Quote:
Originally Posted by eroticsexxx
What you're saying is logical, if you look at things strictly in regards to satiating one's surfers merely on a company's main site. However, Zuckerberg and crew are designing according to a developer perspective (ie. Make the platform easy to integrate into (and beneficial for) other major sites). As a result internet users, despite any misgivings about the brand, will have a greater tendency to use it because the FB login and other related services are becoming relatively ubiquitous.
Notice that twitter is following a similar developmental process.
|
I see what you're saying. I understand and acknowledge that Facebook's integration with other major media sites as well as mobile apps is a strength and shows they are expanding their reach and making efforts to further solidify & integrate their brand. If facebook was able to offer a deeper level of integration based on a proprietary technology, or if they were able to forge exclusive relationships with other titans to keep competitors out, that could be something that would give them that edge... but as you pointed with Twitter- other social media sites are able to follow, building off FB's the lead and doing the same.
My issue with the facebook valuation is it seems to be largely based on what might be other than what is now. Facebook has amazing potential but until they execute on some of their plans to make themselves more profitable and less disposable (by doing things like further diversifying their services and building consumer confidence) it's all conjecture.
I just feel, based on the information available to me, that a good portion of the valuation seems to be riding on what I perceive to be an unknown quantity. We have to also put things into perspective that this is a strategically leaked valuation, not an official release by Goldman Sachs for consumption of the general public. I believe this is a very calculated move as way to float a number to the masses and still minimize any risk to reputation.