Actually that's flat out wrong.

2011- 1,100 seeded startups. 2004- Year Facebook formed. 2012-Facebook's valuation: est. $100 billion.

If you say that 1,100 companies are seeded a year (which is not true, only 885 in 2009, 850 in 2008) and multiply that by 8 years (2004-2012), you get 8,800 startups to invest in. So EVEN IF 8,799 of those companies failed, if you invested in every single one you'ld have a 250% return in 8 years during a down market. That's amazing.

But those 8,799 didn't fail. If 1% succeeded you'ld have 88 companies still left in your portfolio IN ADDITION to your Facebook stock.

This is why we need crowdfunding so badly. Without it, wealth is pumped to people who have so much wealth that they can't spend it all. With crowdfunding, capitalism works to spread that money around to people who can spend all of it. We're talking an explosion of wealth in this country and it wasn't from some stupid government debt plan.

You're right that there won't be another Facebook. Just as there hasn't been another Microsoft or Google. But thinking that there isn't going to be anymore large up and coming companies that change the competitive landscape is false. It'd be like saying in the 1800's that now that railways have drastically changed everything there won't be any new railways game changers. There wasn't much development/change in railways, but it was something new called airplanes that changed everything.

I am sure there are plenty of us here who might have invested a small amount of money in facebook in 2004-2005, the first time I saw it I was pretty sure it was going to kill myspace.

How is there not a second Facebook? Isn't Facebook the second Google the second Microsoft, etc. ?