Posted on 05/22/2012 11:52:50 PM PDT by real saxophonist
Hi David,
We have received a request to permanently delete your account. Your account has been deactivated from the site and will be permanently deleted within 14 days.
If you did not request to permanently delete your account, please login to Facebook to cancel this request:
https://www.facebook.com/login.php
Thanks, The Facebook Team
Maybe you just can't read English.
Seems a common problem among FB defenders.
Too hard to grasp?
Your opinion is yours but facts are facts.
You’ve lost.
Take your own advice. Log off and try to find a friend
And of course the previous post you are replying to. Your Words sparky. You MORHPED your argument AFTER we pointed out you were totally wrong. Its plain for anyone to see.
You started off by claiming you didn't have to use something to know its not useful and once we pointed out all the Businesses and Organizations who use FB daily to conduct business/commerce as well as all the political groups and initiatives (Not as you claimed in the above statment that it is for bored self absorbed people... blah blah blah. You've been proven wrong over and over claiming all manner of outlandish falsehoods (No one would notice if Facebook went away, Facebook has no use, Its only for Entertainment, etc etc.) What is clear is your whole participation on this thread is based on one simple fact. You had no idea how Facebook works and what sort of activity is conducted on the site.
Once evidence was posted that your claims were wrong you "morphed" your argument. You are simply ignorant and to cover your ignorance of the subject you've resulted to lying. And them is the facts Sparky.
If faggots are the heaviest users of Vaseline and for the sake of argument we will postulate that you aren't a faggot does that make Vaseline a worthless product because you don't use it?
I don't use Twitter but that simple fact doesn't make it of no importance and if it disappeared it would be missed whether I or you like it or not.
Keep in mind, there are about 7 billion people on the planet and if Facebook disappeared about 1 billion people would miss it. Out of that same 7 billion if you died roughly 7 billion people wouldn't notice and would not be able to care less.
Here is a real shocker, Facebook is one hell of a lot more important than you are.
Here's proof. I did a poll on Facebook as to which would people rather see fall into a black hole, Facebook or you and you lost 900 million to 2. We double checked the numbers and the 2 misunderstood the question and changed their vote to Facebook.
A new poll from AP and CNBC on the eve of the Facebook IPO shows that Americans are ambivalent about the company and that it faces numerous challenges as it seeks to generate more revenue growth from its already massive user base. The AP-CNBC poll was conducted May 3 through May 7. The survey sample was 1,004 US adults.
Among survey respondents 56 percent had a Facebook profile, 40 percent did not and 4 percent didn’t know.
Google, Apple and Microsoft are viewed more favorably than Facebook. Of the comparison group Twitter was viewed less favorably. The results shift by demographic segment, however, with younger people having a more favorable impression of the social site: 71 percent of people under age 35 have a favorable view compared to 28 percent of seniors.
Some of the questions asked in the poll pertain to Facebook as an investment and its longevity and revenue outlook. Along those lines, almost half the respondents thought that Facebook “will fade away as new things come along.”
http://marketingland.com/survey-nearly-50-see-facebook-fading-away-over-time-12038
The 'one billion people' would quickly find other outlets to post their pictures on, play video games on and generally waste time.
The other 5 Billion would not notice.
The argument has remained totally consistent, you just can't follow it.
Sorry, if it is too deep for you to grasp.
The facts are that FB is simply not important in the real world.
Another “disturbing” finding for the company is that the majority of respondents don’t trust it to maintain privacy. Only 13 percent “completely trust” Facebook, while 28 percent “somewhat trust” it. User trust and privacy concerns are significant areas of vulnerability for Facebook as it rolls out new products and advertising initiatives — as it must.
Among those who said they didn’t use Facebook (it’s not clear whether this also includes those who have profiles), a total of 57 percent said they either lacked interest or actively disliked the company.
http://marketingland.com/survey-nearly-50-see-facebook-fading-away-over-time-12038
You haven't proven that FB is useful in the sense of being crucial in the world, that is, if it were gone, the world would actually miss it.
Because it has some limited organizational uses that doesn't make it irreplaceable.
So, once again, you have confused popularity with actual importance.
Once evidence was posted that your claims were wrong you "morphed" your argument. You are simply ignorant and to cover your ignorance of the subject you've resulted to lying. And them is the facts Sparky.
You posted nothing to refute my arguments, you just attempted to avoid them with straw man arguments and ad hominem attacks.
My original argument remains intact.
FB has no real importance on the world, if it disappeared tomorrow, the world would take little note of it's ending.
And I don't need to be on FB to know that is a fact-Sparky.
To YOU Sparky, not the world.
You however are far less important than Facebook.
They already have. It is called the Internet.
You really are a dyed in the wool idiot.
Posting to you is like showing a chicken a card trick. It is a waste of time because chickens are stupid.
They already have. It is called the Internet. You really are a dyed in the wool idiot. Posting to you is like showing a chicken a card trick. It is a waste of time because chickens are stupid.
They would find another outlet ON the internet.
You really have a hard time dealing with concepts.
Seems to be quite common with FB defenders.
Try reading a book once in a awhile.
To YOU Sparky, not the world. You however are far less important than Facebook.
No, that is the objective reality of FB, it provides no essential service to the world, that cannot be replaced or simply not missed.
A single soul is far more important then FB.
In general, I refrain from assessing candidates, boning up on history, or planning for the future based on polls of the American people.
That’s skating on thin ice. (See my previous blog post about a recent current-events survey.)
Which is why - right about the time Facebook went public - I paid little attention to a poll showing that just under half of Americans think Facebook is a fad.
After all, there was a period when silent film stars believed talking movies might be a flash in the pan. “I think that silent acting is much more difficult than the talking screen acting,” Birth of a Nation star Henry Walthall insisted. “You must put so much into your face and gestures in the silent pictures. In speaking lines, too, you drop all expression. Talking pictures lack effectiveness for that reason.”
And you know how that turned out.
So, when I read about this spring’s Facebook poll - conducted by CNBC and the AP - I thought: meh. Maybe people want the site to be a passing fad, considering how much time it sucks out of their day. But Facebook is addictive, alluring, and, as a researcher told me recently, it allows us to leap over all sorts of barriers.
For example, let’s say you meet a guy. Just once. You’re intrigued. You want to see snapshots of him, know who he’s friends with, and check out what his significant other looks like. In the real world, it would be really creepy to ask for those sorts of pictures right off the bat. And, if you did, your budding friendship would quickly be over.
But on Facebook, you can see anything you want. Significant other? Check. Recent parties? Check. Circle of friends? You betcha.
On Facebook, you can find out who that kid you liked in high school is married to now, even if you would be totally mortified if he or she knew about your sleuthing.
But the very ability of Facebook to entertainingly devour hours of productive time may have fomented a backlash - a notion supported by both anecdotal and statistical evidence.
A number of friends have recently told me that they’ve largely stopped checking Facebook, worried about how central it has become in their lives.
My husband actually deleted 400 friends, even though he was an early adopter of Facebook. When he joined the site in 2004, it was less than six months old.
“I joined because everyone was doing it,” he said. “But now it’s not a helpful social tool because it’s too bloated. I don’t talk to most of the people from high school, for example. So many of the updates are about people I basically don’t know.”
And this week, anecdotal suddenly got backed up by numbers. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll, more than 1 in 3 people who use Facebook report spending less time on the site than they did just 6 months ago. Only 1 in 5 say they’re spending more time scrolling through timelines.
The precipitous drop in Facebook’s IPO (down about 30% at one point) has also seemed to undermine the company, making us wonder whether a saturation point has been reached. And whether, one day, when someone mentions Facebook, people will ask: “Isn’t that the site they made a movie about?”
http://boston.com/community/blogs/culture_club/2012/06/facebook_fading.html
Zynga Trouble: Is Facebook Fading As Game Platform?
The Facebook gaming boom appears to be fading.
Market research firm IHS notes in a blog post that after two years of rapid growth the number of people playing games on Facebook leveled off in 2011. As of the end of 2010, about 50% of Facebook’s monthly active users were engaged in games on the site. By the end of 2011, the absolute number was little changed – and the number of active users engaged in games had dropped to 25%.
The post notes that game sector leader Zynga saw a drop in monthly active users in the fourth quartet to 225 million from 266 million one quarter earlier.
“Facebook rocketed to prominence as a gaming platform in 2009 and 2010,” IHS analyst Steve Bailey said in the post. “However, with equal speed, the market then settled into a state of maturity in 2011, with conditions becoming markedly more challenging for game operators. While Facebook remains a worthwhile opportunity for companies able to meet these challenges, the tone of the market in 2012 will be somewhat muted compared to the optimistic outlook of the past few years.”
Bailey offers several reasons for the tougher environment for social gaming:
•It is getting harder to acquire more users. “With more operators vying for attention and user expectations rising, the cost of acquiring users is growing,” he writes. “Viral channels for finding users aren’t as abundant as they were before, so it has become necessary to engage in cross-promotional networks or direct advertising.”
•Users are otherwise engaged. “The second challenge for Facebook gaming is intense competition, which means that user engagement is under pressure. As seen in 2011, there’s been a trend away from the most accessible game genres and toward play styles that require greater player commitment or skill, in return for deeper senses of engagement.”
•Facebook is a “non-specialist” games platform. “As well as competing with other game operators, companies competing in the Facebook environment must jostle for user attention across a landscape of non-gaming functionality. The play styles of social network gaming have evolved in such a manner as can be best slotted in and out of a wide spectrum of priorities for Facebook users.”
The IHS analyst concludes that for social gaming “the honeymoon is over.”
“Undoubtedly, Facebook will remain a powerful player within the gaming landscape, but it’s now part of an emerging multichannel, cross-platform approach to connected gaming,” he writes. “Facebook has implemented multiple minor initiatives to improve the platform for game operators, along with some major ones, such as its mobile-app software development kit (SDK) in late 2011. The social networking site will continue to make improvements throughout 2012, but the aforementioned issues are unlikely to be fully dispelled.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2012/02/24/zynga-trouble-is-facebook-fading-as-game-platform/
“The top Gov 2.0 tools being used have shifted,” HP and Wakefield said in a news release. “Today, video and multimedia sharing (53 percent) and government-specific social media networks (50 percent) are the most commonly used tools, replacing general social networks and blogs, which were the top picks in the 2010 study.”
Internal networks provided by companies including Yammer have become popular in both government and corporate settings. Popular external social networks for the public include Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest.
According to the Wakefield survey, fewer of the government IT respondents were accessing the external networks in 2012, in comparison to the 2010 survey. There were 44 percent using external social networks in 2012 vs. 56 percent using those networks in 2010.
Meanwhile, the survey also reported that blogs are dropping in popularity. In 2010, they were being used by 48 percent of the government IT professionals, down to 45 percent in the 2012 study.
Source: FCW (http://s.tt/1abZc)
http://fcw.com/articles/2012/04/24/gov-20-tools-survey.aspx
June 12 2012
Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) has been a growth machine since it launched for select university students in 2004, growing its user base to nearly 1 billion in eight years, leading many to believe it untouchable. But while Facebook is still king of the social networks, its growth lately has been none too impressive.
Don’t Miss: TOLD YOU SO: Here’s How Facebook Lost the Battle at $28.
The social network’s growth rate in the U.S. has come to a near-dead halt, according to the Wall Street Journal. Unique visitors to the site were up 5 percent to 158 million in April, compared with a year earlier, according to ComScore data. That’s the lowest growth rate since the firm started tracking Facebook in 2008. Also keep in mind, that number is significantly lower than the “total users” Facebook claims, which is over 900 billion — that’s because many Facebook account holders rarely, if ever, log in.
In April 2011, unique visitors grew 24 percent over the year-ago period, and in April 2010, visitors grew 89 percent. Yes, the site is still growing, but at a much smaller pace, which begs the question, When will numbers begin to fall back? It seems only a matter of time — and not much time, at that.
The amount of time users are spending on the site is also slowing, according to WSJ. Users spent an average of six hours on the site in April, up 16 percent from 2011. However, in April 2011, average time spent on the site was up 23 percent over the year earlier, and that figure was up 57 percent over the year earlier in April 2010.
“Declining growth rates are a natural part of the growth cycle,” ComScore analyst Andrew Lipsman told The Wall Street Journal. But until now, there hasn’t been anything “natural” about Facebook’s growth cycle. How else could it have been valued at 100 times earnings when it went public? Clearly many people then still had faith in what they thought was an unstoppable growth machine. But the numbers tell a different story.
Another recent report by Reuters and Ipsos showed that roughly 34 percent of Facebook users spend less time on the site than they did six months ago, saying it had become “boring” or that it was “not useful.” Only 20 percent of respondents said they now spend more time on the social network, while roughly half spend the same amount of time.
Those numbers will certainly make advertisers wary — the site has already been criticized for its less-than-stellar ad model, which had General Motors (NYSE:GM), one of the biggest advertisers in the country, ultimately pull its business just ahead of Facebook’s IPO last month. If Facebook sticks to its ad model, but users begin to decline, then it will really be in a mess.
Shares of Facebook traded up 40 cents today to close at $27.40 per share.
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/facebook-by-numbers-will-the-social-network-crash-and-burn.html/
Monday, May 21, 2012Advice for Investing in Facebook: Don’t!
Q: Should I invest in Facebook?
As of now, Stock of Facebook is valued at $34.03 according to NASDAQ. Yesterday it was valued at $38.23 when the market closed. Today it fell $4.20 (a loss of 10.99%). People are going to have to realize that just because something is popular, it does not make a good investment. Facebook, unlike many other products, is an intangible item. Unlike minerals, computers, vehicles, and home cleaners, Facebook can not be touched. Instead, it is a virtual item that can gain and lose popularity according to a person’s/society’s whims. Further, it is not a necessity. You do not need it to run your heat, get from one place to another, compute, or stay clean. Unlike companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Procter and Gamble, AT&T, Conoco-Phillips, Starbucks, Amazon.com etc., Facebook is not something that one can expect to be around for at least another decade or two. Facebook also only has one major product, and that is social networking. I ask then, why would a person find this to be a sound investment?
http://www.facebookdetox.com/2012/05/advice-for-investing-in-facebook-dont.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.