PDA

View Full Version : What is facebook up to?



TheManFromDelmonte
March 26 2014, 10:30:53 AM
Since the IPO facebook have made a number of acquisitions, some very large. What exactly is their plan here?

People have suggested they're trying to buy users, which seems unsustainable with the price they're paying and the number they get.

People have suggested Marc Andressen is just funnelling facebook money to himself as he VC funded oculus.

People have suggested zuckerburg has complete control of Facebook and is just throwing cash around like a spoiled trust find baby because there's no one who can stop him.

Here's a list of aquisitions, unfortunately without cash/equity split details.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook

(Hopefully this is intetesting enough to give this forum some traffic)

Ophichius
March 26 2014, 11:20:11 AM
At a glance it looks like business as usual, most of those companies are involved in processes that would be incredibly useful for metadata collection or analysis. Facial recognition coupled with Facebook's staggering throughput of imagery per day should be pretty obvious, everything else is about expanding the network within which they can associate users. Locational tracking, automated translation, computer vision, it all makes a lot of sense if you look at it through the lens of trying to understand the firehose of data that Facebook is constantly drinking from.

Oculus is the odd duck out in that lineup, but my bet is on wanting a closed software ecosystem to sell products in.

-O

Hel OWeen
March 26 2014, 12:08:13 PM
Perhaps Zuck has mistaken the Oculus Rift being something like Google Glass ... ;-)

TheManFromDelmonte
March 26 2014, 12:38:22 PM
He's using the assets of a company that will be worth comparatively little in 10 - 15 years to buy companies that may be worth something in that time.

This is possible, but if this is the case facebook is acting as a long term tech investor and not an ad business. This itself doesn't make sense, did the shareholders in Facebook buy in because they believed so strongly in zuckerberg's ability to pick good tech companies unrelated to facebook?

And there is $400m cash in the oculus deal, frankly that seems like a lot for the company even excluding the (to be) worthless shares.

Hel OWeen
March 26 2014, 02:32:36 PM
(As mentioned elsewhere on the internet)

Also: Zuckerberg is now the boss of John Carmack ... interesting times. I wonder if Carmack did knew/has been made aware of that deal before he joined Oculus.

TheManFromDelmonte
March 26 2014, 02:53:15 PM
There are accounts online saying this deal was made very quickly, which fits previous fb deals and raises more questions about whether theres any corporate oversight at fb or if it's Zuckerberg's personal whim.

QuackBot
March 26 2014, 04:00:13 PM
He's using the assets of a company that will be worth comparatively little in 10 - 15 years to buy companies that may be worth something in that time.
I will in a few extra 0's.

Rakshasa The Cat
March 26 2014, 05:19:28 PM
As said, the acquisition list only shows how out of place the Oculus deal was...

The most obvious reason would be FB having a vision of the Oculus as having strong potential as a social gaming device. Not that people would be willing to buy it specifically for socializing, though if it is already plugged into your machine the barrier is low.

Or it could be the same as google; they found a big fat hose that spews money, now they need to find the next and even if it means doing 20 other things that fail it would still be worth it.

Keorythe
March 27 2014, 05:23:30 PM
He's using the assets of a company that will be worth comparatively little in 10 - 15 years to buy companies that may be worth something in that time.

Pretty much this.

Whatsapp and the social viewing aspects of Occulus are all connectivity apps which is the basis of Facebook. Whatsapp is strictly mobile while Occulus would allow people to have virtual rooms and avatars like a VR version of Second Life. Could you imagine having a Skype or insert_program conversation in VR? This doesn't even address the porn industry which will probably get involved at some point. The US military already has its own version for training people on the new destroyers and may offer contracts to VR companies to help development.

So there are some other areas which go beyond gaming but still does not exclude gaming.

Synapse
March 27 2014, 06:49:21 PM
Its not directly financial and you shouldnt think that's all there is to it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook_Zero

Facebook intends to make itself into a commodity service used by the entire web, one of a number of free services available to all users.

Zuckerberg wants to own all of the main communication media and then make them free, hence he is buying all the options for interaction (whatsapp and oculus both being ways to interact socially) to enact his grand plan for a "facebook layer" of free communication and social services that facebook runs for the world at no cost but great advertising profit.

Joshua Foiritain
March 27 2014, 07:12:53 PM
Hmm world war III wont be started by the Russians, it'll be facebook going to war with Google in an attempt to conquer all the known worlds Both will use subliminal messaging based mind control technology to enslave us into their army to fight each other in both reality and virtual reality.

ALL HAIL GOOGLE, MOST COLORFUL OF THE OVERLORDS.

Straight Hustlin
March 27 2014, 09:46:47 PM
Hmm world war III wont be started by the Russians, it'll be facebook going to war with Google in an attempt to conquer all the known worlds Both will use subliminal messaging based mind control technology to enslave us into their army to fight each other in both reality and virtual reality.

ALL HAIL GOOGLE, MOST COLORFUL OF THE OVERLORDS.

If you've been following along over the past few months, its clear that they both have different strategies. Facebook will base their efforts on brain washing to turn people into mindless zombies doing their bidding.

Google on the other hand appears to have realized that flesh is spongey & easily bruised, and so have been persuing automatons.

Synapse
March 27 2014, 10:22:10 PM
I predict Microsoft will manage to keep some part of the northeast coast using well trained but poorly equipped human mercenaries and volunteers. 5% of the global land market.

Ophichius
March 27 2014, 11:39:57 PM
Hmm world war III wont be started by the Russians, it'll be facebook going to war with Google in an attempt to conquer all the known worlds Both will use subliminal messaging based mind control technology to enslave us into their army to fight each other in both reality and virtual reality.

ALL HAIL GOOGLE, MOST COLORFUL OF THE OVERLORDS.

So we get Burning Chrome instead of STALKER? I'm cool with this.

BRB, stocking up on mirrorshades.

-O

Steph
March 28 2014, 04:48:14 PM
I predict Microsoft will manage to keep some part of the northeast coast using well trained but poorly equipped human mercenaries and volunteers. 5% of the global land market.

Unfortunately due to limited financial resources, said mercenaries will only be paid in stock options.

Sacul
April 4 2014, 03:16:29 PM
I really think that these information mega companies underestimate vox populi regarding being used as ad cows.
I see fb dying in Holland. less and less people use it actively and gmail the same ever since it became public knowledge that it meta reads your mail for personalized ads.
pitchfork and torches to the server farms comrades!!!

Ralara
April 28 2014, 04:44:25 PM
and gmail the same ever since it became public knowledge that it meta reads your mail for personalized ads.

Um, hasn't htat been known for the better part of a decade?

SAI Peregrinus
April 28 2014, 06:15:48 PM
and gmail the same ever since it became public knowledge that it meta reads your mail for personalized ads.

Um, hasn't htat been known for the better part of a decade?

Well, Google did announce that when Gmail first entered its (invite only) beta, and it's been in the TOS since then, but they just changed the wording of the TOS and reminded people.

Ralara
April 28 2014, 10:06:43 PM
and gmail the same ever since it became public knowledge that it meta reads your mail for personalized ads.

Um, hasn't htat been known for the better part of a decade?

Well, Google did announce that when Gmail first entered its (invite only) beta, and it's been in the TOS since then, but they just changed the wording of the TOS and reminded people.

So... "yes". Beta being 2004.... ?

Sacul
May 5 2014, 05:01:27 PM
Well it wasn't widely spread known on Dutch land but I must say we are extremely gullible regarding the internets. 5years of heavy duty lobbying supported by the ISP xs4al changing that slowly.

Sacul
May 5 2014, 05:04:52 PM
On a side note I recommend a book called distraction by Bruce sterling. keeping in mind he wrote it in 1999 its scary how well he predicts the internets future in sci-fi thriller format.

Ralara
May 12 2014, 11:29:37 AM
Well it wasn't widely spread known on Dutch land but I must say we are extremely gullible regarding the internets. 5years of heavy duty lobbying supported by the ISP xs4al changing that slowly.

I don't think they hid it from anyone - they were always quite upfront about it in interviews and during release.

theregister.co.uk was certainly aware (and NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT!) back in 2003/4 and they were making lots of noise.

I just assumed everyone knew.


At the least, Google certainly never hid it.