Hacker News Reader

Comment by nabla9 | Hacker News Reader

After hours P/E ratio is about right.

There is no reason to expect growth better than the Nasdaq composite for the foreseeable future.

1) Due to ownership structure and personalities, the path to new ideas through leadership is closed. Zuckerberg is not going to change or leave if Meta disappoints in the future.

2) Meta can't by market share anymore thanks to regulators in all major markets being finally awake, led by EU. The benefit of using size as leverage is dwindling.

3) Meta has never created major new innovation/product in-house after Facebook. Metaverse is extremely unlikely to succeed against competition. Discount fruitless R&D from profits.

4) Meta continues to make money due to network effect, economies of size. Meta is like an oil company pumping until Facebook + Instagram well runs dry.

View on HN

> 3) Meta has never created major new innovation/product in-house after Facebook. Metaverse is extremely unlikely to succeed against competition. Discount fruitless R&D from profits.

The Quest 2 is honestly pretty amazing, especially for its price point.

As for the metaverse - which competition do you specifically see beating Facebook?

Apple, Microsoft, Disney, etc. Some complete newcomer can come and take it all away.

> 2) Meta can't by market share anymore thanks to regulators in all major markets being finally awake > 3) Meta has never created major new innovation/product in-house after Facebook.

I guess, previously they bought some growing/upcoming competitors. Can they satisfy regulators and buy up new innovative companies with complementary rather than competing offerings?

Platform antitrust regulators investigate both horizontal and vertical acquisitions.

Complementary companies integrated into data-driven economies of scale are still targets for regulators.

Have you used a Quest 2?

Quest 2 is hardware, not market share.

Nothing in Meta's VR research is something that competitors can't do. It's just basic incremental improvement you get by throwing money into it.

Meta owns over 50% of the VR headset market (over 60% of the headsets used on SteamVR). With the amount of money they are pumping into the space, combined with how invested Zuck is personally, there is no doubt that they will dominate this market. They are investing huge sums of money just to get developers to build for their platform. If you are long on VR, you should be long on Meta.

>how invested Zuck is personally

That's a massive hindrance for innovation and my #1 argument above. No matter how much he throws money and hires people, it's still just this same guy and the same viewpoint.

Ability to innovate is not function of money and resources.

Solving concrete issues in VR is mostly money and resources. Go listen to an interview with Zuck regarding VR, he understands the problems in the space very well. He also understands what brings users to a platform, made evident by Meta's complete dominance of the social network space.

Not sure what you're alluding to by his viewpoint, but his company has a userbase of over 3.5B which is the vast majority of the internet connected population of the world (excluding China, for obvious reasons). You might not like him, but he knows how to drive adoption.

VR headset market is currently so tiny that being market leader means nothing.

10b/year of improvements. Who else is doing this?

Just curious if you've used it. I haven't but people say it's way better than they had imagined!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com