facebook and its giant hype-ridden PR push will probably backfire and they won't be able to get an investor/buyer at these ridiculous valuations. They'll have to go the IPO way and IPO will not do well (at least not at the valuations they're suggesting).
If you go to a VC with a new idea and ask him to invest in it, one of the first things he'll ask is, how hard would this be for someone else to develop? That is, how much difficult ground have you put between yourself and potential pursuers?
For facebook the question "how hard?" is meaningless. There are a 1000 replicons already waiting to take its place. The only thing wrong with what Ballmer said is that it isn't "a couple years", but "right this very moment".
"I think these things [social networks] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people," Mr. Ballmer told Times Online yesterday.
Ballmer subsequently added:
"I think these things [television shows] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [talking motion pictures] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [rock and roll music] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [hip hop music] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [fast food restaurants] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [video games] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [digital music players] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [search engines] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [the Internet] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
And finally:
"I think these things [personal computers] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
I remember having this conversation at Startup School last year with some very smart hackers over dinner. The overwhelming majority felt that Facebook was exactly that, a fad like MySpace or Friend or whatever, that it won't be around in 5 years, that they don't have any real technology, etc. I was the only person who disagreed.
I argued that they have an amazing team, that they control the most accurate and real social graph on the planet, they are cooking up something big with it, and they will without a doubt not only be around, but be much bigger in 5 years.
6 months, 1 platform, 5000 apps, and 50 million users later, I'm feeling pretty comfortable about my stance, I don't know about the other guys.
All of these social network tools/sites will have their momentum. But thus far, none has been able to maintain it for more than 5 years. If Facebook could be bigger in its 6th and 7th year, then Steve Ballmer will eat his words. Until then, the fact that social networking site is a fad stands still.
12 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 24.6 ms ] threadWake me up when there's news. I bet all those stupid Microsoft investment stories were planted by Facebook's PR firm.
"There can't be any more deep technology in Facebook than what dozens of people could write in a couple of years. That's for sure," he said.
If he really thinks Facebook is about the technology, he is completely missing the point.
http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html
For facebook the question "how hard?" is meaningless. There are a 1000 replicons already waiting to take its place. The only thing wrong with what Ballmer said is that it isn't "a couple years", but "right this very moment".
"I think these things [social networks] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people," Mr. Ballmer told Times Online yesterday.
Ballmer subsequently added:
"I think these things [television shows] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [talking motion pictures] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [rock and roll music] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [hip hop music] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [fast food restaurants] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [video games] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [digital music players] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [search engines] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
"I think these things [the Internet] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
And finally:
"I think these things [personal computers] are going to have some legs, and yet there's a faddishness, a faddish nature about anything that basically appeals to younger people."
I argued that they have an amazing team, that they control the most accurate and real social graph on the planet, they are cooking up something big with it, and they will without a doubt not only be around, but be much bigger in 5 years.
6 months, 1 platform, 5000 apps, and 50 million users later, I'm feeling pretty comfortable about my stance, I don't know about the other guys.
Hm, if Google analyzes the content of e-mail as much as people say they do, they can probably get a much more accurate social graph.