Microsoft to Pay $240 Million for Stake in Facebook 277
Nrbelex writes to mention The New York Times is reporting that Microsoft has beat out Google and Yahoo for a 1.6% stake in Facebook. The investment will cost Microsoft $240 million valuing the total site at somewhere around $15 billion. "The astronomical valuation for Facebook is primarily evidence that Microsoft executives believed they could not afford to lose out on the Facebook deal. Google appears to be building a dominant position in the race to serve advertisements online. Fearing it might lose control over the next generation of computer users, Microsoft has been attempting to match and in some cases block Google's plans, even if that effort is costly."
The next Big thing, again (Score:5, Insightful)
After hearing so much about mySpace I finally surfed it, set up a page and looked around. It's all rubbish. People ask to join your list of friends to spam you and the interface is clunky at best. I think such a site would be a good idea, but their implementation falls short of the mark by leagues.
Along comes Facebook, cleaner interface, perhaps better ability to keep crap from showing up in comments or messages people send you. Hopefully if you are spammed there's an actual admin who gives them the boot, though it's quick and easy to join so an abuser will likely create accounts as needed for pest purposes. When rot sets in people will leave and go to the next big site, leaving mySpace and Facebook to host an ever shrinking group willing to put up with crap.
Two hundred forty! Million! Dollars!? IIIIII'mmmmmm the CAAAAAT! Seriously this is great news for those who hold ownership in this site, they'll rake in a very considerable profit.
to translate (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, they didn't spend $240 million for 1.6% because Facebook is worth $15 billion. They paid $240 million because they're in the middle of a pissing match with Google.
MyFaceYouBook (Score:4, Insightful)
In six months' time Facebook will be "worth" half that and in a year it'll be worth nothing.
I like social media, I think it's highly useful and may very well change the face of the internet in the same way the web changed the face of traditional media like newspapers, but this is Dot Com Bubble 2.0 as far as I can see. Crazy prices for Crazy products. Good on them for making the $$$$ but seriously
I cannot hold myself (Score:3, Insightful)
WTF!?! Facebook is worth of 15 billion dollars? I thought paying more than a billion for Youtube was dumb.
Re:to translate (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:... why? (Score:3, Insightful)
And Adobe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The next Big thing, again (Score:4, Insightful)
What I really think this shows is that Microsoft thinks Facebook, and not myspace, is going to be dominant soon and for a long time. Facebook has the better interface and the better look/feel, and their user base is exploding. However, I also agree with the parent in saying that people will soon be leaving facebook for greener pastures. If the dot-com boom and embarrassing posting on slashdot about being worthy a lot of money are any indication, the owners should start selling their sharesnow, getting some of the insane wealth in case they can't get it later.
Re:The next Big thing, again (Score:5, Insightful)
These are social sites. They are useless without the people you socialize with being on them too. MySpace and Facebook, thus, have it very good for the future.
What's 1.6% of nothing? (Score:3, Insightful)
*Sniff* ... *Sob* (Score:3, Insightful)
Karma can be tough.
Goes to show a main business rule:
Not what *you* think is a cool interweb app is a cool interweb app. If you can think the concept 'cool interweb app' you are most likely more intelligent than 99% of the poplulation and what you think matters zilch against any possible demografic. What your *customers* think, on the other hand, is *all* that matters in business. Be they 250 Quadzillion Facebook users or a board of half-a-dozen
Re:good thing many people have the sites sourcecod (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The future of social networking? (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. Facebook answers two questions: what are my friends up to and who else do they know? How is that not better done with other technology? Who wants to lock into one company's platform to manage their social life?
Anyone remember Friendster? Yeah, it collapsed under the weight of its users, but long before that it stopped being interesting. Orkut had the hardware and was easier to use and its discussion group features brought something new to the table, but it never went anywhere, either.
It took "gen Y", with it's comfort with the Internet coupled with a lack of sophistication regarding it, to turn Facebook and MySpace into something enduring and popular. But they're still going to get bored with it. These things are toys, and they always will be until they can become as simple and ubiquitous as email or text messaging.
At least LinkedIn, with its focus on career networking, is actually useful for grown-ups. That *might* have a future, if they can get past the creepy spammer vibe to the whole thing.
I don't really think Google cares (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The next Big thing, again (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yeah, but what IS Facebook? (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently a lot of HS and college students use it now to form homework/study groups, things like that. And, of course, less wholesome things. One interesting side effect of its history is that (from what I've seen) most people are registered under their real names there (and if you want to join a college's network, you still have to use an email address or alum email from the school). So it can be much easier to find people than on other sites where people use aliases, which has various implications.
Re:What's 1.6% of nothing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:good thing many people have the sites sourcecod (Score:3, Insightful)
Due to his obstinacy over Facebook he now wonders why no one ever invites him out to do stuff now which I find slightly funny XD
Re:good thing many people have the sites sourcecod (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with both of these sites in terms of future value, they are simply just a small microcosm of the overall world wide web, doomed to a limited existence. Cheap web serving appliances and IPv6 will be the death of both myspace and facebook.
M$ making the typical Ballmer blunder by buying into a section of the web at inflated prices as it's demise is on the horizon, well, at least to those who have at least some understanding of the changing nature of the internet, as hardware reduces in price, software becomes free and broadband bandwidth grows.
For either google or M$ to buy into facebook is an addmission of their own incompetence in managing their web portals and being unable to create their own desirable virtual community or in the case of both of those companies, to so mismanage their existing virtual communities, that they to lose to relative new comers.
You only buy competitors when you can't compete. As for web advertising dominance, expect a come from behind, old world mass media, fracturing of that business space. They have a depth of expertise, as well as extensive libraries of content. Admittedly slow to the party, which sees them currently behind, but they will leverage their existing media distribution systems to push out and marginalize what is basically just a 'search engine'(google) and an 'OS/office suite'(M$).
Did no one pay attention to how Newscorp sutlely promoted myspace by inserting references to it in their news papers, television shows, cable network and movies (the most interesting targeted ones were references to myspace in Sunday paper cartoons). As well as of course the expected advertising as news articles.