Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.234.38.8

Forum Moderators: rogerd

Message Too Old, No Replies

Facebook sells stake in business!

     
2:55 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member dreamcatcher is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 30, 2003
posts:3719
votes: 0


Facebook has sold a 1.96% stake for $200m (£126m) to a Russian internet firm, a move that values the social networking website at $10bn.

[news.bbc.co.uk...]

3:37 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Administrator

WebmasterWorld Administrator rogerd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 2, 2000
posts:9685
votes: 0


They got a slightly better deal than Microsoft did (pre-economic meltdown), but a valuation of $10 billion for FB is still pretty amazing considering their challenges in building revenue.

On the other hand, FB seems unstoppable in building membership and traffic, so presumably economic viability can happen once they are part of everyone's Internet plumbing.

7:51 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 11, 2004
posts:582
votes: 0


DST's internet businesses account for more than 70% of all page views on Russian language websites.

That's pure gibberish in my opinion: the Russian language web is a wild and large set of sites, and unless they mean that they have small percentages of pretty much all big Russian sites (in which case they can't really say "DST's internet businesses..").

Also, they just lost $200m, because 1.96% of 0 dividend is still 0 ;)

9:57 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 30, 2005
posts:430
votes: 0


"Also, they just lost $200m, because 1.96% of 0 dividend is still 0"

lol I JUST told my colleague the same thing. They aren't profitable and they don't pay dividends. Bigger isn't always better, right Enron, Worldcom... ? I'm more profitable than Facebook!

10:15 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 4, 2004
posts:683
votes: 0


"Russian Internet Firm"

... bring on the spam.

11:16 pm on May 27, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 3, 2002
posts:18903
votes: 0


The money covers their current level of debt, just about, but doesn't do much to secure their future as far as I can see.
12:06 am on May 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Jan 3, 2003
posts:1023
votes: 0


One of the directors of DST is a member of World Bank. DST owns #2 social netrowk, and #3 russian-language website, which is also #1 email provider in Russia. The other director was former director of New Century Holdings, a largest Western firm investing in russian market.

The third director of DST worked in London and for Goldman Sachs.

So my conclusion is - DTS is not "russian" firm. It is a western firm with russian directors (who focus on russian market), and with western money.

[ceoworld.biz...]

12:49 am on May 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 1, 2004
posts:3181
votes: 0


P. T. Barnum would be proud.
6:56 am on May 28, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:July 29, 2007
posts:1518
votes: 9


Haha, there's one born every minute.

Connecting with people who are interested in buying products is profitable, throwing the best party in town... not so much.

5:12 pm on May 30, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from LK 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 16, 2005
posts:2414
votes: 16


One of the owners of DST, Alisher Usmanov, is very controversial. He is known as "the hard man of Russia". I suggest looking at Craig Murray's (former British Ambassador to Uzbeckistan) blog and the Marketwatch story on this.
5:18 am on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:May 9, 2007
posts: 597
votes: 0


How can Facebook keep losing money, yet still be valued so highly !

There are some idiots out there.

They sell lots of ads, so why arn't they making money? They don't need many staff I imagine. Its all on automatic !

So how is anyone else supposed to make money on the web ?

5:44 am on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:May 6, 2008
posts:2011
votes: 0


The few ads on the site do not supplement the outrageous server costs. The data they need to store is exponentially growing...everyday they are worse off.

Whoever "gave" them 200 million is a moron. Unless Facebook starts to charge users, they'll never make the money they need without dumb people "investing" in them.

1:16 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Jan 3, 2003
posts:1023
votes: 0


Some people just don't get it.

Who's the most valuable advertising segment?
Children, closely followed by students.

Who's going to get credit cards? 401Ks? bank accounts? rent new apartment? pay outrageous education fees for practically worthless US college degree? who's buying pizzas, burgers, soda, computers, newest cellphones and newest clothing fads doing all that? who needs to be conditioned into a dumb, metrosexual consumer?

And then there's this invaluable info you are providing YOURSELVES to law enforcement and other goverment spies.

Facebook is INVALUABLE.

1:21 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Moderator from GB 

WebmasterWorld Administrator brotherhood_of_lan is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Jan 30, 2002
posts:4842
votes: 1


It would be fun to query their database, that's for sure but 200M is out of the question for me...
4:02 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

New User

5+ Year Member

joined:Feb 4, 2009
posts: 12
votes: 0


"Who's the most valuable advertising segment?
Children, closely followed by students. "

Would that be because of their high disposable incomes?

Anyone I know who has advertised on FB has concluded that it is an utter waste of money, unless your offering happens to be free or very nearly free.

FB = kids with no money. Ditto Myspace and all the other "me too" social networks.

9:40 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

joined:Jan 3, 2003
posts:1023
votes: 0


As I mentioned earlier, some just don't get it.

One of top 3 largest TV channels by ad revenue? Nickelodeon (kids), $1.6 bln ad revenue, and MTV $1.1 Bln.. Looks like larger is only one channel - ESPN with $3.7 bln. That is what you call "kids with no money".

Social networks are the best place for any kind of social engineering - we are talking about future consumers, future voters etc.

And while searching for that info, it was the first time in my practice that I couldn't find anything on Google and found it on the first page on Bing.com.

9:49 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:May 9, 2007
posts:597
votes: 0


If Russians are now part owners of Facebook does that mean it will be full of banners for Russian Brides ?
9:51 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

5+ Year Member

joined:May 9, 2007
posts:597
votes: 0


One of top 3 largest TV channels by ad revenue? Nickelodeon (kids), $1.6 bln ad revenue, and MTV $1.1 Bln.. Looks like larger is only one channel - ESPN with $3.7 bln. That is what you call "kids with no money".

Yeah but they are tv channels that advertise products such as chippies and candy etc, so that kids can nag their mums when they get to the supermarket.

Kids are not going to click on more serious pay per click ads that companies such as mine want to put up.

10:15 pm on June 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from FR 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 15, 2004
posts:6717
votes: 230


As I mentioned earlier, some just don't get it.

agree with you 100% ..access to data and forward thinking about what one can do with that data in 2,5 10 years or more ..that is the point ..

google should have tried to buy at least a stake ..they could have had everything sewn up for years to come ..that would have been all the data on everyone as they got older ..but they didn't buy in and now it's too late for them ..microsoft also missed that one ..I'm not surprised at all that a Russian company bought in ..the country is( as are many other ex soviet republics ) awash with highly skilled IT people ..If more people spent some time on Russian and other ex Eastern block sites ..or even Arab language sites they would be amazed at the levels of expertise ..and also the lack of "it's only of use if it can make me money right now " mentality ..the long view and what is needed to get there is something that very few in the west "get" ..

12:09 am on June 3, 2009 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:June 1, 2004
posts:3181
votes: 0


>>One of top 3 largest TV channels by ad revenue? Nickelodeon (kids), $1.6 bln ad revenue, and MTV $1.1 Bln.. Looks like larger is only one channel - ESPN with $3.7 bln. That is what you call "kids with no money".

Nick is number 9 on the list I just found. And I suspect a great deal of that is for XMas gifts...