Facebook down

[Machismo]

Again they are not the biggest in their main market, Internet advertising.

Revenue made from internet advertising 98%....how is this not "their market".


How they get there and make that money through social media users is almost irrelevant since google does the same thing across all their products.

Once again, that's not really what they do. Its not irrelevant how they get there, because the models are completely different.

That's like saying WoW is a magazine company, because they sell subscription-based entertainment... or that Wheel of Fortune and the UFC are the same, because contestants win prizes for competing.

[Zan15]

Once again, that's not really what they do. Its not irrelevant how they get there, because the models are completely different.

That's like saying WoW is a magazine company, because they sell subscription-based entertainment... or that Wheel of Fortune and the UFC are the same, because contestants win prizes for competing.

huh? 98% of the revenue is from X.

then X is what they do when you are arguing about monopoly/anti competitive problems.

Holy hell how can you even argue this??


They are an internet company that gains almost all their revenue from on line advertising. To limit their "competitors" and not include google is just molding them to fit an agenda. Youtube is and has always been considered social media.

Sure its not the same but what is the same is the business they are competing for.


your example's are just....sigh.

Wheel of fortune makes their $$ from television revenue, probably almost all of it. UFC makes their money from ticket sales and merch. They make a small percentage of it from TV rights.

Your wow example is just cringe.

[Draco-Onis]

huh? 98% of the revenue is from X.

then X is what they do when you are arguing about monopoly/anti competitive problems.

Holy hell how can you even argue this??


They are an internet company that gains almost all their revenue from on line advertising. To limit their "competitors" and not include google is just molding them to fit an agenda. Youtube is and has always been considered social media.

Sure its not the same but what is the same is the business they are competing for.


your example's are just....sigh.

Wheel of fortune makes their $$ from television revenue, probably almost all of it. UFC makes their money from ticket sales and merch. They make a small percentage of it from TV rights.

Your wow example is just cringe.

By that definition every forum, internet board or comment section of articles are Facebook competition...

[Machismo]

huh? 98% of the revenue is from X.

then X is what they do when you are arguing about monopoly/anti competitive problems.

Holy hell how can you even argue this??


They are an internet company that gains almost all their revenue from on line advertising. To limit their "competitors" and not include google is just molding them to fit an agenda. Youtube is and has always been considered social media.

Sure its not the same but what is the same is the business they are competing for.


your example's are just....sigh.

Wheel of fortune makes their $$ from television revenue, probably almost all of it. UFC makes their money from ticket sales and merch. They make a small percentage of it from TV rights.

Your wow example is just cringe.

No, this is the problem, you are ignoring what they do. Plenty of things make their money via ad revenue, that doesn't mean they are direct competitors of Facebook, Google, or even YouTube. Facebook isn't the direct competitor of the
PennySaver coupon books that come in the mail. WoW isn't a direct competitor of Netflix and the Washington Post.

- - - Updated - - -

By that definition every forum, internet board or comment section of articles are Facebook competition...

And radio stations, television stations, and even the yellow pages.

[Zan15]

By that definition every forum, internet board or comment section of articles are Facebook competition...

do they sell internet advertising then they would be the competition.

- - - Updated - - -

No, this is the problem, you are ignoring what they do. Plenty of things make their money via ad revenue, that doesn't mean they are direct competitors of Facebook, Google, or even YouTube. Facebook isn't the direct competitor of the
PennySaver coupon books that come in the mail. WoW isn't a direct competitor of Netflix and the Washington Post.

umm now you are comparing internet advertising with print? Really?

And radio stations, television stations, and even the yellow pages.

technically they are all competing for the same total ad dollars, but we are specifically talking about markets. Facebook and google are in the same market competing for the same ad revenue. they are direct competition with each other and make it so neither one is a monopoly

[Draco-Onis]

do they sell internet advertising then they would be the competition.

But online advertising is not homogeneous, Google had a competition to facebook which failed I am sure you are more than aware of this. Facebook is a near monopoly within their category. Youtube is not social media just because people can respond to each other on the comment section, it's not what youtube is built around. If your point is they all fall under the advertising umbrella then everything is a competition to facebook in advertising.

[Machismo]

do they sell internet advertising then they would be the competition.

- - - Updated - - -



umm now you are comparing internet advertising with print? Really?







technically they are all competing for the same total ad dollars, but we are specifically talking about markets. Facebook and google are in the same market competing for the same ad revenue. they are direct competition with each other and make it so neither one is a monopoly

You are the one trying to link separate shit, I was simply pointing out how absurd it is. Glad you are finally coming around.

[Zan15]

But online advertising is not homogeneous, Google had a competition to facebook which failed I am sure you are more than aware of this. Facebook is a near monopoly within their category. Youtube is not social media just because people can respond to each other on the comment section, it's not what youtube is built around. If your point is they all fall under the advertising umbrella then everything is a competition to facebook in advertising.

Its not the "same" social media, but its social media. Every single organization recognizes youtube as social media and a competitor of facebook.

So good then split facebook up into each service and keep their advertising under one company, solve nothing.

If your point is they all fall under the advertising umbrella then everything is a competition to facebook in advertising.

Online advertising. How much money do they make from users being "users" on the service. umm, next to zero? How much do they make on online advertising? 98% or billions and billions?


If i have 10 billion users who signed up to my company and own 99% of the widget market and I a monopoly on users or widgets?

- - - Updated - - -

You are the one trying to link separate shit, I was simply pointing out how absurd it is. Glad you are finally coming around.

nah. Nope. bye

[Draco-Onis]

Its not the "same" social media, but its social media. Every single organization recognizes youtube as social media and a competitor of facebook.

So good then split facebook up into each service and keep their advertising under one company, solve nothing.

I am not sure which organizations you are referring to that recognizes this but facebook's main competitor in their category are twitter, parler and other formats built on personal interactions. Google is part of online advertising but they are still struggling to break into social media and their advertising revenues mostly comes from search. However I do disagree on splitting Facebook because the problem isn't really facebook but regulations, I would put other companies higher up on the breaking up list like the too big to fail and too big to jail banks we have for starters.

We are a country of oligopolies so facebook being picked on is a bit of nonsense if they were gone another would take its place because we don't foster competition.

Online advertising. How much money do they make from users being "users" on the service. umm, next to zero? How much do they make on online advertising? 98% or billions and billions?
If i have 10 billion users who signed up to my company and own 99% of the widget market and I a monopoly on users or widgets?

You're essentially playing semantics here that's like saying Playboy magazine is in the same business as the New York Times because they publish things. Just because the business model relies on the same type of revenue doesn't mean they belong in the same category. If facebook were to burn to the ground the beneficiary of those users wouldn't be google as the day Facebook was off demonstrated twitter and other social media format are the ones who got a ton of new users as result.

[Machismo]

Its not the "same" social media, but its social media. Every single organization recognizes youtube as social media and a competitor of facebook.

So good then split facebook up into each service and keep their advertising under one company, solve nothing.



Online advertising. How much money do they make from users being "users" on the service. umm, next to zero? How much do they make on online advertising? 98% or billions and billions?


If i have 10 billion users who signed up to my company and own 99% of the widget market and I a monopoly on users or widgets?

- - - Updated - - -



nah. Nope. bye

Don't blame me, this is the rabbit hole you tried to dive into. You spoke of advertising, so stick with it. That would mean that Facebook is the same as radio stations and the yellow pages.

Don't run away from your argument, now.

[Zan15]

Don't blame me, this is the rabbit hole you tried to dive into. You spoke of advertising, so stick with it. That would mean that Facebook is the same as radio stations and the yellow pages.

Don't run away from your argument, now.

nah i will blame you, its how you argue everything.

You know we are talking about internet advertising and more specifically youtube being considered social media and being a massive competitor for the same internet ad revenue as facebook (not to mention also having close to 2 billion users).

but you be you boo.

- - - Updated - - -

You're essentially playing semantics here that's like saying Playboy magazine is in the same business as the New York Times because they publish things. Just because the business model relies on the same type of revenue doesn't mean they belong in the same category. If facebook were to burn to the ground the beneficiary of those users wouldn't be google as the day Facebook was off demonstrated twitter and other social media format are the ones who got a ton of new users as result.

Print media is a bucket for which newspapers, magazines, etc etc all compete for print media advertising revenue. there are sub catagories in every business but its still the same revenue stream of print media advertising they are all competing against. One week Walmart can decide to go full balls 10 million in advertising in the NYT or they can do 10 million in Playboy instead because they got a superstar to pose nude instead of spending that money in the NYT.



if facebook died tomorrow you can bet youtube would seeea huge revenue and activity boost. Companies would have to find a new home for all that advertising budgeted money for the quarter/year

[Draco-Onis]

if facebook died tomorrow you can bet youtube would seeea huge revenue and activity boost. Companies would have to find a new home for all that advertising budgeted money for the quarter/year

False because as we have seen during the blackout people aren't going to rush to youtube to get their facebook fix. Since they get paid for more users it wouldn't make much difference, twitter on the other hand. I am not sure why you are being so obtuse, you clearly understand the difference between those platforms. It's not really a good argument against breaking up facebook, you should have gone with a more intricate angle.

[Machismo]

nah i will blame you, its how you argue everything.

You know we are talking about internet advertising and more specifically youtube being considered social media and being a massive competitor for the same internet ad revenue as facebook (not to mention also having close to 2 billion users).

but you be you boo.

- - - Updated - - -




Print media is a bucket for which newspapers, magazines, etc etc all compete for print media advertising revenue. there are sub catagories in every business but its still the same revenue stream of print media advertising they are all competing against. One week Walmart can decide to go full balls 10 million in advertising in the NYT or they can do 10 million in Playboy instead because they got a superstar to pose nude instead of spending that money in the NYT.



if facebook died tomorrow you can bet youtube would seeea huge revenue and activity boost. Companies would have to find a new home for all that advertising budgeted money for the quarter/year

It's your argument.This is the metric you laid down, so suddenly running away from ot shows you don't even believe your own bullshit.

[Yuujin]

I'm still annoyed I had to create a Facebook account to use my Oculus. 30+ years of no facebook and then this shit.

[Zan15]

It's your argument.This is the metric you laid down, so suddenly running away from ot shows you don't even believe your own bullshit.

Nah the effort for a contrarian like you is just not worth the time based on your history on these forums. Explains why so many people have you on ignore.

[Machismo]

Nah the effort for a contrarian like you is just not worth the time based on your history on these forums. Explains why so many people have you on ignore.

No, you arenpissed that you got beat by the jacked up rules you tried to make.

[Zan15]

No, you arenpissed that you got beat by the jacked up rules you tried to make.

Nah, but its cute you think I'd be pissed over something so insignificant. I just gave up trying based on your history. You're just not worth the effort anymore and your history is proof of that.

[Machismo]

Nah, but its cute you think I'd be pissed over something so insignificant. I just gave up trying based on your history. You're just not worth the effort anymore and your history is proof of that.

You seem pissed off. You jumped in here with this stupid argument, and then when it was turned around on you, to show just how bad it was, you deemed it unfair, and irrelevant.

It's your fucking argument.

I'm reminded of a Robert Frost Poem:

Having invented a new Holocaust,
And been the first with it to win a war,
How they make haste to cry with fingers crossed,
King's X--no fairs to use it any more!

[Zan15]

You seem pissed off. You jumped in here with this stupid argument, and then when it was turned around on you, to show just how bad it was, you deemed it unfair, and irrelevant.

It's your fucking argument.

I'm reminded of a Robert Frost Poem:

Having invented a new Holocaust,
And been the first with it to win a war,
How they make haste to cry with fingers crossed,
King's X--no fairs to use it any more!

Wasn't stupid at all, but keep bitching its fun to watch you hem and haw over your actions.
You couldn't even get past the fact 98% of their revenue and profits are from internet advertising. That is proof enough. Your history proves its almost always a waste of time attempting to have even a simple conversation with you.

[Easo]

I'm still annoyed I had to create a Facebook account to use my Oculus. 30+ years of no facebook and then this shit.

Of all the things and hate for big companies blah blah this is something I do agree absolutely should not happen - your hardware becomes useless in case FB bans you.