Facebook IPO being hyped by stupid reporters on behalf of Wall Street

[Šñøü†ê®]

Wall a bunch of bullshit propaganda. The retarded author of this article was clearly told to promote interest in the Facebook IPO for the benefit of Wall Street.

Ann Sherman, associate professor and IPO expert at DePaul University, raised the possibility that Facebook could set aside a portion of its shares for the small investor and use a lottery system if there is a lot of demand.

Wow what a great idea. The "IPO expert" suggests what E*Trade used to do 15 years ago which everyone hated. Although it was cool when a worthless tech stock went up 30 bucks in a couple hours and it was dumpable immediately even though E*Trade requested it not be dumped.

I was at a party recently and commodity traders there were not even sure what Facebook was. And they definitely were not interesting in getting IPO shares even though they have the connections to do so. So why would there be any expectations that the kids on Facebook have professional trading accounts to make stock trades and are willing to buy blocks of stock before it hits the market, especially in a market that is totally manipulated and could be shorted by Wall Street insiders at the open or be adversely affected by more neocon activity?


Windows, software bought from some dudes in the Pacific Northwest by Bill Gates. Facebook, software stolen by some geek by the name of Zuckerberg in the northeast. Can Facebook users look forward to Facebook 2012 with added functionality such as monitoring every keystroke on your PC!

http://news.yahoo.com/facebook-deliv...214857803.html

[Šñøü†ê®]

An interesting issue is the timing of this POS IPO. I would be willing to bet the NWO does not do any preemptive invasions of sovereign countries until AFTER the IPO of that POS company.

[Šñøü†ê®]

Wow, just watch Jim Cramer, the infamous MSNBC pump and dumper stock "guru" whose advise has been worthless for the last decade (his advice is 49% accurate) hype Facebook as a buy for the new generation. What a crock of shit. No doubt his bills are still paid by Wall Street scumbags underwriting that worthless POS stock.

[IFF]

Šñøü†ê®, i would tend to be in agreement with you in this regard.

for example

High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6d26b93a-4...#ixzz1lPRbEThg

For 2011, the company generated $3.7bn in revenues, an 88 per cent jump over the year before. Net income rose 65 per cent in the past year to $1bn, up from $606m in 2010 but lower than analysts had estimated.

source - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6d26b93a-4...#axzz1lPRLhkFL

so with net income of $1 Billion, if it was at the lower end of what's expected to be the valuation $80 Billion, this would be a multiple on net income of 80 times.
Unless they have some fresh income sources coming out soon, this is a vastly over valued company on the market. i know it is growing vastly so this would be a reason for the high valuation but i don't think it's worth that much.

my thinking is people buying at this stage will be losing money on it when the early investors cash out and liquidise their profit on it.

[Šñøü†ê®]

I would curious to see how their alleged $3.7 billion in revenues are derived. Google generate $38 billion but they have a search engine that EVERYONE on earth uses. Their stock is $600 a piece. So IF Facebook was the equal of Google, which controls the internet, Facebook should be 38/3.7 = 10. Or ten times less than GOOG, which is $60. Then again NOBODY can function on the net WITHOUT Google, but EVERYONE can function on the net WITHOUT Facebook. It would be a surprised if Facebook trades at $23 on IPO day with the IPO cost to insiders $18 like piece of shit "tech" companies 10-15 years ago. Unless they can pull some scam to force everyone on the net to use Facebook.

[optimus]

I would curious to see how their alleged $3.7 billion in revenues are derived.

Facebook ads. That's it. Like google, that is their revenue model. Selling advertisements.

[IFF]

I would curious to see how their alleged $3.7 billion in revenues are derived.

from the ft.com article above

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/6d26b93a-4...#ixzz1lX5n3TuI

The company showed strong growth in its core advertising business, which accounts for 83 per cent of revenues. Payment transaction fees from Zynga, the social gaming company built on the Facebook platform, accounts for 12 per cent. The remainder comes from transaction fees for sales in other games and digital goods like music and movies.

[86Dùde]

I hate face book hence I don't use face book. It's gaaaaay.

[Caffeine]

Looks like the broke state of California is excited about Facebook's IPO. Politicians there are already dreaming of ways to spend projected tax funds generated from the IPO sale.

"Eying Facebook IPO, California Is A Friend In Need"

http://news.investors.com/Article/60...lionaires-.htm