Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Cierto, perdón por el error. Sigue sin estar nada mal invertir anualmente más de 500 millones de dólares solamente en "cacharrada". Y hasta me parece poco, sinceramente. Todo lo relacionado hoy en día con la "nube", requiere de una inversión descomunal.

Facebook tiene detrás una inversión bestial en bienes tangibles. Otra cosa es cuantificar lo que suponen los datos que poseen y lo que vale la dependencia que tiene la gente de su producto. Hoy por hoy a mi me parece que vale muchísimo, pero como todo en internet, cualquier mínimo detalle te hace tirar todo por la borda.
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Si "mañana" alguien como Google, vuelve a la carga y consigue una red social que enganche, podría hacer caer ese valor de FB a poco más que el precio por kilo de chatarra. Otra cosa es que suceda o no, lógicamente es imposible aventurarlo, pero es muy volátil como todas las puntocom.
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Precisamente por todo lo que decís, la valoración de la empresa debiera ser menor aún.

Todo lo que comentáis son gastos, que evidentemente son necesarios para que funcione el servicio. Y esos gastos hay que pagarlos... ¿de dónde sale la pasta? y ¿de cuánta pasta en ingresos estamos hablando?

Eso son los conceptos "en bruto" que luego habría que analizar más en detalle, conociendo las inversiones que hayan podido realizar en determinadas empresas (Zynga, Instagram, etc.)

Pero si sólo sumo gastos... y no conozco los ingresos... no podré calcular los beneficios...

Y está claro que alguien sí que ha hecho ese ejercicio y con esos datos ha realizado una valoración que ya ha bajado desde los 104 mil millones a algo menos de 85 mil...

Hay cosas que huelen mal, como las correcciones que publicaron tanto Morgan Stanley como Goldman Sachs sobre las previsiones de facturación, indicando que su número de usuarios crece más rápido que la publicidad que genera... Y eso lo han hecho después de presentar el prospecto de la OPV.

La gente compra en función de las expectativas de crecimiento. Si la incógnita de los ingresos se resuelve con la publicidad y la previsión de crecimiento es menor que la de los gastos que generan una masa de usuarios cada vez más y más grande... está claro que la tendencia tiene que ser a bajar.

:ok :ok :ok
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

La facturación de 2011 creo haber leído que han sido 4500M$, dejando unos beneficios de 900M$.

Revisando por ahí veo que en mayo'11 se estimaban 2000/400M$, y en diciembre'10 1600/200M$.

A mi me parece otra burbuja, que hará "replantearse" a todos eso de comprar por 500M$ estudios con una sola aplicación, 1000M$ por Instagram,... etc etc etc.


:hola
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Es información un tanto antigua, pero es interesante y explica el modelo de negocio del Caralibro...

Facebook-Business.jpg



:ok :ok :ok
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Y algo más que he leído en http://tommytoy.typepad.com/tommy-t...s-could-result-in-another-dotcom-bubble-.html con lo que estoy muy de acuerdo:

The next time you hear about an online business that gives away its product or service away for free and 'monetize the eyeballs' that result, consider this:

  • The Number of Users is Finite - Growth in the number of users or eyeballs eventually slows down as a sites users nears the saturation point, and eventually the total number of users peaks. This is especially applicable to social networks like Facebook, Twitter and Foursquare.

  • Advertising Revenues Will Eventually Peak - Advertiser's pay for ad impressions or the number of eyeballs that can see their ads. Since the number of users is a finite number, social media revenues will grow in some proportion to total users. Social media ad spending represents a fixed percentage of total advertising dollars in the U.S. and social media's share of total ad spending has shrunk 25% since its peak in 2007.

  • Social Networks Eventually Reach A Critical Inflection Point - The number of Facebook users has already reached saturation in the U.S. and parts of Europe. As growth in users begins to decline ad revenues will also decline, and will eventually peak. The social network will eventually have to depend on other revenue streams to continue growing.
:ok :ok :ok
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Si el tema está es que Facebook estará de moda hasta que salga otro que sepa atraer a los usuarios y ofrezca algo novedoso sobre lo que ya ofrecía Facebook, un nuevo modelo de red social donde hacer el gilipollas de forma más fácil y efectiva.

Decían hace un rato que hubo una circular del banco que gestionó la salida a bolsa de Facebook donde hacía previsiones a la baja. La circular solo ha llegado a los grandes inversores, así que al final esto no ha sido más que un movimiento especulativo de cara a las vacaciones en el Caribe.
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

A ver, si la gente compró acciones de Bankia... Cómo no van a comprar las del caralibro?
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Las acciones son participaciones para ganar dinero a largo plazo, los que pretendían forrarse en dos días estaban equivocados. Ahora la empresa está en el océano de la especulación, con olas de 15 metros zarandeando el barco. Pero es un barco seguro que llegará a puerto en un futuro
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Que no Tozzi, que es otra burbuja tecnológica.
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Han denunciado a unas... organizaciones conocidas como Goldman Sachs y Morgan Stanley... Creo que hablamos de ellas con anterioridad, sobre la duda de por qué los F-18 no bombardeaban sus sedes o algo así. Pues bueno las han denunciado por la salida a bolsa a Facebook.

http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2012/05/23/actualidad/1337788413_406601.html
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Hay cosas que huelen mal, como las correcciones que publicaron tanto Morgan Stanley como Goldman Sachs sobre las previsiones de facturación, indicando que su número de usuarios crece más rápido que la publicidad que genera... Y eso lo han hecho después de presentar el prospecto de la OPV.

Y tan mal que olían...

:ok :ok :ok
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Quería responder desde hace unos días pero se me ha ido pasando.

Mi comentario respecto a que FB es "humo" es relativo y se refiere más a que la inmensa mayoría de la población no sabe que valores tiene dicha empresa o con que comercia o como tiene ingresos.

Esta claro que a través de la publicidad y las inversiones FB se mantiene a flote y así puede invertir a su vez en esos servidores donde alojarse, pero el concepto de producción normal, con FB, es algo etereo, ¿no?.

Quizá porque es gratuito y el consumidor no ve o no puede imaginarse lo que pasa detrás de esa capa que es su pantalla, de hecho, la tira de DeBilbao está muy bien para ayudar a comprender que es todo lo que sucede alrededor de dicha empresa a nivel general.

Sin embargo no estoy de acuerdo con el texto que enlaza de tommytoy en algunos puntos:

- Mientras que es cierto que la red social tiene que reinventarse para poder generar mas ingresos y seguir existiendo, el número de usuarios no es exactamente finito, ya que, a largo plazo, siempre hay nuevos nacimientos y es bastante probable que terminen uniéndose a dicha plataforma.

A día de hoy debe haber más de 700 millones de personas conectadas a Facebook (según los últimos datos que he podido encontrar que son del año pasado)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/13/facebook-growth-slows-for-second-month

En el mundo hay 7 billones (de los ingleses) de personas aproximadamente más las que van naciendo y menos las que van muriendo, claro.
http://www.ibiblio.org/lunarbin/worldpop

Facebook no esta en China todavía (después de haber sido bloqueado y tal) pero en el momento en que consiga dar con algo que les permita entrar va a ser interesante.

Así pues, yo creo que es cierto que la salida a Bolsa por ese capital ha sido un completo descalabro pero les va a servir para saber exactamente cuanto valen y mantenerse estables o innovar y subir como la espuma; la cual yo creo que va a ser la opción.

Un saludo.
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Hay trampa. Si te das de baja de FB (inténtalo, ya verás lo intuitivo que es...), siguen guardando todos tus datos y sigues contando como un usuario de la comunidad. Así claro que crece...
 
Respuesta: Facebook: ¿la nueva burbuja tecnológica?

Esto va a ser un escándalo en toda regla...

Some Big Firms Got Facebook Warning
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...17189500.html?mod=WSJEUROPE_hpp_MIDDLETopNews

Capital Research & Management wanted to buy into the Facebook Inc. FB +1.78% initial public offering. But days before the IPO, an underwriting bank on the deal warned the big investment firm about Facebook's dimming revenue prospects.

The Los Angeles firm, armed with information from a May 11 "roadshow" meeting with underwriters and Facebook, along with similar estimates of its own, slashed the number of shares it intended to buy. The night before trading began, a Capital Research manager told a banker at Morgan Stanley, MS -0.37% the lead underwriter, that the deal's pricing was "ridiculous," according to a person familiar with the situation. Some Capital Research fund managers didn't buy into the IPO at all, say people familiar with the matter.

Jennifer Kohne received no such warning. The 52-year-old retired medical-device salesperson in St. Louis bought 3,000 Facebook shares Friday at $42 through an online brokerage and now sits on losses of $30,000 based on Wednesday's closing price of $32. "We don't get the information that these institutional fund managers are getting," she says. "We're at a disadvantage."

It is one of Wall Street's best-kept secrets: Securities firms are allowed to selectively confer with favored large investing clients about crucial information as they prepare IPOs.

Wall Street firms, for their part, say they give certain information to big clients because the clients pay for this type of data. It is typical in an IPO for analysts or sales staff to give certain information to clients, they added. But that usually doesn't apply to small investors.

At any other time, such "selective disclosure" violates federal securities law, which requires companies and Wall Street firms to publicly disseminate any information that could move share prices. Securities law prevents analysts at banks that underwrite large IPOs from issuing research reports to the public until 40 days after the shares begin trading.

Some securities lawyers urge that new rules be put in place to prevent this uneven information flow. "Analysts should not be giving opinions about the IPO at the same time their firms are acting as underwriters. They should not be giving information that's not in the prospectus to favored clients," says securities lawyer Jacob Zamansky, who represents investors in securities cases. He isn't involved in any Facebook cases.

Facebook declined to comment. In a statement, Morgan Stanley said it "followed the same procedures for the Facebook offering that it follows for all IPOs. These procedures are in compliance with all applicable regulations."

The Facebook IPO was supposed to be a highlight for the social-media company, lead underwriter Morgan Stanley and the Nasdaq Stock Market.

Instead, the lackluster deal—Facebook shares have dropped nearly 16% since Friday's launch, though they rose 3.2% Wednesday—has illustrated that pockets of the financial world remain firmly stacked in favor of the market's biggest players.

The fallout has been quick. State and securities-industry regulators are investigating whether there was anything improper in the investor communications. On Wednesday, some Facebook investors filed suit in Manhattan federal court, alleging that the company and its underwriters failed to properly disclose changes to analysts' forecasts made at the underwriting banks. And a Senate banking panel will examine issues in the Facebook IPO process.

Morgan Stanley said it may adjust prices for trades made during the IPO. The bank said it was reviewing orders by retail brokerage clients on a trade-by-trade basis and will make adjustments if clients paid too much, according to people familiar with the situation. In a memo sent Wednesday to the nearly 17,200 financial advisers of its Morgan Stanley Smith Barney retail brokerage joint venture, the firm said it expects to make "a number" of price adjustments. The orders in question occurred in Facebook's debut Friday, which was marred by trading glitches by the Nasdaq Stock Market that delayed the start of trading in the social-networking company by 30 minutes.

Clients at Morgan Stanley and other brokerages also were left with orders that were processed improperly. Besides the glitches, a number of investors are angry that Facebook raised the IPO price to $38 a share, even amid declining forecasts for its revenue.

The lead underwriters, which include Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS -1.56% and J.P. Morgan Chase JPM -0.73% & Co., set the best price based on demand they saw for the shares last Thursday night when the price was set, say people familiar with the matter. Goldman and J.P. Morgan had limited sway in the Facebook IPO, people familiar with the matter said. Morgan Stanley, Goldman and J.P. Morgan declined to comment.

In this case, some of the demand was coming from what on Wall Street is sometimes called the "dumb money": individual investors looking for a piece of a company that many use every day to connect with friends and others. In low-profile IPOs, 10% to 15% of shares typically are allocated to individuals. In this case, individuals received roughly 25% of the IPO—big for such a high-profile deal.

Three days into its roadshow—where Facebook executives and Wall Street underwriters discussed the deal with prospective investors—Facebook released a revised regulatory document about the offering. The document acknowledged user growth for its mobile site hadn't led to an increase in the company's ad revenue.

Facebook said in the filing that the trend of user growth outpacing ads continued into the second quarter. It warned that as more people use Facebook on mobile phones rather than computers, that trend "may negatively affect" results. The revised documents were made available to all investors and written up in media reports.

After filing the updated IPO document, a Facebook executive individually called 21 sell-side research analysts to discuss the contents, as is standard practice, according to people familiar with the matter. Analysts were allowed to ask questions, and following the calls, a majority of them revised their estimates on revenue and earnings, the people said.

Morgan Stanley and the other underwriters sprang into action. In the middle of the roadshow, the banks informed key clients—including large hedge funds, mutual funds and wealthy individuals—of the declining revenue prospects at Facebook. It was a significant red flag.

The Wall Street firms prepared talking points for their salespeople outlining downward revisions on Facebook revenue for the second quarter and full year, people familiar with the matter said. The salespeople scrambled to make as many calls as possible to key clients, reading out the new numbers.

Morgan Stanley said in a statement that a "significant number" of analysts in the IPO syndicate reduced their "earnings views" after Facebook's regulatory disclosure. It said the revised views "were taken into account in the pricing of the IPO."

In any case, the tension was building. In a row of desks on the 4th floor of Morgan Stanley's Times Square headquarters, officials on the company's "syndicate" desk worked the phones, assessing demand from investors to "build a book"—lining up potential buyers to help determine at what price to offer the IPO. Nearby, Morgan Stanley bankers talked with the other investment banks co-managing the deal. As lead manager, Morgan Stanley basically "ran" the books; that is, it helps to decide how many shares are allotted to its clients and how many are to be sold to each underwriter.

Fidelity Investments was among big clients that were told by analysts or bank sales staff of the declining Facebook financial picture, people familiar with the matter say. The nation's third-largest mutual fund firm expressed frustration to Morgan Stanley about Facebook valuations based on the dimming prospects for the company, the people say.

A Fidelity spokesman declined to comment.

Roger Duvendack was one of the many individual investors who were in the dark from his broker. He says he bought 2,000 Facebook shares at 11:30 a.m. on Friday at $42.97 a share, and put his shares up for sale at $45 at 11:33 a.m.

As he saw the shares move down, Mr. Duvendack altered his sale price to $44. After Facebook hit $38 a share that morning, he bought 2,000 more shares at $38.69 just before noon on Friday. He then made several attempts to sell between $41 to $41.40 a share.

But because of Nasdaq's technical glitches, he says, his orders couldn't be executed.

On Tuesday, a senior Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. executive told customers that the exchange would have put the brakes on Facebook's IPO had it known the extent of the technical problems that plagued its systems that day.

Mr. Duvendack called his broker, Fidelity, and was told he was having problems because of technical issues at Nasdaq. Eventually on Monday, he says he sold his shares at a loss of nearly $18,000.

A Fidelity spokesman said the company is working with regulators and Nasdaq on behalf of customers who experienced problems.

A senior Nasdaq executive told brokers Tuesday that Nasdaq executives "regret sincerely what happened on Friday," and said that Nasdaq can't assess individual retail customers' losses but is working with brokers that are seeking compensation for those retail clients.
 
Arriba Pie