SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Meta Platforms, Inc. (Facebook) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (923)8/18/2012 3:12:20 PM
From: Win-Lose-Draw1 Recommendation  Respond to of 3790
 
DEAR FACEBOOK EMPLOYEES:

"Hope you took advantage of the pre-IPO secondary markets - 'cause you know damn well the bosses now telling you to hang in there and keep shipping did."




To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (923)8/19/2012 6:04:17 PM
From: manalagi1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3790
 
Is Facebook's Zuckerberg in over his hoodie?

By WALTER HAMILTON and JESSICA GUYNN Los Angeles Times

LOS ANGELES - The deepening slide in Facebook Inc.'s stock is fueling talk once considered implausible on Wall Street and in Silicon Valley.

Should Mark Zuckerberg, the social media visionary but neophyte corporate manager, step aside as CEO to let a more seasoned executive run the multibillion-dollar company?

In that scenario, Zuckerberg would remain as the creative force propelling Facebook's technological innovation. But the 28-year-old would cede the CEO title to someone better suited to overseeing operations and building rapport with finicky investors - mundane but essential duties for which Zuckerberg has shown little appetite or aptitude.

"There is a growing sense that Mark Zuckerberg, talented though he may be, is in over his hoodie as CEO of a multibillion-dollar public company," said Sam Hamadeh, head of research firm PrivCo. "While in many cases a company founder can, and does, grow into the job, things are happening so quickly that there is precious little time here for Zuckerberg to do that."

Doubts about the Facebook founder intensified Thursday as the stock closed below $20 for the first time. The shares, which slipped to $19.87, have shed nearly half their value since Facebook's disastrous initial public offering three months ago. The slide continued Friday, with shares losing another 4.1 percent to close at $19.05.

The selling was kicked off by the expiration of provisions that had barred Facebook's venture capital backers from unloading their shares. Trading volume on Thursday was abnormally heavy, a sign of the velocity with which some of the company's earliest investors ran for the exits as soon as they could.

"This was the most anticipated IPO in many years and it was like an exploding cigar," said Barry Ritholtz, head of research firm Fusion IQ. "Every investor thought they were about to become wealthy beyond their wildest dreams, and they had this blow up in their face."

The danger, Ritholtz said, is the drooping stock price could tag the company itself with a "stink of failure" that could make advertisers less willing to use Facebook.

Facebook's troubles stem from numerous factors, including investors' overinflated expectations, the company's unproven strategy for mobile advertising and an IPO that was mangled by both the Nasdaq stock market and Facebook's investment banks. Its first-ever earnings as a public company, released last month, beat analysts' expectations as revenue grew 32 percent year over year. Still, the stock plunged as investors were spooked by rising costs and slowing growth.

Only some of those problems are attributable to Zuckerberg, analysts say. And given he is the company's largest shareholder, with ironclad control over all decisions, nothing would happen without Zuckerberg's assent.

Still, restless investors blame Zuckerberg for several missteps, such as pricing the IPO at a stratospheric $100 billion valuation.

Facebook boosted its IPO price days before the offering, with several large shareholders selling unexpectedly large chunks of their holdings. The moves were seen as siphoning extra profit for the company and big shareholders at the expense of subsequent investors.

Disrespectful?

The enormous valuation left Facebook little room for error, and was seen as hubris by a company that at the time saw few obstacles in its path.

Zuckerberg's indifference to traditional corporate etiquette - he wore sneakers and his trademark hoodie sweatshirt for Facebook's first big investor meeting - is viewed as disrespectful of the corporate world he needs to win over.

"His behavior is what I would expect of someone his age - the hoodies and everything else," said Chris Whalen, senior managing director at Tangent Capital Partners in New York. "He's trying to appeal to his audience instead of being responsible to his investors. His job now is to run the company."

Even Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Jobs, who was known for favoring turtlenecks and jeans, donned a suit in his early days when he was touting his upstart.

Some experts say the criticism of Zuckerberg is overdone.

The stock has fallen because investors have realized that Facebook's growth potential isn't as great as they had thought, analysts said.

"Is it possible that management changes could improve those prospects? Maybe, but I don't think it's a sure bet," said Dan Alpert at New York investment bank Westwood Capital. "Zuckerberg appears to be a decent guy who the market should give a little bit longer to prove his mettle."

Adult supervision

There is precedent for iconic founders to hand off CEO duties.

Larry Page led Google Inc. in its early days, but he and co-founder Sergey Brin, both in their late 20s, were persuaded to bring in technology industry veteran Eric Schmidt to provide "adult supervision" in 2001 when the search company was still privately held.

"Mark Zuckerberg should be the chief product officer and bring in a whole slew of new management that have a very long track record in running companies, like Google did," said Scott Sweet, senior managing partner of Florida-based IPO Boutique.

Zuckerberg and his lieutenants have tried in vain to reverse investor skepticism.

But they've been stymied by the difficulty in determining Facebook's actual value because the business models of social media companies are unproven.

Although Facebook has nearly a billion users, no one is sure whether advertisers can gain traction in selling products to them.

The challenge for Facebook's stock could worsen in coming months.

Facebook freed up about 271 million shares Thursday, adding to the 421 million the company sold in the IPO. An additional 192 million will be released in mid-October and a whopping 1.2 billion shares in mid-November.

Many investors are hesitant to buy Facebook shares until that cloud is lifted.

"Whatever happens this week is a dress rehearsal for November," said Kevin Landis, chief investment officer at Firsthand Capital Management in San Jose, Calif.

Investors hope Zuckerberg will be able to win over skeptics by then.

"Mark Zuckerberg has not yet proven himself a success or a failure," said Michael Pachter, an analyst at Wedbush Securities.

thehawkeye.com



To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (923)8/25/2012 3:59:38 AM
From: Doren  Respond to of 3790
 
DEAR FACEBOOK EMPLOYEES

From: manalagi1 Recommendation of 952 Is Facebook's Zuckerberg in over his hoodie?

I find the "analysis" from the "analysts" to be less than credible. They seem to miss the obvious.

It seemed obvious to me that Zuckerberg learned from past tech IPO mistakes by the progenitors. He dragged out the IPO until the very last minute purposely. He could not have dragged it out further. He smartly retained the majority of the share voting power and a huge chunk of shares. The guy made a lot more money than he would have had they IPO'd early due to a lack of patience. He got all the venture capital he needed too, and more. He's not dumping his shares, because I think he really thinks that FB will be back after the inevitable dilution.

May 20, 2012 Michael Hiltzik
So, against all odds, you managed to get your hands on a few shares of Facebook stock via one of the most hyped initial public offerings of all time and managed to survive its messy first day of trading.Congratulations. You're now married to Mark Zuckerberg. The 28-year-old company founder is today one of the most deeply-entrenched chief executives in American business. Thanks to a two-class stock structure, Zuckerberg will own about 28% of Facebook but control 57% of all shareholder votes. To put it simply, he can do whatever he wants with Facebook, and you, the shareholder, don't have a say — not even if you team up with every other outside shareholder in the company. You can't veto a decision or vote down his choice of board members.





Zuckerberg is a weasel but a very smart weasel. Really you have to give the guy credit for amazing weaselality. He out maneuvered dozens of extremely seasoned venture caps.

This was all predictable. The float was absurdly large. I think the majority of those who bought in probably don't understand the implications of what a float is or what a P/E is. They just went with a Las Vegas "feeling."

All of this has nothing to do with Facebook as a business. Its far more than email. Its getting laid by your exgirlfriend. He he, I'm joking of course but only half joking. Its really about finding old friends and keeping in touch with old friends and nothing in the world is worth more than friends, except family. We used to lose touch but no more and that is worth a lot.

The question for me is:

Once Zuckerberg's rape of the innocents (including stock optioned employees) is over... after that November flood of shares is released... can Facebook develop more revenue streams...

or

can they do what Google did?

Google really didn't do it very well considering what they have which is a virtual monopoly on search. Sergy and Brin are not Steve Jobs. I don't think Zukerberg is either. Still all these guys are smart and they hire a lot of very smart engineers. Their Achilles Heel is they don't understand the difference between truly creative design and brilliant engineering of design, because they are all engineers, and engineers are arrogant. That insight about design understood by Jobs made Apple what it is today. Engineers building great design. Jobs understood both sides to great technology products, and he had LONG term vision. He valued strategy over tactics. VERY RARE. (Zukerberg, too, might have that strategy over tactics smarts, and the patience of Jobs. Big long term advantage.)

However despite that lack of creativity past their first idea (search) Goog were STILL able to monetize the company, and develop some smaller new streams. In retrospect it would have been surprising if they hadn't.

The ONE really great aspect of FB IMHO, even if its not Apple, is that its really lost its shine. Hopefully that tarnish will cause the stock to drop to irrationally low levels. It looks like it might. I'm hoping.

(If I were Zuk I'd dump my stock... then buy it back lower... can you imagine what would happen to the price if he dumped his?)

That really never happened with Goog. This drop in price may eventually be a great bottom fish. Its sort of like being able to get in on Goog as if it had dropped initially rather than steadily climbed.

The only real irrational drop in goog happened understandably in the 2008 disaster. Could have made some great money there, if one had the stomach, when the entire world economy was in jeopardy. If FB drops much more its almost a no brainer, there will be a limit. Unless 2008 happens again.

Whether FB can figure out how to create new stuff to value add is another question, however its really sort of a no brainer that FB will figure out how to monetize a billion eyeballs. How could they fail? Nope they are too smart to fail, even if they aren't creative geniuses. Its possible but they'd really REALLY have to screw it up.