homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 50.17.162.174
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Subscribe and Support WebmasterWorld
Home / Forums Index / Social Media / Facebook Marketing
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: httpwebwitch

Facebook Marketing Forum

    
Facebook 4Q Revenue Reaches $1.585 Billion, With Ad Revenue Up 41pct, Ending Full Year at $5.089 Billion
engine




msg:4540960
 3:46 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

Facebook, Inc. (NASDAQ: FB) today reported financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2012.

"In 2012, we connected over a billion people and became a mobile company," said Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook founder and CEO. "We enter 2013 with good momentum and will continue to invest to achieve our mission and become a stronger, more valuable company."

Facebook 4Q Revenue Reaches $1,585 Billion, With Ad Revenue Up 41pct, Ending Full Year at $5.089 Billion
[investor.fb.com]
Fourth Quarter 2012 Operational Highlights


•Monthly active users (MAUs) were 1.06 billion as of December 31, 2012, an increase of 25% year-over-year
•Daily active users (DAUs) were 618 million on average for December 2012, an increase of 28% year-over-year
•Mobile MAUs were 680 million as of December 31, 2012, an increase of 57% year-over-year
•Mobile DAUs exceeded web DAUs for the first time in the fourth quarter of 2012
Recent Business Highlights


•Mobile revenue represented approximately 23% of advertising revenue for the fourth quarter of 2012, up from approximately 14% of advertising revenue in the third quarter of 2012
•Facebook launched Graph Search Beta, a structured search tool that enables users for the first time to find people, places, photos and other content that has been shared on Facebook
•Launched Facebook for Android 2.0, completely rebuilt to deliver improved stability and faster performance and opened Facebook Messenger to anyone with a telephone number

Fourth Quarter 2012 Financial Highlights


Revenue — Revenue for the fourth quarter totaled $1.585 billion, an increase of 40%, compared with $1.13 billion in the fourth quarter of 2011.


 

submaza




msg:4540969
 4:25 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

There will be time i think when facebook will overcome google.com in advertisement

particleman




msg:4540971
 4:28 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

Doubtful, not unless they figure out how to become a real search engine. Displaying an ad based on someone's interest is not near as effective as displaying an ad based on what someone is looking for (adwords).

engine




msg:4540977
 4:41 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

particleman, i've been testing Graph Search Beta and, although it's a work in progress, it has great potential. Not as a general search engine, but, as a Facebook search engine. Think about it for a moment. It's doing what Google's already running.

Clarence




msg:4541020
 6:07 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

Facebook is no longer the under dog in Online Advertising. In a Few year they will be the dominate Online Marketing Channel.

They just implemented Re-Targeting, Conversion Tracking, and a little known feature called Audience Tracking "A Gold Mine for online marketers", as soon as they find a way to crack the user intent market "keywords" Facebook will reign supreme.

My suggestions for user intent is: Facebook shouldn't try to be the search engine, but create a content network, and become the first AD a visitor see after they complete a search and land on the publishers' website, and track that incoming search intent "why Google is hiding incoming Keywords", and allow advertisers Retargetng based on previous search terms on Facebook or other sites in their content network.

If Facebook works with publishers to determine the intent "keywords" of a page Facebook can tie intent search phases with Facebook users and delivery related ads on the publishers' site, across the content network and on Facebook.

SevenCubed




msg:4541025
 6:13 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

Clarence I don't want to burst your bubble of enthusiasm but they won't be around long enough (as an everyday destination) to accomplish all that. They reached their peak at the IPO which is of course why they IPO'd when they did.

Clarence




msg:4541100
 9:49 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

I love pessimist.

Unless you been living under a rock for the last 2-3 years, you would see that Facebook's growth is far larger then a destination. In a lot of circle it's has become a means of communication a step above email.

It stopped being used as a Social network "per se" a few years ago, now it's more of a communications channel.

I would call it evolution. Smoke Signals, Mail, Telegraphy, Mail, Radio, Telephone, Cell Phone, Email, Instant messaging, Video conferencing, now Face-booking.

People use it as their main median to communication with their large network of friends, associates, and Now Whole families.

It's less of a destination, and honestly more of a dependences now days.

People are kind of locked it for now, with their data stored on it (Pictures, Videos, Connection, Contact, Messages, etc).

I'm a big email guy, but lately i find it easier to reach people through Facebook now.


And with marketing Dollars flooding in, it will get bigger, and make it harder for a replacement! Any potential real competitor can now be purchased in Whole and added.

But you probably hate Facebook, don't believe in it, etc, but just sit back and watch!.

I will bump this thread in a few year ;)

engine




msg:4541106
 10:11 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

I have to admit, i'm with you, Clarence.

It doesn't mean I like the dependence that so many have, or the personal information that so many are blindly submitting, or the way new rules are rolled out, etc.

FB is not going to go away overnight, it's become too entwined in peoples lives.

As a webmaster and marketer I have to go with what is current, or up-and-coming.

SevenCubed




msg:4541107
 10:11 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

It's pointless for me to try to explain it any further. It would be just an absolute waste of time. That rock you are referring to these days is the internet. If you've been living on it exclusively then you have lost your ability to think for yourself.

Very clearly if you think a picture of a stranger on your facebook page is what you define as a friend, well, I'll reserve comments.

My friends, they are warm people with a pulse that I can actually see in their neck veins as I sit with them in person and have real conversations. I also benefit from their body language and tones of expression to prevent me from mistaking their comments as one coming from a fool compared to one simply acting like a fool for a particular reason.

People are kind of locked it for now...


Send my condolences to them when you talk to them in person.

I don't hate facebook, I don't hate anything (even google) but I also know where to direct my allegiances.

It's very difficult to understand a person's character with an absence of voice or gestures. I'll use incrediBILL as an example. He has wit and on more then a few occasions I've been drawn into something that he commented on in a tongue in cheek manner. Of course by the time I realized he was kidding it was too late, I had already objected to what he was saying (wipe away that smirk incrediBILL).

If it was an in person conversation he wouldn't get that upper hand, but that's ok, I enjoy the challenge :)

Anyway this was a very quick reply without thinking it out much because I'm in a hurry. A honey just called me up to go out for a walk and talk so I have to get out of here quickly. Maybe I'll come back to it later tonight.

Clarence




msg:4541129
 11:21 pm on Jan 31, 2013 (gmt 0)

Facebook isn't perfect, but the power they are putting into the hands of people, and marketers and publishers is huge!

They have open access to mass communication with you target audiences. As a webmaster you would be pretty foolish not to consider it, or to try and ignore it. Because you competitor "or future competitor isn't"

Second, in the age of search where more of our traffic is going through a single destination "Google" which is restricting our data, i would think web master would welcome and support a new and better way to reach and engage their target audience?

I don't get it.

For me Facebook is a blessing. The page for my main site is now 56,000 Fan strong and i do more traffic from Facebook now then Google, and I have been able to build a large email list from Facebook then Google, and i can target my fan through Facebook ad for pennies per click generating consistent traffic and engagement.

I wish Facebook was bigger.

I think i should go and invest in some Facebook stock.

SevenCubed




msg:4541533
 6:43 pm on Feb 1, 2013 (gmt 0)

First of all I'll point out that Clarence and I are obviously approaching this from a different perspective. He's seeing it as an ultimate marketing channel and in his own words says it's not a social network. That much we agree on, it's not a social network. That's simply what the marketing community has successfully presented it as in order to corral consumers.

This latest quarterly report was seriously lacking in any good news from a financial perspective.

Mobile revenue represented approximately 23% of advertising revenue for the fourth quarter of 2012, up from approximately 14% of advertising revenue in the third quarter of 2012

I would expect that to be so when you consider that period was one that revolves around the apex of marketing for retailers. I would imagine that much of the economy depends on high sales during the last 2 months of each year. Needless to say most advertising budgets would splurge during that time. Ads must have been running rampant. Any advertising network should be able to make a profit during that time span. But, let's see them sustain that throughout the year.

"We enter 2013 with good momentum and will continue to invest to achieve our mission and become a stronger, more valuable company."

Well duh.

"In 2012, we connected over a billion people and became a mobile company,"


A mobile company? What kind of a senseless statement is that? Are they now selling facebook branded smartphones? No. Did they become a telecom provider? I think I remember reading somewhere that they now offer voice calls? Can that be done to landlines or just between other mobile users? Is it across all types of devices or restricted to certain platforms? I still can't see how that makes them a mobile company. How will they generate revenue from that? Will people have to listen to a voice advertisement prior to being able to make a call? That should go over well. If making their site accessible to mobile users makes them a mobile company then I guess most of us will also become mobile companies in 2013-14 too.

So why make a senseless statement like that? Simple. Because all the hype surrounds mobile these days so he has to throw that in for good measure to perpetuate the myth of value. Just like a few months ago they were "becoming a search engine". Then a week or so before this latest quarterly report they let the "Graph Search" out of the bag (in very early beta, sounds like alpha to me). They're simply trying to ride on Google's coat tails of success by implying that because google made large fortunes from search they will have access to those same fortunes. Wrong. It's all about intention. It's that simple. Intention for accessing a search engine increases the odds of wanting to purchase something. Intention for accessing facebook -- to catch up on gossip for many youngsters or for some more realistic interaction between families separated by large distances.

Monthly active users (MAUs) were 1.06 billion as of December 31, 2012

Very highly unlikely. We've discussed this before. Many mega corporations have individual accounts for each of their brands. One I looked into has 19 major consumer product brands, each has their own facebook persona.

Many people have multiple facebook accounts, one for each of their alter-egos, or their cats, dogs, babies, events, on and on. Facebook cannot weed out all the multiple accounts per household or per business.

The highest adoption rate for facebook has already peaked, it's behind us. Any further growth can only come from developing countries where ads will be mostly useless due to lack of disposable income.

It's beyond my understanding why some newspaper or other media outlet doesn't ask MZ a very simple straightforward question: Do they equate their stats as 1 billion users or accounts? Has it been asked anywhere that I am not aware of?

Facebook is only riding on their earlier adoption rate just like google. Now in desperation facebook is flinging dung all over the place to attempt to bring in streams of nickle and dime revenue -- gifting, gift cards, and so many more that I can't even remember them all. If advertising revenue was going to save them there is no way they would be wasting time and effort in the nickle and dime stuff.

As for all their numbers, the GAAP stuff, take it with a grain of salt. They can weave and rearrange all kinds of scenarios to fit the market apprehension they are attempting to alleviate.

Needless to say all of the above is just my humble opinion of course.

I love pessimist.

I don't know where you get that impression from. I'm probably one of the least pessimistic people on this rock. I'm an eternal optimist and never let shades of illusion influence my thinking. I always accept each day and what I will learn from it. On some occasions I may drift towards feeling slightly overwhelmed but I don't let it sink to the point of pessimism. I'll alter my path before it gets to that point. I'm realistic.

...you would see that Facebook's growth is far larger then a destination...

I strongly disagree but if a way of expressing my disagreement doesn't come to my thoughts in less than 30 seconds I have to let it slide or my mind will get in the way.

In a lot of circle it's has become a means of communication a step above email.

It stopped being used as a Social network "per se" a few years ago, now it's more of a communications channel.

As a communication channel I think Twitter is more effective based on my observations. But they don't have the souls of consumers up for auction so I can see why it's considered less attractive for marketers. By the way, I am a marketer too -- a passive one, and it works for me and fits well into my lifestyle.

I would call it evolution. Smoke Signals, Mail, Telegraphy, Mail, Radio, Telephone, Cell Phone, Email, Instant messaging, Video conferencing, now Face-booking.

Good grief. Queue the violin music.

People use it as their main median to communication with their large network of friends, associates, and Now Whole families.

Play it again Nero.

It's less of a destination, and honestly more of a dependences now days.

There's help available for that.

And with marketing Dollars flooding in, it will get bigger, and make it harder for a replacement!

Marketing dollars might be flooding in, maybe yes, maybe no, but floods recede in due time (Summer 2014).

I will bump this thread in a few year ;)

That's your right. One of us might be wrong, one might be right. However if it works itself out as I foresee, based on cold hard facts, I won't be looking this thread up to come and rub your nose in it. I'm more of an Aikido type, I prefer to just let others defeat themselves while I stand back and watch them flailing all over the place.

Second, in the age of search where more of our traffic is going through a single destination "Google" which is restricting our data, i would think web master would welcome and support a new and better way to reach and engage their target audience?

Yes I agree. But it's not available through any of the current choices. I have a personal project coming up and I have made a definitive decision to block ALL google IPs to the site as well as display a message to Chrome visitors that their browser isn't supported, they will be welcome to reload the blank page with a different browser to get the content. I'm going to attempt to use Twitter to promote it. That way I can just push info to the ether without infringing on anyone's right to privacy and they can find me by choice through hashtags or electronic word-of-mouth. I suspect it will be high quality traffic. I WILL NOT have any type of "social" media account other than Twitter.

The page for my main site is now 56,000 Fan strong and i do more traffic from Facebook now then Google, and I have been able to build a large email list from Facebook then Google, and i can target my fan through Facebook ad for pennies per click generating consistent traffic and engagement.

In a previous post somewhere here on WW you've said before that you spend "large amounts of money on facebook advertising". At that time I was going to jump into the thread to suggest you might be able to get better value and more highly targeted traffic for less dollars with Google Adwords, but I didn't. However "large amounts of money" is a relative term but "pennies per click" and "large amounts of money" contradict each other.

I wish Facebook was bigger.

There's a subliminal thought being expressed there that in it's current state it's not adequately producing enough for you?

I think i should go and invest in some Facebook stock.

Well with your highly successful venture into facebook marketing you must surely be able to afford to risk a few hundreds of thousands of dollars so go for it!

My stance with facebook is that I have no doubt it may be beneficial for a select few niches. It's like everything else, there are exceptions to the rule. But as far as I'm concerned the rule is that it's a total waste of time and effort for most businesses.

Finally I just want to add my post here is not an attempt to be vindictive toward Clarence. All is expressed strongly, but with no ill intentions. I just like Clarence's ability to stir me into debate through deeper thinking and expression.

Clarence




msg:4541574
 8:24 pm on Feb 1, 2013 (gmt 0)

In a previous post somewhere here on WW you've said before that you spend "large amounts of money on facebook advertising". At that time I was going to jump into the thread to suggest you might be able to get better value and more highly targeted traffic for less dollars with Google Adwords, but I didn't. However "large amounts of money" is a relative term but "pennies per click" and "large amounts of money" contradict each other.


Large Amounts of money, and pennies "PER" click! Re-Read that! Spending $1,000's of dollars and getting each click for pennies, not spending pennies, only paying pennies per click PPC.

I'm not a Facebook evangelist, and i won't try to persuade you!

Good luck!

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Social Media / Facebook Marketing
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved