Blog Post

Can We Avoid Another Internet Bubble?

Stay on Top of Enterprise Technology Trends

Get updates impacting your industry from our GigaOm Research Community
Join the Community!

Launching the Om Says daily newsletter, our fearless leader noted that Silicon Valley is full of confusion right now. There’s so much information being thrown at us all that we lose the ability to understand the bigger picture or, in his words, “a whole lot of activity is distracting us, masking what is really happening when viewed from a larger landscape.”

That comment turned my mind to a handful of reports over recent weeks that I’ve been thinking about closely. Amid the torrent of news we see each day, they caught my attention not necessarily because of what was said — but because of how, when and where it was said.

First there were Twitter’s “low-level” acquisition talks, which valued the messaging service at $10 billion, then there was JP Morgan Chase considering a $500 million new media fund, and just the other day came Zynga’s hopes to raise another $250 million, with a $7 billion valuation.

All three stories have some things in common. First, they all send the same underlying message: “There is money to be made by investing in Silicon Valley companies!” Second, they all appeared in the Wall Street Journal (s nws), the newspaper of record for investors, bankers and venture capitalists. Lastly, they’re all speculative.

I don’t mean speculative as in untrue, but speculative in the sense that they reflect something that hasn’t happened yet and might not ever happen. Twitter’s value is based on a hypothetical buy-out (and CEO Dick Costolo apparently says “it’s just a rumor”); Zynga is hoping to secure a $7 billion valuation; and the JP Morgan new media fund is not yet concrete and is not yet investing. These are stories about aspirations.

In this I’m not saying that the Wall Street Journal is reporting anything that’s not actually happening; I’m sure each of these stories is a faithful report of activity that is going on. But stories can make news happen as well, encouraging those who read it to act. Leaking rumored acquisition talks is a time-honored practice for getting another buyer to step up or goad an executive into faster action. What’s crucial to consider is the reason these stories appear when they do and where they do. Executives, investors, acquirers, competitors: Almost everyone who might be involved in getting these stories to the public has some sort of vested interest in seeing particular information either leaked or suppressed.

That’s fine to insiders, who know enough to dismiss a rumor as chatter, or already have the inside track on another deal that’s in the works. But for the vast amount of people who take the information at face value — the sort of people who might chat about this stuff in the office and use it, even in the tiniest way, to inform their thinking — it’s impossible to understand what the motivations are behind each individual rumor.

At the same time, people often assume that the industry has an interest in stopping the bubble from inflating, that nobody wants to return to the bad times of the dotcom crash. Because nobody wants be the guy who buys another Bebo, or oversees a sour marriage like AOL Time Warner (s aol) (s twx), or cuts thousands of jobs and throws in the towel, right?

Well, of course nobody wants that to happen … to them. The truth is, most people think they are smart enough to cash out in time and avoid the worst excesses of the bubble. Except, of course, not everyone can be the smartest person in the room. That sort of thinking is exactly the thing that helps bubbles inflate — and when you combine it all with the other pieces of the puzzle we see — such as Facebook’s $50 billion valuation and loss-making Pandora’s IPO — you’re rapidly assembling all the ingredients for this cycle to blow up.

We may be heading into another bubble. It’s possible we’re already inside it. The news we see each day suggests all the right elements are in place: companies valued much higher than their profits would suggest and old world investors looking to pump money into a growing market for easy returns. And as we start to talk more about a new raft of stock market flotations, the bubble will move from professional investors towards the public market — where it can have really disastrous consequences.

But it doesn’t have to happen. Bubbles are not inevitable. So when you see information about valuations, investments and rumored deals, then remain skeptical: Why is this here? Who gains from this? What else is going on?

Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req’d):

14 Responses to “Can We Avoid Another Internet Bubble?”

  1. What is a bubble?

    a bubble is a bidding war, and this happens when markets are not segmented, for example twitter and salesforce maybe grouped together.

    Think there are less bubbles spread over different types of markets and it should be evaluated that way.

    We do not know by what means these startups are evaluated or what market they are compared to to get these results.

  2. I read wikipedia article on dot com bubble and I was astonished to see how similar conditions are right now. If companies continue to raise money on ridiculous valuation in parts promoted by low interest rates, all it takes for the bubble to burst is govt increasing the rates. Its a complex issue since govt have to keep rates low to propel economy and investor can lend this money cheaply and keep investing in private companies which increases the bubble. Finally these company go public and now public do the same thing. In some ways its even worst since p/e values seems to be much higher now than they were in 2000 and second market are creating ridiculous valuations. Its scary enough that we should keep some cash around for the rainy day!

  3. I disagree that we are in a bubble. There are plenty of Internet startups out there that have some revenue, or no revenue at all and are getting appropriately low valuations with steady investment. If this is a bubble, it is nothing like 2001. It could be a specific type of Internet bubble. In other words Darwin at work here for the “Social Networking” species of Internet bubbles, but I don’t think it is at all. Social Networking is a new paradigm for the Internet. It will define “The Internet” for the mainstream perception. It makes something that was previously very technical and cold, into something more human, “social.” It is successful in anthropomorphizing technology and a powerful meme. The companies discussed are in on the ground floor. Its changing the political landscape already. It will change the Internet cash engine as well.

  4. Honestly, I would kind of like to see a bubble-bust at this point. We need something to get rid of the copious BS there is around (for example) social media marketing, or the ridiculous over-hype of the Next Big (vacuous) Thing (wooh, another tablet!) or this or that revolution (3D TV anyone?), blah blah blah. I’ve suffered through bubble-busts before. They’re painful, certainly. But they seem to be necessary to get rid of the dross that accumulates over time. They give everyone fresh perspective.

  5. What bubble and who cares? Rich people and institutions are throwing play money around. Does it affect the price of oil? Food? Real estate? Real estate could use a boost. Then what difference does it make? This is a good example of leaving the market alone to self correct. Hopefully the Fed feels it does not have to intervene like it did the last time. The economy got off relatively easily in the early 2000s, but taking steps to deflate a bubble now, coming from that recent economic cliff drop would be pure national suicide.

    Bubbles, cash in, cash out is all fake. It is your position vis-a-vis interest and the cost of money. Leave the rates low or just park them somewhere, keep interest rates stable and let the billionaire gorillas knock themselves out. China is in a bit of an inflationary bubble itself right now and will likely hike their own rates, assuming the exchange rate and foreign willingness to buy our debt is unaffected, now is the best time to go for growth, and let Sillycon Valley sort itself out on its own terms.

  6. Bubbles are inevitable as humans are imperfect. Although Facebook’s evaluation of 50 Billion seems crazy, getting the world to use a software cannot be underestimated. We don’t know how many lives Facebook has impacted. Social ties are very important to people, and I think that’s where Facebook’s value comes in.

  7. I can tell you why is this here. Because there are some very rich guys who have invested into these bubbles at very early stages and who can influence media in their own favor. I think its easy.

  8. Bubbles are inevitable as humans are imperfect. And there is always something to learn from the Bubbles. Although Facebook’s evaluation of 50 Billion seems crazy, getting the world to use a software cannot be underestimated. We don’t know how many lives Facebook has impacted. Social ties are very important to people, and that’s where Facebook’s value comes in.