After first-ever Facebook revenue drop, Meta looks like it's in panic mode | Hacker News Reader

After first-ever Facebook revenue drop, Meta looks like it's in panic mode

sfgate.com

36 pointsnradov14 comments

What I find ironic is that there is a huge gap that FB left behind, IE: people still want a way to keep in regular contact with friends / classmates / former co-workers / family who they might not see physically on a regular basis. FB had this market, then effed it up because they got greedy with their advertising and data poaching. Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram - no other of the "social" platforms focuses on this need either. FB still is the default for this need, but they've made their users miserable in the process and plenty of people have just plain left because they don't trust FB. And the kids see it as something for old people.

Agree, old Facebook was one of the best things about the internet. But there's no real way to monetize it without a corresponding degradation in user experience.

Maybe it just wasn't meant to be...

this is what happens to companies who don't expand the scope of what they're trying to do. they just keep adding more useless features to their platforms and yet facebook is still just facebook: a successful cashcow that's aleady so enormous it doesn't have much hopes of growing any larger.

If they want to grow they need to get out of doing the same thing over and over. As a consumer, VR is the last thing I want to see. They need to grow into other markets, like Tesla does. Tesla didn't just build a car, they're going after the whole energy market too.

And, if FB doesn't want to grow, then they need cut all the useless expenses and just keep milking their cashcow in a slow decline.

FB did do a lot IMO. They got into IM, into VR and really brought it to the mainstream. Other parties did too but FB really put in the investment to put it on the map.

I don't like FB as a company because of their privacy attitude. But I don't think they did anything wrong business-wise. Just morally.

IM is not a business for them but another data source for FB. The costs for running WhatsApp must be astronomical yet it is a free service.

VR may become the entertainment platform but maybe it doesn’t. AR has a much wider application and is actually needed. It will allow our connected computers to see and hear what we perceive allowing for a much more direct input. I can’t wait for true personal assistants accompanying one throughout life. This data gathering may allow a machine to get to know us and finally even upload us for extended after life. That’s philosophy difference Zuckerberg mentioned. FB just came up with another way to sell ads.

Facebook grew for years by acquiring other companies for users, business, or talent. See FriendFeed, Instagram, and Whatsapp. Oftentimes, Facebook would help grow the resulting business enormously or deploy the technology to great effect.

But with increased antitrust scrutiny and the realization from a few founders that they could do better not selling, Facebook lost much of their potential growth. See Snapchat and TikTok. Snapchat spurned an acquisition offer.

Imagine if Facebook owned Snapchat and TikTok. They would be doing a lot better.

Snapchat wouldn't have added anything to FB as far as I can tell.

Instagram crushed Snapchat almost instantly once it started doing filters/video.

TikTok, OTOH, is a real threat. And it's real threat only because it's an even worse, more cynical social media platform than FB/Instagram.

> Instagram crushed Snapchat almost instantly once it started doing filters/video.

I don’t find this to be true at all. My cohort of middle class Americans have all been using Snapchat since ~2014, and we’re still using it. More so, the HS-age baristas at the coffee shop I frequent DEFINITELY still Snap the day away.

I see Insta and SC as finding an awkward equilibrium, the the overlap of the daily stories functionality. Other than that, their core features are completely different. This is why both are still healthy.

Tiktok doesn’t have to care about the western shaming and potential impact it could have on its growth and profits like facebook does.

You seem to be saying two conflicting things:

- FB needs to "get out of doing the same thing over and over", but also

- FB tries to do new things and that's why they're doing poorly

Do you view VR as not a new market for them?

VR is new. But, I don't see it growing into the next big thing. do people really wanna wear a headset all day?

The real problem is that Zuckerberg does not know how to run a business that can sustain itself.

The go-to tactics for FB are to lie habitually to the press, fleece customers (ie: advertisers), and urinate all over the faces of FB users.

Harvard is the big secret to FB's success, not Zuckerberg. It is the prestige of Harvard that attracted FB's initial users. It is the connections and cachet of Harvard that attracted FB's employees and investors.

Zuckerberg is not Augustus Caesar. He is not Steve Jobs. He's a lucky boy who got into an Ivy League school at exactly the right time to create a social network with more prestige than MySpace.

What's the alternative, bit tech being immune to recessions? Sounds like entitlement more than panic. Realize that the economy has downturns, trim the fat, look for new products and services appealing in current conditions...

Given how much of Facebook/Instagram is about sharing photos, why isn't there a Meta service to upload, organize and share my photo albums to rival Google/iCloud for example?

good riddance. trash absolute dogshiet of a company

Reply on news.ycombinator.com