| Reading this article, one does raise questions about Facebook's past practices which in my opinion, is becoming very aggressive and contradicting. I don't think I need to call them out in particular, just look at all opinion pieces on various analysis of Facebook's numbers with a google search. I think the HN community have discussed at great lengths and even Veritasium's video have talked about some of the things they like to do when Wall Street is watching. So my question is, why? Why show one side to the world and the other a very different treatment one that must appease Wall Street? I get that public companies are on the line when it comes to Wall Street but if a company that is supposedly almost as valuable as Google but unable to print cash like Google, does it not make sense that Facebook will be overly aggressive and downright questionable when it comes to strategies to maximize it's user base which it heavily relies on for it's current valuation? This is the vibe I'm getting whenever I read something Mark writes. No credibility that matches my standards which other tech giant easily passes. Just take a look at TWTR. Investors are signaling they are increasingly anxious to see more cash and sooner. TWTR looks like the first to go and as global risk premium increases so do the continued viability of FB against cash rich giants like Google & Microsoft. I'm going to do some research on FB and see if there's any shorting opportunities. If TWTR can crash and burn, there's nothing stopping FB which operates on the same business model of building an audience first before seriously monetizing it. I'd love it if somebody could offer more insights or even correct me, but I can't shake the feeling, Facebook is in serious trouble as reflected in their strange policies recently, especially around Fake News and trying to enter an attricious battle in China. Why would FB keep doing what they were doing 10 years ago if they have money printing machine like Google Adwords? I don't think they'll figure it out in time. |