Post: #51

(02-21-2014 11:51 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  I don't have Whatsapp, so I'm curious if the current setup is conducive to ads?

FB ads are not ideal currently on mobile and has been a sticking point for them. Considering more and more web traffic is going mobile this is a big issue.

From what I've read in the Wall Street Journal, the Whatsapp founders are totally against putting ads on Whatsapp.

Zuckerberg assured them that Facebook would not try to put ads on it.

Post: #52

Whatsapp generated $20m in revenue (not profit) last year. I don't understand how they are worth $19bn, even if they grew 300% to 1bn members.

Post: #53

(02-19-2014 08:10 PM)Sourcecode Wrote:  I've said for a while... I think Facebook is one of those companies that too big to fail.
They'll buy out their competition. Those dudes aren't playing around. They want everything.

I believe this is basically right. They have enough money that they can buy up anyone who they consider to be a threat in the realm of "communicating with friends". It's the American way after all (pursuit of monopoly).

Only 55 employees. Thought provoking article by Robert Reich (yes, he's a lefty) on the implications:

Robert Reich: WhatsApp is everything wrong with the U.S. economy

Post: #54

Quote:Robert Reich: WhatsApp is everything wrong with the U.S. economy

Interesting article.
Reich couldn't even complete one sentence before saying "inequality".

(I guess in his world only highly paid government/academic 'intellectuals' like him deserve the big bucks).

Here's an article from Peter Schiff...
Is Mark Zuckerberg Crazy?

Post: #55

I'm starting to get the feeling that this is a desperation move by Facebook. They're losing young people very rapidly and trying to buy up the apps that they are going to. But those apps have a much lesser potential for monetization than facebook, which already is tough to monetize. The fact that apps like Whatsapp can be easily duplicated with cheap Amazon cloud hardware and Indian programmers suggests that it will be probably impossible to recoup that $19 billion with advertisements that don't annoy users and send them elsewhere. Some Europeans I know already prefer Viber in place of Whatsapp.

Post: #56

I gotta stop reading these threads here's a quick news flash for people who actually read about tech, know about tech and are in the know.

1. Over 51% of revenue generated from Facebook is form mobile ads. Go read an 8-k or read a call transcript. They jumped the ship that's why the stock moved from 55 to 70.
2. They bought whatsapp for mobile penetration genius move. International integration.
3. Anyone saying Instagram was a shitty acquistion back in the day is a full on retard. If you know anything about instagram, the AD platform is already out. Has been proven. When that is launched the conversion is expected to be higher than the current platform
4. Facebook wiped out the bids this week. What does this mean? Your cost of advertising just doubled they are targeting the Branders cash flow goes up. Printing dem green backs.
5. Facebook has finally created an ad platform that goes outside the interface if that shit works forget about it stock is worth $100+.
6. Whatsapp is 100000x better than tango because of the security and operating system. Why? It's locked up. If you run data analytics you want the data to be yours and yours only. Why? Now you can advertise better than google. Just because an application is the same from an average persons observations does not mean at all that the OS is the same. Ask an android vs. iOS engineer. There is zero dollars in value for information on a poorly made application where I can scrape the same data with integration into the OS so who cares about viber and tango? No one.

That's what actually happened.

I love RVF but the vast majority of the community has a poverty mindset and is not plugged into making money. You can see it over and over again based on the posts alone in this thread.

If I was Facebook I would have paid $6B to snapchat and tried to take them out. After that the game ends. Won't happen though they missed the bid about 2 years ago.

You guys gotta think. If bids get doubled that means they are printing money like the fed.

In addition why is snapchat worth so much? Your photos will be analyzed immediately to figure out who you are what you're doing and what you want real time. Automatic big data analytics play.

All the posts I have read on here have what seems to be zero working knowledge of facebooks actual software and technology.

Anyway hope you guys didn't actually short the stock this year ha.

One last snapple fact for those that work in the space. The ROI is higher on Facebook than Google for an advertiser right now. Let that sink in.

---

Based on all the facts laid out above who should buy someone like snapchat? There is an obvious answer here rep point from me if you can name the obvious acquirer. Assume that Facebook cannot.

Post: #57

(02-23-2014 01:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  In addition why is snapchat worth so much? Your photos will be analyzed immediately to figure out who you are what you're doing and what you want real time. Automatic big data analytics play.

---

Based on all the facts laid out above who should buy someone like snapchat? There is an obvious answer here rep point from me if you can name the obvious acquirer. Assume that Facebook cannot.

The NSA?

Post: #58

(02-23-2014 01:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  I gotta stop reading these threads here's a quick news flash for people who actually read about tech, know about tech and are in the know.

1. Over 51% of revenue generated from Facebook is form mobile ads. Go read an 8-k or read a call transcript. They jumped the ship that's why the stock moved from 55 to 70.
2. They bought whatsapp for mobile penetration genius move. International integration.
3. Anyone saying Instagram was a shitty acquistion back in the day is a full on retard. If you know anything about instagram, the AD platform is already out. Has been proven. When that is launched the conversion is expected to be higher than the current platform
4. Facebook wiped out the bids this week. What does this mean? Your cost of advertising just doubled they are targeting the Branders cash flow goes up. Printing dem green backs.
5. Facebook has finally created an ad platform that goes outside the interface if that shit works forget about it stock is worth $100+.
6. Whatsapp is 100000x better than tango because of the security and operating system. Why? It's locked up. If you run data analytics you want the data to be yours and yours only. Why? Now you can advertise better than google. Just because an application is the same from an average persons observations does not mean at all that the OS is the same. Ask an android vs. iOS engineer.

That's what actually happened.

I love RVF but the vast majority of the community has a poverty mindset and is not plugged into making money. You can see it over and over again based on the posts alone in this thread.

If I was Facebook I would have paid $6B to snapchat and tried to take them out. After that the game ends. Won't happen though they missed the bid about 2 years ago.

You guys gotta think. If bids get doubled that means they are printing money like the fed.

In addition why is snapchat worth so much? Your photos will be analyzed immediately to figure out who you are what you're doing and what you want real time. Automatic big data analytics play.

All the posts I have read on here have what seems to be zero working knowledge of facebooks actual software and technology.

Anyway hope you guys didn't actually short the stock this year ha.

One last snapple fact for those that work in the space. The ROI is higher on Facebook than Google for an advertiser right now. Let that sink in.

Insightful post WC. I do have some questions perhaps you can explain further:

"Facebook has finally created an ad platform that goes outside the interface"

Can you explain how it goes outside the interface?


"If I was Facebook I would have paid $6B to snapchat and tried to take them out. After that the game ends."

Won't other new apps pop up and it becomes a continuous chase?

"Won't happen though they missed the bid about 2 years ago."

So they had a better chance 2 years ago when snapchat wasn't so big?

"why is snapchat worth so much? Your photos will be analyzed immediately to figure out who you are what you're doing and what you want real time. Automatic big data analytics play. "

Would the same apply to instagram? Real time photos. Show ads based on your photos that you're sending?

"Whatsapp is 100000x better than tango because of the security and operating system. Why? It's locked up. If you run data analytics you want the data to be yours and yours only."

So with Android someone else can access the data?

Post: #59

@scorpion hahaha. Oh they got all your shit already government is gay as fuck. You know this the government is a huge cock in yor as from the womb.

But anyone who can name the obvious acquirer = rep.

I will give you guys a massive hint "Platform Security".

Post: #60

(02-23-2014 01:23 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  Based on all the facts laid out above who should buy someone like snapchat? There is an obvious answer here rep point from me if you can name the obvious acquirer. Assume that Facebook cannot.

I woudl think Google or Yahoo. Google did offer but was rejected. Could use snapchat to pump life into Google+

Post: #61

^ no. You are still operating under the assumption of web scale which is not where the value is.

Googles android platform is shit from a security standpoint.

(I'll get to your other questions when I get home)

Post: #62

Lookout? Symantec?

Post: #63

^ nope closer thought process though.

where is the value? The value is here:

1. REAL TIME photos. Instagram can be photos from a few days ago right? It's stale.
2. Location specific
3. Photos die. So you have to put that into a heavy Solid State Drive based data center to run analytics on what was in the photo.
4. It is All mobile.

Post: #64

(02-23-2014 02:13 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  ^ no. You are still operating under the assumption of web scale which is not where the value is.

Googles android platform is shit from a security standpoint.

(I'll get to your other questions when I get home)

The app shouldn't rely on the OS for security. For secure messaging, I would think the app should encrypt the message via PGP or custom method, send the message via SSL/TLS, store the message still in encrypted format, send to recipient via SSL/TLS, then decrypt at recipient's phone via PGP, etc.

The OS is not involved or relied on for security -does Android not support PGP and SSL?

Post: #65

(02-23-2014 02:20 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  ^ nope closer thought process though.

where is the value? The value is here:

1. REAL TIME photos. Instagram can be photos from a few days ago right? It's stale.
2. Location specific
3. Photos die. So you have to put that into a heavy Solid State Drive based data center to run analytics on what was in the photo.
4. It is All mobile.

Perhaps some company in the mobile advertising space.

Post: #66

^ what I mean by security is you need to be certain each "snap" is yours and no one else's.

Again information about a person that is readily available to competitors is useless information.

There is a reason why you don't see real money making professionals running around with android "bring your own devices". Will not happen in the near future, no way in fucking hell.

Haha if you and menace combined your answers you'd get the right company in a heartbeat.

Post: #67

Misread question

Post: #68

(02-23-2014 02:28 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  ^ what I mean by security is you need to be certain each "snap" is yours and no one else's.

Again information about a person that is readily available to competitors is useless information.

There is a reason why you don't see real money making professionals running around with android "bring your own devices". Will not happen in the near future, no way in fucking hell.

Haha if you and menace combined your answers you'd get the right company in a heartbeat.

What I described in post #64 is end-to-end encrypted messaging using PGP but not via SMTP which is what most people use PGP with. Once each snap or msg is encrypted and sent only the recipient can open it (I think). The app then deletes the local photo file (msg is not stored). I use Andoid's encryption feature to encrypt my phone's hard drive though I cant say for sure how ssecure that is.

Blackberry Messenger is preferred by a lot of people b/c from what I read it's fully encrypted.

Post: #69

Blackberry Messenger is preferred by a lot of people b/c from what I read it's fully encrypted

Blackberry. And you win the game.

Security + real time picture data = huge upside.

Problem? Bbry can't afford it bleeding dough.

---

I will never forget 1 month after Instagram was acquired, I was sitting with a major PM at dinner talking about the company. (By talking about the company I mean me shutting the fuck up takin copious notes as the meeting was run under the table like a servant).

At the end after all the "jokes" were made about the acquisition he says

"Well you know, a picture is worth a thousand words"

And left.

Secure information is really where all value resides. So any time a major company does something like this, instead of making fun and thinking we're all smarter than mark Zuck or Sergy brin maybe we should think about the operating systems and value before going to twitter and saying "LOL" only to get embarrassed 3 years later. No I am not saying it is guaranteed money obviously, but I sure as fuck don't think I am smarter than Zuck.

Post: #70

Once FB starts the ads on Whatsapp people will go to the next big thing.

I get what WC is saying, however apps/sites that are primarily aimed at the young don't hold that demo's attention for long. FB is seeing this with it's own primary site.

Saying that, I guess I don't see the attraction of it as I have unlimited messaging on my phone anyway. And as mentioned earlier the cell outfits can kill it if they want.

Of course it was primarily overvalued stock traded, not cash, so that needs to be taken into account as well.

Post: #71

^ Don't mean to be a dick but teen ad worries are nonsense from seeking alpha type articles they feed to the masses. it is true. 18 year olds don't have money man. Also there is a heavy teen proportion on insta, there will always be another vine/tango whatever but it doesn't matter at all. All that matters is Facebook has better information on what you are going to buy than anyone else. if they continue they win.

Facebook hit the mature cycle phase and is now moving outside the platform. To address dtf's point this means they can advertise to you off of the facebook platform! That's a mind fuck. If they pull that off google is FUCKED. why? It means they can out bid you.

Lets go ahead and look at the actual tech.

Whatsapp is international information that is secure. The age group is not a "latch on to teens" game, there are many many older folk on there, it is an international "texting platform". That's the real value and it is SECURE.

---

Dtf here's the highlights of your questions.

Outside the interface means I can now outbid google. Think about how insane that proposition is. The bid in facebook ads is double or MORE the bid on a google ad. This means the ROI for advertisers in facebook is more than double that of google... What does that mean if they go out of the interface?

Now they outbid the google placed ads and replace with Facebook ads. Now the advertisers have next to no reason for working with google. (Is is an extreme bullish view and will likely never happen) but the point is simple.

If advertisers make more money paying 2x the amount for a facebook ad as they do for a google ad that means Facebook has significantly better info on what you are going to buy correct? That's game over you are printing $$.

You asked about a snapchat buyout, I am saying they should have bought it before it reached this level of penetration. It's too big now. It is worth much more than $4B assuming they fix it to dual encryption. Similar to what happened to Instagram they bought that thing for $1B?! That thing is probably worth over $5B today (likely an underestimate).

I addressed the slight difference between Instagram and snap. It's real time. Now I know where you are and literally exactly what you are looking at. Instagram is not real time. Again the headache there is three fold. 1) security, 2) data Analytics you likely need a heavy scale out flash data center to analyze the photo and 3) real time ad based on the photo (already done well on Instagram beta test that has been released). None of those 3 are easy of course but good god the profits are huge if they can link it all up.

Finally yes, some of those apps are so shitty in terms of security that they can already access your info. If you don't think so try typing in the same name of a country or city destination over and over on your phone and tell me what happens to your ads. Suddenly you'll see ads for "flights to New York!". But that kinda data is complete and utter shit compared to your real personal life because many people search and type bullshit into their browser all the time. They want info on exactly who you are right here and right now so they can sell you more shit you don't need.

Anyway that's the highlights of the transaction/ what Facebook intends to do in the future.

Post: #72

What you are basically talking about is retargeting, which has been done for quite some time now. In fact, there are plenty of retarget ads on FB as we speak. FB sells adspace to outfits like google, adroll, etc that is filled with spots targeted based on your prior browsing history.

Ever wonder why a site you visited yesterday seems to be following you around with their ads for days/weeks after? That's retargeting. You visit hostgator for instance and they drop an Adroll cookie on you that records what page you were on so they know if you are looking for domain names or hosting. Now, you log into FB and you'll see Hostgator ads in your feed or sidebar.

Yes, it is good for FB to bring more of that in house however you say yourself that young people don't buy shit. Sure, they have data on another 450 million people. Thing is, most of them are probably already on FB so what info do they gain?

And 19 billion, $42/user, is a LOT to pay for data no matter how in depth it is when your primary income source is advertising.

edit-Also, what is your source for ad spends and ROI FB vs. Google? I have seen better ROI because the costs are lower on FB. Google sends better traffic per click however.

Post: #73

^ no I am not talking about re targeting that is old school.

I am talking about moving outside the interface and outbidding google because they know you are about to purchase product x. Re targeting is old school.

Again the value is 1 security, 2. Real time life information on you.

We're getting into the weeds of tech but I doubt many people even know what a scale out NASversus a scale out Block architecture is and how that will change ads so there is no real point in going further. I do know what you're saying, just so we're clear I am not talking about re targeting at all.

We chit chatted a few months ago when talking about cloaking but somehow that got into cookie stuffing which isn't the same etc etc.

But basically TLDR if you don't know what Facebook is really doing just avoid the stock. If moving outside the interface actually happens I will throw every dollar I have into the stock.

They already have a scale out NAS data center if so... Well we all know the game is over. Google's data center is primarily too slow right now due to disk drive slow down and Facebook is using a flash ssd... Really a game of real time Analytics as well. Lots of moving parts and I've just turned this into a ramble about tech lol!

Anyway good stuff.

--

I am definitely not giving info on the ad spend differential lets just say I know more than a few guys worth 8 digits plus who destroy the ad space. Ufortunately, I am no where near as smart as them but positively they let me invest small amounts of money from time to time into their companies. I can tell you do some ads so you should be aware of the click cost price differential on at least a low scale.

Also agree more traffic but who cares right? It's all about how much money you make on the traffic. 1000 hits and 2 sales is not the same as 100 hits and 3 sales (simplistic and not realistic numbers).

Post: #74

(02-23-2014 02:55 PM)WestCoast Wrote:  Blackberry Messenger is preferred by a lot of people b/c from what I read it's fully encrypted

Blackberry. And you win the game.

Security + real time picture data = huge upside.

Problem? Bbry can't afford it bleeding dough.

---

I will never forget 1 month after Instagram was acquired, I was sitting with a major PM at dinner talking about the company. (By talking about the company I mean me shutting the fuck up takin copious notes as the meeting was run under the table like a servant).

At the end after all the "jokes" were made about the acquisition he says

"Well you know, a picture is worth a thousand words"

And left.

Secure information is really where all value resides. So any time a major company does something like this, instead of making fun and thinking we're all smarter than mark Zuck or Sergy brin maybe we should think about the operating systems and value before going to twitter and saying "LOL" only to get embarrassed 3 years later. No I am not saying it is guaranteed money obviously, but I sure as fuck don't think I am smarter than Zuck.

Thank you for the +1. Security + real time picture data has a lot of money making potential from military use, corporate espionage, to traders taking a 'snap' of their screen and sending it to their buddy.

Post: #75

I'll have to do more research into it but what you are describing, short of datacenters which has little to do with buying Whatsapp, doesn't really sound any different than what google already does.

If they can do it better, good for them. I don't see it however and plenty of guys that know the ad game a lot better than I don't see it either.