| 5:44 pm on May 11, 2012 (gmt 0)|
People will eventually decide their private and personal information is not to be used to empty the wallets of their loved ones. Unsolicited promotion will fragment Facebook beyond repair, perhaps sooner rather than later.
| 5:50 pm on May 11, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I think they are just trying to push out more possible income streams before their IPO. It could make investors that know little about them think that they have the ability to generate more income and this may bolster their future stock value.
I personally cannot see how this could become a viable income stream.
| 10:18 pm on May 11, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I agree with Sgt_Kickaxe. I hope the wording on the BBC article wasn't taken directly from Facebook, because it sounds very sleazy. If it was from a Facebook spokesman (which I doubt), then Facebook may indeed die sooner than later.
| 12:59 am on May 12, 2012 (gmt 0)|
If they are looking to generate more income then why not jump into the search game?
| 4:10 am on May 12, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Because they have been planning an IPO and don't yet know who their primary owners will be. As soon as they see who their financial backers are, and gauge how much or how little those backers are also behind Google, they'll decide to tackle search(or not, depending on who owns stock).
|If they are looking to generate more income then why not jump into the search game? |
I truly do NOT like a Wall st backed company manipulating private data for profit, it's a recipe for unabashed greed and abuse.
Before you argue that all companies do it with your data remember that Facebook has your data and that of all your closest friends and relatives too, including constant updates. They have everyone you care about to use against one another for profit. Check out these widgets cause uncle Joe loves them! Heck, we told aunt Rita about Joe liking them and she bought 3 of them! So buy some too! ick! Lines have definitely been crossed here.
| 8:36 am on May 12, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Oh dear. I'm not impressed with this move. If it's 'friends and family, why on earth would they want to pay? If it's purely for business, they it could be lucrative. |
Bang on engine.
Just to add on for their another feature - Its like generating revenue by 'controlling' likes to outsmart likes SPAMMERS. There are so many out there who earn their livelihood by merely spamming 'likes'
They are planning to extend it to each feature if they succeed - which might not materialize if this fails.
| 10:53 pm on May 15, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|The other day, one of Facebook's bigger clients was privately complaining to me. |
This gentleman is in charge of digital advertising for a worldwide company. He told me: "First they charge me for ads. Then they try and charge me again in order to make sure those ads get seen by more people."
He was referring to Facebook's presentation in February when it suggested brands have "Premium ads." You know, ones that might be enjoyed by more than the estimated 16 percent of fans who actually see a brand's messaging currently.
It's hard not to imagine that -- despite Mark Zuckerberg's insistence that Facebook will always be free -- the soon-to-public company will have to seek more revenues from its biggest franchise: every single one of its users.
Another viewpoint... same issue.