Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

200 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I'll say it's bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532168)

Even Slashdot isn't getting any replies

Group = Social Media? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532172)

Really? What next, Slashdot = Search Engine?

Re:Group = Social Media? (1, Informative)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532428)

This. There's no real "social" aspect to Groupon's core business. It's a company that sells discount gift certificates, that's all there is to it.

Re:Group = Social Media? (1)

Altus (1034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532584)

Doesn't it have a feature where if you buy something and then get some number of friends to buy it you get it for free? I know thats not Facebook like but it does sound pretty social to me. It is certainly exploiting real world relationships for online marketing which is really all the social web was ever about.

Social media = relationships between users (3, Informative)

F69631 (2421974) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533088)

The definition of "social media" varies but generally speaking the word implies online service that is centered around the social relations between the users. Social media builds on who you're interested in, not on what you're interested in. It's based more on the amount of communication as opposed to the content of communication.

For example, Slashdot isn't social media because I come here for the content (articles and the information and opinions found in comments section). Facebook is social media because I go there to see what people I'm interested in are up to - the content of our status updates and comments hold no value at all but rather the fact that we communicate and the metadata of the communication (tones, etc.) are what matters. Some services (Messageboards, IRC, etc.) CAN be used for communication that contains useful information and they CAN be used just for building and maintaining social relations. Generally, a service isn't labeled "social media" unless it is in some ways been clearly designed for that purpose (FB is clearly built for that purpose, IRC can be used in somewhat similar ways but hasn't been specifically designed around that).

Groupon does have some aspects that could technically be called "social" but they're not what the word meand in "social media".

Re:Group = Social Media? (2)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532616)

The "social" aspect is that a certain number of people have to sign up for a deal before the deal becomes active. If a preset limit isn't met, nobody gets the deal. People tend to use social networks such as Facebook to spread the deals and encourage other people to sign up. So Groupon is kind of an adjunct to social networking sites like Facebook in the same sense as Zynga is (Zynga only exists because of Facebook).

Re:Group = Social Media? (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532682)

And as such it's actually one of the more realistic business models among the current crop. Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly like the way they do things, hell, I gave up unsubscribing (I had to to monitor something for work) and marked them as spammers as in my experience they don't play by the rules in these parts, but the idea of lots of people buying one thing cheaply does actually work. If they stuck at their core business model instead of trying to make a short term killing then there might well be a viable long-term business there, but instead it looks like a lot of smart people trying a pump-n-dump rather than a bunch of smart people trying to make a lot of money with a good idea.

Re:Group = Social Media? (1)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532960)

That would have been a fairly valid comment if you hadn't retarded it up by starting it with "This."

Re:Group = Social Media? (1)

khellendros1984 (792761) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533268)

Would you have complained if he started the comment with "Agreed." instead? "This", as the sole content of a post, sounds a lot like the AOL-style "me too!", but using it as a sign of agreement before expanding on the point seems like a perfectly valid usage of a new linguistic construct to me.

Re:Group = Social Media? (1)

Siberwulf (921893) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532570)

Agreed. It's really tough to make a case when you don't have a set of three.

Re:Group = Social Media? (2)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532644)

It's really tough to make a case when you don't have a set of three.

OK, then: The ongoing meltdown of MySpace, which was bought by News Corp in 2005 for $580 million, and was sold in 2011 for $35 million.

Hmm. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532180)

What's zynga, never heard of that

Re:Hmm. (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532202)

They make facebook "games".

Re:Hmm. (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532450)

They make facebook "games".

I.e. Farmville.

Re:Hmm. (2)

click2005 (921437) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532788)

I think of them more as slot machines for the internet age.

Re:Hmm. (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533180)

They also make a bunch of iPhone game apps. They have a few word games I play on occasion.

Re:Hmm. (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533482)

Not just Facebook. I have been using Words with Friends (Scrabble clone) on my iPhone and it's worked well.. Free. They nag to upgrade to the paid version once in a while, but I don't notice the ads in the free version.

Re:Hmm. (2)

citylivin (1250770) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533286)

What's zynga, never heard of that

Not sure if you are trolling or what, by Zynga is a huge gaming company mostly propped up by facebook. Some sources say that they are bigger than EA [businessweek.com] .

Well i guess not anymore :P

given the state of the economy, (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532184)

this is not surprising. i wouldn't blame it on a social-media specific bubble just yet since this is only reflecting the problems with overall growth of the (world) economy.

Re:given the state of the economy, (2)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532432)

Uh.. the whole economy crashing thing was years ago now. I doubt this is related. It does sound more like people just finally got bored and moved on to something else. I'm not sure what, but I'm glad there won't be so many of those stupid predictions about how gaming inside your web browser is "teh futurez!". It has its place, but that place isn't replacing consoles any more than the Wii's motion controls got rid of game pads.

There's a big difference between "infinitescimal growth" and "95% decrease" btw.

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533186)

Uh.. the whole economy crashing thing was years ago now.

Uh, haven't you read the papers lately? Crashing repeatedly is apparently all it's capable of these days.

"Recession coming again."

"Really? I didn't even get to see the last one end. @#$"

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533246)

Yeah.. I haven't actually noticed any change at all in my own life.. though I don't make much use of credit, and the only debt I'm in right now is my student loan, so I guess I'm not in a position for it to affect me much.

I think a lot of the whining is just a self fulfilling prophecy though. How do you expect to "increase consumer confidence" when you do nothing but spout doom and gloom all over the place? Sensationalist media really don't help when it comes to this kind of situation.

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533290)

PS no, I never read the papers, nor do I watch TV or listen to the radio. I used to just never read any news ever (I really don't want to think about rape and murder every single day of my life), but I found that Slashdot often has stuff that interests me.

Re:given the state of the economy, (5, Insightful)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532462)

I'd blame it entirely on the bubble, and irrational valuation. It's not the recession's fault that Groupon's value to decreased from a trillion+ dollars... it was never worth that to begin with, and wouldn't have been even in a healthy economy. Nothing real about Groupon or Zynga has changed that caused their value to decrease 90%; those sorts of swings are entirely driven by the worst type of speculation.

Re:given the state of the economy, (2)

Hope Thelps (322083) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532576)

Nothing real about Groupon or Zynga has changed that caused their value to decrease 90%; those sorts of swings are entirely driven by the worst type of speculation.

I doubt that speculation reduced Zynga's profits by 95%. Either their costs have soared for some reason, their revenues plummeted or their books were just plain wrong. Or a bit of two or more of those.

Re:given the state of the economy, (4, Informative)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532632)

From what I've read, Zynga's revenues rose 115%, but profits dropped 90%+.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/09/zyngas-90-drop-in-second-quarter-profits-unlikely-to-derail-ipo.html [latimes.com]

According to that article, their costs went up a ton due to development of two new games that have yet to make them money. I have a hard time swallowing the article's claim that a 90% drop in profits isn't something to be alarmed about.

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532738)

If profits are dropping because they're expanding that's a good thing, assuming you think there's space for them to expand in to. I'd want to kick the tires and make sure that money was actually spent on stuff (new offices, larger workforce, whatever), but if their revenue's growing and the profits are down because they're making more stuff, that's not a problem.

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

Hope Thelps (322083) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533170)

If profits are dropping because they're expanding that's a good thing, assuming you think there's space for them to expand in to.

A lot rides on whether they predicted it. A company that says "we're embarking on three big projects over the next year, costs are expected to rise initially with effects on revenues following in future years" (um, a bit more detailed than that but you get the gist) looks like a company with a plan and hopefully anybody who doesn't like the plan has already sold well before the results show something like what they forecast. A company that says "oh, uh, yeah our costs have gone up a lot due to some projects we're working on" without having forecast that is scary even if the projects are good ones. Don't know which side Zynga falls closer to.

Re:given the state of the economy, (2)

robot256 (1635039) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532858)

According to that article, their costs went up a ton due to development of two new games that have yet to make them money. I have a hard time swallowing the article's claim that a 90% drop in profits isn't something to be alarmed about.

Sad but true. Short-sighted investors that are alarmed when executives put profits back into the company instead of dolling them out as dividends are what make so many CEOs drive perfectly good companies into the ground. They should all have their man-cards revoked and sent to business school.

Re:given the state of the economy, (2)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532674)

Nothing real about Groupon or Zynga has changed that caused their value to decrease 90%; those sorts of swings are entirely driven by the worst type of speculation.

I doubt that speculation reduced Zynga's profits by 95%. Either their costs have soared for some reason, their revenues plummeted or their books were just plain wrong. Or a bit of two or more of those.

I think early speculation on a Google buy out of Groupon propelled their valuation to irrational heights. Reality has been reasserting itself, in a way very reminiscent of Terry Pratchett's Mort, upon Groupon. I thought they had a marginal idea, at best, when I first hear their business model, but I'm just a nobody who said people should be buying Ford stock with every dollar they can lay their hands on, when it was at 89 cents a share in early 2009 (even at today's price of ~$10 a share that's a pretty nifty return.)

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532942)

. I thought they had a marginal idea, at best, when I first hear their business model, but I'm just a nobody who said people should be buying Ford stock with every dollar they can lay their hands on, when it was at 89 cents a share in early 2009 (even at today's price of ~$10 a share that's a pretty nifty return.)

Yeah, I was just a nobody then too. I, however, was recommending GM back in 2008. Luckily no one trusted me to give financial information, including my wife.

Re:given the state of the economy, (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532742)

So the fact that Groupon counted the total amount of its daily-deal sales as revenue, including fees paid to merchants [businessweek.com] and didn't think anyone would notice had anything to do with it?

Or how about Zynga's founder Mark Pincus' own admission [techcrunch.com] that he scammed the players to make money.

heat (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532206)

Was kind of funny seeing Zukerberg feeling the heat on his ass last week. Too bad he will have to accept to be just another rich man now unless some unlikely hit comes....

Re:heat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532754)

Without all the Facebook staff's tongues up there, his ass is usually burning anyway.

Too bad (2)

rkfig (1016920) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532214)

I was rather looking forward to shorting them.

Somehow (1)

Hsien-Ko (1090623) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532246)

I heard Farnsworth say "GOOD NEWS EVERYONE!" before reading this article.

Re:Somehow (1)

Tomato42 (2416694) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532416)

And I have read it in his voice.

Silly reporting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532274)

Nothing makes a good headline like massive amount of "revenues" or "profit" decreases - except both metrics can be totally worthless unless you look into details.

Re:Silly reporting (4, Interesting)

AdmiralXyz (1378985) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532380)

Then would you care to enlighten us, O Wise and Powerful AC? Zynga's quarterly profits went from $22m to $1m in a quarter, and thanks to the SEC we've discovered Groupon has never made a profit at all. But please, tell us why these metrics are worthless and these companies are still hot stock picks.

Re:Silly reporting (3, Interesting)

rnswebx (473058) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533376)

Regarding Zynga, how about doing as suggested and read the details? (I won't comment on Groupon, as I've never believed in their product at all)

Their quarterly revenue actually went up by more than $30M over the previous quarter; $279M vs $242M. They didn't launch a new game the entire year, until May 31st. (one month before the end of Q2) Since then, they have also launched a new Indiana Jones themed game, Adventure World. Keep in mind that Zynga will be one of the early players on Google's new social network, already launching their biggest game, Cityville, on the platform.

They had higher than normal hiring expenses, including a $10M payment as part of an executive's sign-on bonus. They also paid out $10.6M in a stock warrant. Both of these are quite likely to be one time events, and neither of them made many appearances in the media. If you take those two payments out, you are back at ~$22M in profit, which would be an increase in year over year, and almost double Q1 2011's profit of $11.8M. My source [businessinsider.com] outlines most of this for you, in case you'd rather not read through the details yourself. I knew the Q2 2011 profit number, but here is another source [gamezebo.com] for you to check out in case you don't believe me.

Re:Silly reporting (1)

rnswebx (473058) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533392)

My mistake.. the last sentence should be "... Q1 2011 profit number ..." instead of "... Q2 2011 profit number ..." -- sorry.

YAY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532348)

YAY!

People who were trying to attach a value to social interaction were idiots to begin with. There's a fine line between marketing things that people are interested in and shoving ads down their throat. The problem with social networking is that you can't piss off your target audience as much with obnoxious ads. Marketers for some reason thing the more obnoxious your ads are the more people see them.

Re:YAY (2)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533550)

Marketers for some reason [think] the more obnoxious your ads are, the more people see them.

Why's that at all surprising? It's true.

I've sworn off buying stuff because of egregiously offensive ads many times. Slapping me in the face repeatedly with boneheaded marketroid pitches just makes me look harder for stuff I don't want and will never buy. I was just telling a friend last night why I'd never buy an HP laptop again, and why I won't buy Intel based boxes, and why I've not been inside a McDonalds in more than a decade. Their ads remind me repeatedly of all the things I hate about them!

Marketroids' pitches more often drive me away from (not toward) making a sale for their principals.

It's a fun game. I really wonder why they want to play it. They can't win that game, except they can (because there's a lot of morons who do buy !@#$, regardless of what I think of it).

Zynga? (2)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532362)

People are have gotten tired of those stupid games.
Facebook is making money and a lot of it.
Groupon. I used it once of movie tickets. People can only go out to eat and got to the spa so many times.
I don't think it is too much of a bubble. Much like the first time around the good will survive the stupid will die off.

Of course you should come to my new social media site. It is for people that are in deep emotional relationships or want to seek relationships with one eyed Episcopalian kangaroos. I am pretty sure it will be the next big thing.

Fetish courtesy of Neal Simon's Goodbye Girl.

Re:Zynga? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532622)

Facebook making money? I heard the other day that they are EBITA positive. That is not the same as making money. When people start confusing the two, it seems doomed to cause a bubble.

Re:Zynga? (3, Interesting)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532684)

Two problems with Groupon that I've seen after briefly subscribing to it:

1. It's convoluted to see deals without subscribing. I imagine there are people out there who would be interested, but don't want to give out personal information.
2. Who can blame them? Most of the deals sucked in my area. This is one place where targeted advertising would be great--I specifically signed up to receive ads! Instead, I got an ad for pole dancing. As a male, I was not very intrigued.

Re:Zynga? (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532804)

"1. It's convoluted to see deals without subscribing. I imagine there are people out there who would be interested, but don't want to give out personal information." Nah. Just click on a link, such as the privacy statement on the "sign up" page, and then click home. I check it out regularly to see what businesses in my area are poorly managed.

Re:Zynga? (3, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533010)

The main problem with Groupon is the "deals" suck so badly for businesses that once they've burned through all good will in a region the only way to keep generating revenue is to expand into another. Hence Groupon has hyperinflated itself beyond the major US cities, into smaller cities, into Europe and beyond. It attracts local interest in its service for a while before the offers turn to shit. And when the deals turn to shit people lose interest in the service altogether. It's obviously all going to come crashing down at some point. I'll be surprised if Groupon lasts more than a year in its current form the way it's going.

Re:Zynga? (1)

BLToday (1777712) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533122)

Oh good, I thought I was the only one getting ads for pole dancing. Look, I'm all for pole dancing just not the type that has me dancing.

Re:Zynga? (3, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533198)

Look, I'm all for pole dancing just not the type that has me dancing.

I think we're all in agreement on this one.

Re:Zynga? (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533228)

I imagine there are people out there who would be interested, but don't want to give out personal information. [...] This is one place where targeted advertising would be great--I specifically signed up to receive ads! Instead, I got an ad for pole dancing. As a male, I was not very intrigued.

So you don't tell the system that you're male (personal information) and then you're annoyed because you see ads that don't make sense to you?

Re:Zynga? (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533298)

Actually, I did give them personal information. Signed up and everything. I should have made that more obvious.

Re:Zynga? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533472)

Instead, I got an ad for pole dancing. As a male, I was not very intrigued.

Wait...why wouldn't a male be intrigued by pole dancing? I'm confused; seems like good targeting to me.

Too much generalization (4, Insightful)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532364)

Groupon is not a social media website by most definitions of that term. Zynga is a single one of many companies profiting from Facebook. Pushing back the Facebook IPO is not a reason to think that the bubble is bursting- indeed if they thought that they'd want to go and do the IPO sooner rather than later. The Zynga and Facebook issues are also probably to some extent due to a new player entering the field in terms of Google+. It does seem that the social media sites don't remain on top for very long. Myspace is dying, and who even remembers Friendster? But it does seem that the industry itself is here to stay. We may end up seeing something similar to what happened with search engines- successive stages of different companies until someone got the product well enough to dominate the market (a long with a healthy dose of early mover effect compared to new rivals). Whether that will happen or not is hard to tell. But declaring that there was a bubble in this context when most of the relevant companies aren't even being traded actively is really difficult. Declaring that the bubble has burst makes even less sense.

Re:Too much generalization (1)

noshellswill (598066) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533032)

Split dem hairs yassurh. Nice pump-un-dump excuse making Mr Investor ... but those high-flying parasite mediaCoz are heading at 1000 mph straight down. BOOM! They do nothing and are worth nothing. You are sooo fyucked!

Re:Too much generalization (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533428)

We may end up seeing something similar to what happened with search engines- successive stages of different companies until someone got the product well enough to dominate the market (a long with a healthy dose of early mover effect compared to new rivals).

I'm hoping we'll make some progress. We should get a "social media" that is made by, for and of the people (to borrow from something that may not actually deserve that description). Powered by something like diaspora* [joindiaspora.com] and the freedombox. [freedomboxfoundation.org]

ps. Check out the new .sig if you have an opinion on women.

Re:Too much generalization (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533444)

Sorry. I feel the need to clarify. The ps. was completely off topic and was not just directed at the parent but at anyone in general.

Re:Too much generalization (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533462)

the generalization being made here is that the IPO is often thought of as a strategy for growth, but it is apparent from recent history that these are merely the acts of companies cashing out

Re:Too much generalization (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533508)

Myspace is dying, and who even remembers Friendster?

MySpace isdying? It died a long time ago and it's actually finding new niche life.

Anti-Social Networking (3, Interesting)

Armandoban (1210708) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532382)

Even the most computer illiterate among my friends and family are starting to talk about privacy invasion, enforced sharing, and lack of control over their personal information. Facebook's "ticker" has created a new world of raging confusion. The anti-social networking mentality is hitting the mainstream..

Overly dramatic headline (5, Insightful)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532396)

Better would be "Predicted social media bubble fails to materialize". A bubble is defined by its inflation; a bubble that "pops" before it "inflates" never existed in the first place.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (5, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532444)

I would argue though that Goldman Sachs creating an investment tool that trades in Facebook pre-IPO shares, and having that investment tool value FB at around $50 billion is a pretty damn strong sign of an actual bubble.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532628)

I would argue though that Goldman Sachs creating an investment tool that trades in Facebook pre-IPO shares, and having that investment tool value FB at around $50 billion is a pretty damn strong sign of an actual bubble.

Well, Facebook IS valuable. All that demographic data that people willingly provide every day for free is very valuable to advertisers.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532678)

Sure, but do you really think it's $50 billion valuable?

Re:Overly dramatic headline (2)

cobrausn (1915176) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532740)

Doesn't really matter what he thinks - it matters what people are willing to pay for it.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (5, Informative)

m50d (797211) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532794)

If you're buying it not because it's worth that much but because you think someone else will pay more for it, that's a bubble right there.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (1)

Jimbookis (517778) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532690)

Well of course, apparently Goldman Sachs rules the world [theage.com.au] and exists to only take advantage of opportunities to make money in spite of any consequences. So many people around the world depend on their retirement savings and superannuation tied up in this system and whether they like it or not need stupid overvalued IPOs like this to get by in the future.

Re:Overly dramatic headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532770)

Aha! but in heated water, steam pockets (bubbles) form and collapse instantaneously before the water has enough energy to boil!

Re:Overly dramatic headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533236)

Linkedin (LNKD) is still trading $80 a share. That sounds more than inflated and materialized to me.

Good (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532398)

The market and the investors have evolved, almost a defense mechanism, against shitty companies and IPOs. This is nothing more than a population of educated investors.

Re:Good (1)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532906)

Investors have become educated?

If only that were true. History shows that investors can't wait to participate in the next bubble.

Zynga's profit is down 95%?? (3, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532404)

Damn. I thought that Zynga's bubble was going to pop, but not this soon. There are only so many Farmville type games anyone can play, and I can't be arsed to build my life around clicking some field every 4 hours without getting paid.

Yes, this is just a year-over-year quarter comparison, and there are a few things that were playing against Zynga in the last few quarters. Not the least of all that a lot of real game companies are getting into the FB game business. Zynga won't be able to just rip-off some game mechanics and then throw some eye candy on top of it. They'll actually have to develop real games.

Welcome to the real world, Zynga. No one except your founders is going to make bank on your stock.

Re:Zynga's profit is down 95%?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532642)

I'm pretty shocked at this as well, that can't be right, Zynga are huge, that is such a HUGE drop.

Kind of a good thing really, means other developers can step in and make games that require more than half a braincell, and are actually, you know, fun.
The only problem is they might still be around, ready to sue even more with their trolling tactics and knockoffery, now that they are making so little.
Until we behead the beast and nuke it from orbit, we will never be safe.

Re:Zynga's profit is down 95%?? (1)

Is0m0rph (819726) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533274)

Zynga is killing themselves with all the spam your friends crap. I've played some of the ville games and the thing that really kills them is the spam 100 of your "friends" to get this or that and continue in the game. They'd make a lot more money sticking more with the sandbox than the spam.

Re:Zynga's profit is down 95%?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533318)

Reduced profit doesn't always mean reduced revs or business. Go look at the monthly active users on the app pages of their new games like adventure world and tell me people are sick of the games.

Re:Zynga's profit is down 95%?? (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533534)

Also remember that profits in the tech industry are incredibly variable. You can spend a lot of money on R&D or marketing in one quarter, or have a surge of interest in your new product followed by a rapid dropoff.

It's hard to evaluate this without looking at their full balance sheet.

Not surprised in the least. (4, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532436)

I must be jaded.

I must have been around a bit.

I must be a thinking human.

It surprises me in the least.

The barriers to entry in these fields are so low I can't figure these absurd valuations of social media - people on the internet are not just fickle, they're extreme fickle - since there's nothing really to hold them anywhere, not much of a stake.

Now eBay, they're still successful no matter how badly they handle their business, because everyone goes there because everyone is there and no other auction sites have really stuck around to compete with them. But social, who's really nailing their cart to any Social Media horse? Google+ pops up and everyone creates an account, just in case everyone else goes there.

We knew this phenomena back in the days of Fido BBSes (and even before that with message systems on college mainframes in the 1970's.)

Re:Not surprised in the least. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533158)

But social, who's really nailing their cart to any Social Media horse? Google+ pops up and everyone creates an account, just in case everyone else goes there.

Before Google+ I didn't think it was possible for another popular social network to pop up (except I was hoping for some distributed one, but didn't really get my hopes up high). Facebook was the first social network I joined, because I was nearly forced to. I can't think of any other company except Google whose other social network I would have wanted to join. The only possible 3rd one I can think of is the open source distributed one.

I'm sick and tired of hearing from Slashdotters how Facebook is just one of the many social networks that just come and go. No. Facebook was the first real global social network, there was none before that. Myspace may have been popular in the US, but definitely not globally. Facebook is also the first one where "old people" started hanging out, there were none before that. Google+ only succeeded as well as is did so far because of its brand recognition, even even now I don't really know if it's going to make it. It's highly unlikely that anything else is going to show up in the next 5-10 years.

That's not good news (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532456)

They'll get out of this without LEARNING something.

And are way more likely to repeat the mistakes. Again.

Re:That's not good news (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533356)

What mistake are you talking about? Milking the cow until the cow dies sounds pretty dandy.

Zynga Games (4, Funny)

randomErr (172078) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532468)

Whenever I see a new Zynga games advertised I immediately hear a twisted version of Boomhauer in my head:

Yeah man, I tell ya what, man, that dang ol’ Zynga, man, you just go in on there and point and click, talk about w-w-dot-w-com, mean you got the chicks on there, man, just go click, click, click, click, click, it’s dang ol' easy, man.

And here I am with all this money to invest! (1)

sizzzzlerz (714878) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532578)

I wonder if online pet food stores are coming back.

Re:And here I am with all this money to invest! (1)

DogDude (805747) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532626)

Yes.

Jokes? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532582)

Lets get ahead of the curve. Last tech bubble resulted in all kinds of jokes. This tech bubble is going to result in jokes about... Or will it be more complaining, like this bubble will be nothing but whining about how facebook sucks, etc?

Re:Jokes? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532880)

how about these for starters....
facebook.con
facebook.gone
facebook.not
facebook.arrrgh
fecesbook.com

Money burned elsewhere (3, Interesting)

prefec2 (875483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532604)

The money for the last New Economy bubble was created to counter measure a previous bubble collapse. The fed reduced the interest rates to pump more dollars into the market. That worked perfectly. And the money had to go somewhere. And that somewhere was the New Economy. This time they burned the money in that finance crisis and housing thing. And reduced the interest rates again. However, this time the economy is in such a bad shape due to the financial crisis and the money problems in the Euro-zone and of course the trouble with the US budget keep the banks from "investing" so IPO for the web 2.0 companies is not such a good idea at the moment.

Re:Money burned elsewhere (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37532810)

Actually, part of the reason why the economy is in the crapper is the fact that banks just refuse to lend in any way, shape or form in the US. Credit is so hard to get compared to just a few years ago that businesses who *want* to expand and actually make jobs are unable to.

Maybe the FED should threaten to loan directly to businesses at the discount rate. Problem solved.

Re:Money burned elsewhere (2)

Vaphell (1489021) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533082)

why lend to unreliable businesses when you can borrow at 0% from the fed, buy treasuries at 2-3% and earn risk free money?

Woohoo! (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532608)

Yes! Finally! Hopefully all this social media crap will die off soon. And my later prediction was correct, Groupon was the first to go.

Re:Woohoo! (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533514)

Social media won't die until you find some other effective means for creepy guys to stalk scantily clad young women in a semi-anonymous manner. Social media sites have pictures of real college-aged (or younger) girls posting pictures of themselves in bikinis or less without the negative social stigma of being a 'porn' site. Until you find an alternative to that, there will always be some sort of social media demand.

Dear Zynga (1)

Mick R (932337) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532640)

Sucks to be you. Assholes! You deserve to fail. If I ever see a former Zynga coder or QA person come through my door looking for a job I WILL have you thrown off the premises bodily. Yours All the people you have ripped off, falsely accused of cheating with no proof and otherwise slandered.

Re:Dear Zynga (1)

discord5 (798235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532954)

Temper temper, mon capitain.

Re:Dear Zynga (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533024)

Nice story, bro. they take your pixels away? U mad?

No news here, Slashdot... (1)

theNAM666 (179776) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532698)

Unremarkable:

1) GroupOn is crap, was going to fail away.

2) We're at the start of a "double-dip" recession or worse; everyone at the Fed is screaming about "no investment;" interest rates have been lowered etc but experts say this will move only a few investors, in highly secure investments... ie, "what Bubble???", no one's taking high-risk investments.

I guess now that Taco's gone, article quality is going even *further* downhill.

Re:No news here, Slashdot... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37533384)

1) GroupOn is crap, was going to fail away.

AdDing random capiTal letters inTo comPany names doesn't make you sound aNy more knowledgeAble about them.

Oh, money was lost... (1)

seanmcelroy (207852) | more than 2 years ago | (#37532898)

But this time, it was the VC's, private equity, and angels who are holding the declining valuations, not the post-IPO institutional and retail investors.

About time they stop tossing hot potatoes to us -- they finally got burned!

Flailing at the Wind (5, Interesting)

Scot Seese (137975) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533380)

Facebook is - or soon will be - flailing at the wind. Fighting an opponent they can't hurt.

Facebook is now facing a competitor that can afford to earn $ 0 from social media.
Facebook's survival depends on the popularity and eyeball count of Facebook to sell ads and revenue share (Zynga) agreements against.

Google, currently earning as much profit per month as Facebook earns per year, does not need Google+ to earn three cents in order to continue flourishing. While they would LIKE Google+ to be a runaway hit, it simply isn't necessary.

Once Google starts aggressively advertising Google+ on television, stealing 10, 20, maybe 30% of Facebooks' traffic, how will Zuckerburg feel then? Probably like the guys at Netscape after Microsoft purchased Mosaic, rebranded it as Internet Explorer and started giving it away for free.

Facebook's UI is a mess, it's privacy and security settings are not intuitive and the entire user experience feels stale and worn-out to many people I've talked with. The massive redesign that Facebook is preparing to launch, with Timeline and other UI tweaks.. while satisfying some, will probably feel like "work" to many - something new to learn, for what was supposed to be a simple, fun way to keep in touch with friends.

If Google has half a brain, they will ascertain the date of Facebooks' relaunch and start a massive national ad buy for Google+ starting two days prior and run a solid week after. Clean, simple, secure microblogging with video and photo photo sharing. They will steal millions of users.

Re:Flailing at the Wind (2)

Scot Seese (137975) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533480)

edit: revenue per month, not profit. However, this Jan. 5 2011 article suggests Facebooks' profits scale similarly to Google's. By which measure, Facebook is still a tenth or twelfth as valuable and 100% dependent on the success of their one property.

http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-details-leaked-company-is-much-more-profitable-than-everyone-thought-2011-1 [businessinsider.com]

This would be newsworthy (1)

fsterman (519061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533476)

Except that their revenues are actually UP. They bought a lot of stuff and hired a lot of people. Profit money taken in, it's money AFTER you paid for everything they are doing. So, as of now, they are quite sustainable [businessinsider.com] .

Re:This would be newsworthy (1)

fsterman (519061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37533502)

Grr, that should read "Profit != money taken in" -Slashdot apparently filters the does-not-equal character.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>