Granted, being able to monetize doesn't matter to your users, but if you keep running through your VC, you eventually can't keep up development at the same pace.
Not to say that FB is going to be as big as Google. Outliers on that scale may only appear every couple decades. But they have a similar hackerly vibe.
Couldn't the same apply to Linkedin?
In a way all the attention is on facebook, linkedin is getting as much attention as google did in 2000.
Online Newspaper X has over 20m online readers. Most of them have at some point subscribed to print publications @ $200+ per year. If it was a membership site at just $2 per month, wouldn't they be able to keep some readers? 10%? 5%?.
You're not telling me someone making $80k per year would replace the newspaper she reads every day to to save a few cents a read?
Wouldn't people pay to use google? What if it was just $0.50 a month? or $0.01 per search?
The concept that if people use a site, it's worth money, has not proved itself.
World of Warcraft takes in 12.99 - 14.99 per user per month and has approximately 10 million active subscribers. Plus additional profits whenever an expansion comes out.
http://www.mmogchart.com/Chart1.html
faq...
[EDIT: added "per month" to second paragraph, first sentence]