039;t it?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Tom, </p>
<p>I agree, mobile will be a big opportunity for FB when it figures out how to monetize it. I thought the metaphor was apt though because as it stands now the closer it Facebook gets to mobile the weaker it becomes financially. </p>
<p>As for the voting control, I&#8217;m just leaving open all possibilities. I shares Zuckerberg controls are sold, he loses their votes, though his control won&#8217; be diluted that much since they revert to Class B shares. It is a possibility that everyone cashes in and he loses voting control, isn&#8217;t it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Foremski</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/#comment-804727</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Foremski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=479831#comment-804727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Surely, mobile is not Kryptonite, but a coming massive windfall for Facebook? 
Also, don&#039;t take the section on &quot;Risks&quot; in the S1 so seriously, it&#039;s full of boiler plate negative scenarios, such as Zuckerberg could die, or leave, then we&#039;d be up the creek, etc. 

And, &quot;...while it will be likely be controlled by Zuckerberg and those loyal to him&quot; Likely? What would change the fact that he controls 57% of the voting stock?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely, mobile is not Kryptonite, but a coming massive windfall for Facebook?<br />
Also, don&#8217;t take the section on &#8220;Risks&#8221; in the S1 so seriously, it&#8217;s full of boiler plate negative scenarios, such as Zuckerberg could die, or leave, then we&#8217;d be up the creek, etc. </p>
<p>And, &#8220;&#8230;while it will be likely be controlled by Zuckerberg and those loyal to him&#8221; Likely? What would change the fact that he controls 57% of the voting stock?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Tehan</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/#comment-804722</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Tehan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:59:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=479831#comment-804722</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Facebook missed the boat on mobile, if they had even a little advertising from the start the precedent would be set and they could do whatever they wanted without too much backlash. But once people have it for free without advertising it is hard to go back.

Whatever long term strategy they adopt they need to allow people access to AD-free mobile use if they want to pay for it. Whether that is $.99 a pop for the AD free version of the app or a &quot;premium&quot; account subscription that means no adds on mobile and maybe some other extra features. People are used to this now with many other apps and don&#039;t mind dropping a small amount for a clutter free experience.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Facebook missed the boat on mobile, if they had even a little advertising from the start the precedent would be set and they could do whatever they wanted without too much backlash. But once people have it for free without advertising it is hard to go back.</p>
<p>Whatever long term strategy they adopt they need to allow people access to AD-free mobile use if they want to pay for it. Whether that is $.99 a pop for the AD free version of the app or a &#8220;premium&#8221; account subscription that means no adds on mobile and maybe some other extra features. People are used to this now with many other apps and don&#8217;t mind dropping a small amount for a clutter free experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/#comment-804719</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Thomas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:40:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=479831#comment-804719</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Facebook could accomplish what you&#039;ve suggested by placing ads (or better, contextual promotions or messages) onto users&#039; News Feeds and Pages directly, perhaps inserted between every &quot;n&quot;-number of Posts. But they&#039;d need to offer their users something in exchange for this (more control, an opt-in system where users allow their News Feed to include third party promotions and messages, etc.). 

Social networks are becoming a top source of referral business - far more than ad-banner clicks. If done correctly - in a way that doesn&#039;t compete or interfere with the way that individual FB users right now are already using the platform to promote themselves, their own influence, and their own offerings - Facebook could help third parties to get the referral business they so desire from all social networks, by making facilitating that connection and possible referral/revenue sharing arrangements between users&#039; News Feeds and Pages, and selected vendors with an interesting offer or promotion. 

In other words, FB should enable users themselves to be the marketplace for third-party promotions, able to select (with some OpenGraph help and recommendations) vendors and offers they feel comfortable sharing with their personal network.

Yes, it&#039;s Facebook&#039;s network, and Facebook could do whatever they want. But if FB wants to monetize any mobile, and further desktop usage, they need to understand that empowerment of users is the best path to success (and in fact has been key to FB&#039;s success so far).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Facebook could accomplish what you&#8217;ve suggested by placing ads (or better, contextual promotions or messages) onto users&#8217; News Feeds and Pages directly, perhaps inserted between every &#8220;n&#8221;-number of Posts. But they&#8217;d need to offer their users something in exchange for this (more control, an opt-in system where users allow their News Feed to include third party promotions and messages, etc.). </p>
<p>Social networks are becoming a top source of referral business &#8211; far more than ad-banner clicks. If done correctly &#8211; in a way that doesn&#8217;t compete or interfere with the way that individual FB users right now are already using the platform to promote themselves, their own influence, and their own offerings &#8211; Facebook could help third parties to get the referral business they so desire from all social networks, by making facilitating that connection and possible referral/revenue sharing arrangements between users&#8217; News Feeds and Pages, and selected vendors with an interesting offer or promotion. </p>
<p>In other words, FB should enable users themselves to be the marketplace for third-party promotions, able to select (with some OpenGraph help and recommendations) vendors and offers they feel comfortable sharing with their personal network.</p>
<p>Yes, it&#8217;s Facebook&#8217;s network, and Facebook could do whatever they want. But if FB wants to monetize any mobile, and further desktop usage, they need to understand that empowerment of users is the best path to success (and in fact has been key to FB&#8217;s success so far).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicholas</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2012/02/02/facebook-just-revealed-its-kryptonite-mobile/#comment-804704</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nicholas]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:50:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=479831#comment-804704</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s sort of difficult for me to believe that they can not see the path to monetizing mobile! The innovation of GroupOn is not offers.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s sort of difficult for me to believe that they can not see the path to monetizing mobile! The innovation of GroupOn is not offers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
