[HN Gopher] Meta Reports Second Quarter 2022 Results
___________________________________________________________________
Meta Reports Second Quarter 2022 Results
Author : simonpure
Score : 64 points
Date : 2022-07-27 20:10 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (investor.fb.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (investor.fb.com)
| MarcellusDrum wrote:
| Do you think we have already seen peak Facebook? Obviously we
| can't judge from one bad(?) quarter, but from Meta's desperate
| attempts to copy Tiktok, I think its a slow decline from here.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Their attempt to copy TikTok is a sign they're still competing
| - they copied snap _and won_ , so it'd be more concerning if
| they didn't do it again.
| paulpauper wrote:
| They have Instagram and what's app , too, let's not forget.
|
| So it is diversified in that sense.
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| It's popular to hate on Meta/Facebook but those acquisitions
| were very prescient and evidently pure dumb luck, either. The
| same Zuckerberg is still a directional force now as he was
| then, so it seems it isn't cut and dry that the company will
| only trend down from here.
|
| The bet on VR seems dubious to me, but I'm getting old and
| boring. I don't know what anyone likes.
| sys_64738 wrote:
| Look how many people FB has to support their webpage. Insane.
| Yhippa wrote:
| It must be mostly backend stuff. It feels like the website
| itself barely evolved over the past several years.
| almog wrote:
| Yes, Facebook has weathered past storms by adapting to changes,
| but anyone using Google+ failure to draw parallels with TikTok,
| is making a superficial comparison at best.
|
| For one, Google+ never matured in terms of user engagement or DAU
| that interacted with its social feed. It's not Facebook's "war
| story" but a story of Google's own failure.
| alangibson wrote:
| On the metaverse question: does anyone seriously believe Facebook
| can innovate, let alone build a new industry?
| mwint wrote:
| I kind of think FB is uniquely positioned to make the metaverse
| thing work, if it possibly can. I just think it's unlikely
| we'll ever see it catch on, no matter who is pushing it.
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| Imagine Facebook comment sections...but in VR.
|
| Yikes!
| kornhole wrote:
| They have the capital and people. I keep asking people I know
| if anybody is excited about their metaverse, and only a
| marketing person told me she was. Their reputation from past
| behavior is going to make it difficult for people to adopt. I
| see a big flop, but I have been wrong before.
| alangibson wrote:
| In terms of market position, you're right. But in terms of
| creativity and innovation, they've got the algorithmic news
| feed and little else.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| They have the cash to make the hardware, the capital-intensive
| side, work. On the actual product experience I'm unconvinced.
| But all Meta needs to do is be competitive in the space not win
| it. If they're in the top-3, that's still a huge revenue
| generator.
| alangibson wrote:
| They changed their name to Meta... They need to win it or
| become a footnote. The market won't accept them going from a
| world leader to an also-ran.
| ALittleLight wrote:
| Their share price would just update to reflect their
| position. The market isn't going to punish a company for
| declining, just price a company based on current position
| and future prospects. It is the nature of companies to
| grow, stagnate, decline, and fail.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| Right now Meta has product offerings (Horizon Worlds), they
| have an app store, and they make their own hardware. I find
| their product offering to be bad, but their app store and
| hardware are fine. Valve has made plenty of money over the
| years by owning just an app store alone. I think Meta is
| still a world leader owning the store and the hardware even
| if their product offering is middling. Being able to
| innovate on the hardware end gives them great leverage on
| what features applications use, the ability to influence
| AAA studios and indie devs alike. This will eventually stop
| if VR hardware becomes commoditized, but that's not
| happening any time soon if it ever does. And if Meta does
| win the product battle then there's even more value to
| profit from.
|
| And not being a world leader won't tank their stock or
| somehow erase the company. There's still real
| earnings/value to be had in VR and they're early in the
| space. As long as the space as a whole is successful and
| Meta stays a part of it, they'll continue to receive
| revenue which will continue to drive stock growth. They
| might not forever stay a behemoth, but they're not going
| anywhere any time soon.
| t_mann wrote:
| Imho Facebook has entered Nokia territory. Their core products
| are losing market share, their innovative products (Oculus) are
| lacking a killer app.
| sparkbII wrote:
| threeseed wrote:
| iPhone has been losing market share and never had a killer app.
|
| And given the Quest2 has a been a commercial success perhaps
| like the iPhone there is no one game changing single app but a
| range of apps and features.
| mgl wrote:
| This is likely the peak for facebook, the website.
|
| But it may not be a peak for facebook, the company - it is time
| for a new product.
|
| Facebook successfully digested any vital competition in the
| social media market, the big question is whether they (still)
| have the innovation gene in their DNA.
|
| Alternatively, they could keep acquiring any new emerging social
| apps like BeReal, especially targeting the youngest people, so
| the platform can keep the attractive demographics forever.
| civilized wrote:
| When did they last do innovation? As far as I can tell the site
| is hardly different from when the Wall / News Feed was invented
| in... what, 2005? Since then they've made a few minor
| extensions of the site, a few major acquisitions of
| competitors, and that's it.
| doubtfuluser wrote:
| I don't think this is yet the beginning of the end - the company
| has proven to be resilient in the past (Google+, mobile). But
| yeah declining MAU from last quarter and overall numbers not too
| great. Now war-time Zuck will come.
| kgraves wrote:
| Great to see the beginning of the end of Meta / Facebook with
| their first revenue miss.
|
| Hopefully their metaverse play is a costly fatal distraction that
| will ultimately lead them to lose more money while lots of people
| run away from using their platform.
|
| The fact they are ruining their own product [0] to compete with
| TikTok shows that they have completely run out of ideas.
|
| There is no saving Facebook / Meta this time.
|
| [0]
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/07/27/instagr...
| throwaway1777 wrote:
| They're still printing money. It's hardly the end. People said
| this about Microsoft for years when they missed mobile, and
| look at them now.
| mandeepj wrote:
| > look at them now
|
| "A new CEO" - gave them that much needed new life lease
| alliao wrote:
| wow is that right, that's gotta be pretty significant. first
| revenue miss.. gotta happen some time
| rightbyte wrote:
| "Headcount was 83,553 as of June 30, 2022, an increase of 32%
| year-over-year."
|
| Like ... why? They hired 20 000 employees net in a year? And
| Zuckerberg now somehow says that they need to tighten the belt?
| antoniuschan99 wrote:
| Thinking they had an aggressive hiring for metaverse
| snoopy_telex wrote:
| I have no idea what all those people are actually doing. That
| seems so heavy a head count for the public end result.
|
| Is there a break down somewhere of how many are SWE vs SRE vs
| support?
| dralley wrote:
| Yeah, that casts a very different light over the suggested
| layoffs.
| alberth wrote:
| Off topic: I wonder why this is posted from fb.com as opposed to
| meta.com.
| paulpauper wrote:
| Bad..as expected. Meta generates tons of cash though, i think
| it's cheap, imho
| alexk307 wrote:
| They operate on 30% margins, even a bad quarter or two is worth
| looking at
| fleddr wrote:
| As usual, people making a fool out of themselves by confusing
| "Facebook is no longer cool" with actual value.
|
| Half the adults on this planet use a Meta product DAILY, and they
| added some 3% to it in an incredibly difficult environment.
|
| The only interesting thing in the results are the lower ad
| prices.
| decebalus1 wrote:
| https://www.theverge.com/23277797/mark-zuckerberg-meta-faceb...
|
| 'Crack' is the sound that is commonly associated with 'a whip'.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Lower revenue than Q2 of 2021 and higher expenses. They're on
| track to have significantly lower net income this year than last
| year.
|
| Au revoir, Facebook.
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| They've deeply embedded themselves into my life because of
| Whatsapp.
|
| Life and work are nearly impossible here without Whatsapp.
| biorach wrote:
| Yeah but how much advertising revenue does WhatsApp bring in?
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Whatsapp is really deeply embedded in business in Latin
| America and it's deeply concerning to me. It was already
| reading your conversations. At best, it's going to start
| serving ads soon.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| So have the telecom companies. We don't need to downlevel the
| quality of the site because of it.
| brianhorakh wrote:
| Talk to your friends and family about matrix.org, setup a
| whatsapp bridge for the laggards.
| threeseed wrote:
| > Au revoir, Facebook.
|
| Modern day Linux on the Desktop.
| christophilus wrote:
| Desktop Linux and non-Facebook user, here. Can confirm.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Last week, I switched my desktop to Linux. I was pretty
| bullish on FB (but hated the company) until the whole
| "Metaverse" thing.
| pavlov wrote:
| Comparing to 2021 can be misleading because the Covid year was
| a strange anomaly for digital businesses. That kind of profits
| may be a long way off for most of them.
|
| Meta's operating income (i.e. profit before taxes and interest
| basically) for this past quarter was $8.3 billion. That's
| roughly the same as Exxon did in its Q1. "Au revoir" seems
| premature when they're still raking in that much cash.
| impulser_ wrote:
| Also, they run three of the top five most used applications
| in the world.
|
| I love how people keep saying Facebook is dying, yet TikTok
| still doesn't have as many active users as Facebook, WhatsApp
| and Instagram.
|
| The only application that does is YouTube.
| baal80spam wrote:
| Hopefully 'farewell'.
| redmen wrote:
| Au revoir?
|
| Don't think dethroning the lizard king is going to be that
| easy.
| daenz wrote:
| Facebook will die, Meta will live through Instagram and
| whatever else it can purchase.
| solarmist wrote:
| Snarky only comments aren't in the spirit of HN...
|
| That said I laughed out loud to this. I'm not a FB fan
| because of all the dark patterns.
|
| Edit: Added "only"
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| Its okay, Zuckerberg isn't reading these comments.
|
| We should at least be able to make snarky comments about
| our overlords on anonymous internet forums.
| threeseed wrote:
| I do love the idea of computer nerds making fun of the
| appearance of other nerds.
| solarmist wrote:
| It's not the snarkiness. It can be snarky if it also adds
| to the conversation. There wasn't really anything people
| could say in repose to your comment that was relevant to
| the topic.
| kristopolous wrote:
| The only thing that matters to see their trajectory is their
| performance with respect to their industry peers.
|
| So assuming they're just an online entertainment company,
| Netflix is higher, Twitter is about the same, Disney is
| probably on the up, Activision and EA have similar downward
| trends, so I don't know, might still be too noisy to tell.
|
| Personally if I were a betting man I'd be shorting them hard.
| People are quickly souring on the entire social media industry.
| There's no reason it had to stay around
| flyinglizard wrote:
| They are still a very powerful part of interpersonal
| communication - friends and family.
|
| The only way forward is for them to kick out Mark, stop the
| insanity that is Metaverse, focus on their core and play nice
| with the platforms and regulators.
| __derek__ wrote:
| > The only way forward is for them to kick out Mark
|
| It might be hard to convince him to give himself the boot,
| especially while the company continues to make gobs of money.
| Maybe we'll see a compromise where the company starts paying
| a dividend and Zuck shovels the rest of the cash into his
| passion project.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Mark is unkickable, he has owns the majority of votes. We're
| not even close to a world where he kicks himself
| layer8 wrote:
| He may end up kicking himself in a different way. ;)
|
| In any case, it will be interesting to see how the
| Metaverse thing will eventually perish.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| My guess is that he will resign in shame if the "Metaverse"
| project doesn't pan out for them, and get replaced by an
| MBA.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Sure, but he gave himself until 2030 to prove the
| metaverse.
| oneoff786 wrote:
| That's a laughably short duration to produce mass appeal
| VR
| yuppie_scum wrote:
| It should be pretty obvious at this point that the man
| has no shame.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| From a less cynical point of view, they have basically bet
| the farm on "Metaverse." They can no longer buy out
| competitors (the FTC will block them), and they need a new
| monopoly to keep printing money. If they can make even a
| moderate success out of the metaverse project, they can get
| out of the hole. If they can make a massive success of the
| project, they will easily be the new Apple. However, I'm not
| sure that a recession is the time for a mega-cap company to
| start spending a lot on a new uncertain project.
| giantrobot wrote:
| > If they can make a massive success of the project, they
| will easily be the new Apple.
|
| In what way? If Facebook wanted to replace the iPhone with
| some "metaverse" device they would need to be able to build
| a device way more advanced than their current offerings at
| a price point equal to or less than the iPhone. That means
| they would need to make up for thousands of person years of
| engineering, manufacturing, and operations expertise that
| Apple currently has.
|
| You're basically saying "If Facebook could build a copy of
| Apple from scratch and make some compelling products, they
| could be the next Apple". Samsung is an industrial behemoth
| and _just_ keeps up with Apple.
|
| Not only is that unlikely it doesn't even sound possible.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| It seems like they need about 5-10 big fundamental
| improvements in technology to make the headsets work well
| enough for consumers. In the next 5-10 years, it's very
| possible that this bet will pay off.
| threeseed wrote:
| Might want to watch this as it's quite clear Meta knows
| exactly what's required to make the Metaverse a reality.
|
| And if they achieve it then it will be a game changer as
| big as the internet or smart phone.
|
| https://youtu.be/2zHDkdkqd1I
| deltree7 wrote:
| Bingo! I'm always astonished by the amount of
| cluelessness displayed by HN crowd -- supposedly at the
| cutting edge of things. Like all other platforms, about
| 5% of the posters at HN provide extremely valuable
| content. The rest just parrot current popular pitchfork
| (anti-capitalism, anti-corporate, anti-advertisments --
| stuff that I can get from TikTok in a more entertaining
| format).
| phailhaus wrote:
| Higher expenses were already expected due to the metaverse
| play, so I don't think this means that Facebook is really going
| anywhere.
| gigatexal wrote:
| Yeah as much as I hope they go the way of the dodo I think
| they're far too big to die soon. MySpace wasn't anywhere close
| to their size when it died. That being said it doesn't mean we
| can't hope and pray for such things. ;-)
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| Well, the trend is that the successor is worse.
|
| Looks at TikTok...
| civilized wrote:
| At the current rate of year-over-year decline in operating
| income, they'll be _losing_ money in two short years.
|
| Then they'll be as dead as eternal money-losing cash pit Uber.
|
| _someone whispers in my ear_ ... correction, I 'm being told
| Uber is still not dead.
|
| I know, I know, I'm as confused as you are.
| [deleted]
| hamandcheese wrote:
| Facebook pays a lower effective tax rate than most HN commenters.
| googlryas wrote:
| Is there a reason corporations even pay taxes, versus just
| taxing individuals once they get money distributed to them from
| the corporation?
| Closi wrote:
| > Is there a reason corporations even pay taxes, versus just
| taxing individuals once they get money distributed to them
| from the corporation?
|
| Yes - because without corporation tax the revenues might get
| funneled out of the country and taxed elsewhere in tax
| avoidance schemes (both at the 'corporate' level in foreign-
| owned businesses, and at the individual level with the
| ability for the rich to setup shell corps to avoid income
| tax).
| throwaway5959 wrote:
| If that happens I'll form a corporation, rent forever and
| have my employer pay my corporation and move to a state
| without income tax.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| Should move to Puerto Rico and avoid federal tax.
| Closi wrote:
| Well that's probably mostly because the corporate tax rate in
| the united states is lower than many HN commenters taxes,
| rather than specific Meta policies.
|
| (USA corporate tax rate is 21%, while someone earning $200k in
| California would pay an effective rate of 33% including
| Federal, FICA & State taxes).
|
| Besides - the effective paid 17% compares favourably with their
| competitors and others in the space.
| clintonwoo wrote:
| I'm guessing they publish their tax rate on the first page to
| counter criticisms of "big corps that pay no taxes".
|
| It's hard to deny that a company cannot grow forever with the
| same product. There's literally only so many people on Earth.
| It's not a bad thing for growth to stop. It's a bad thing for
| your product to offer a sub par user experience though. I think
| this is where Facebook has suffered as they prioritized metrics
| and numbers over making a product that people love.
| [deleted]
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| Guidance is atrocious.
|
| While the misses might not look bad in isolation, the overall
| picture isn't looking good. The COO just quit after an extremely
| successful run, guidance is bad, and worst of all, the planned
| rebranding to Metaverse has been hijacked by crypto bros shilling
| ponzis on steroids.
| vineyardmike wrote:
| The overall picture looks promising... except the gov just
| blocked one of their latest acquisitions, which may mean the
| end of that.
|
| They're best positioned to combat the ATT changes. No one can
| handle the engineering costs of navigating that and the data
| limitations as well as them. Their direct response advertising
| base has no where else to go, snap just proved that.
|
| The meta verse re-brand is meant to be forward looking
| (although IMO not close enough for their needs). They can't
| grow social media forever - especially as social views of it
| sour.
| oneoff786 wrote:
| Results are bad
| cm2012 wrote:
| I am very bullish on FB:
|
| 1) Founder still has majority voting shares, gives a lot more
| freedom.
|
| 2) I think the Metaverse stuff will pay off in the long run
|
| 3) They are making the changes necessary to compete with TikTok.
|
| I am buying shares now at this price
| rvz wrote:
| Like I said before, the premature death of Meta Platforms
| constantly screamed here and even orchestrated and parroted by
| the mainstream media, has been _greatly_ exaggerated.
|
| Still profitable in a market downturn even with rising inflation
| fears causing everyone else in big tech to slightly miss
| expectations. DAUs, MAUs up again and they will be here for
| another 10+ years like it or not.
|
| It's business as usual folks.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| The price of the stock is not based on "business as usual." It
| is based on relentless growth.
| rvcdbn wrote:
| with a PE of 13?
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Oh, it's that low? I guess they are priced for "slow
| decline." For comparison, IBM's P/E ratio was around 10
| before the pivot to a consulting company.
| stefan_ wrote:
| That's nice, but what does the future hold? Companies aren't
| valued on the here and now.
|
| This is after all the company that is betting its future on
| clown shows like this:
| https://twitter.com/MetaQuestVR/status/1551943338038726657
|
| It's hard to decide what is the more inept management between
| the Twitter crypto avatar bros and the meta "meta" verse
| people.
| UncleMeat wrote:
| This one will be interesting. On the one hand, still hugely
| profitable. An operating margin of 29% is insane. On the other
| hand, people expect growth and no revenue growth and a large
| drop in income is definitely not what investors want to see.
| samspenc wrote:
| The interesting thing is they were operating at more than 40%
| profit margins for years now. A drop to 29% margins [1] is
| actually pretty significant and puts it in line with profit
| margins at most other larger tech firms, and not at the top
| of the market anymore.
|
| [1] Looks like this is pre-tax? I'm calculating 25% post-tax
| margins.
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| Given how the market is reacting, or non-reacting, then yeah
| this is business as usual for Meta. But hating on Meta is just
| free karma on HN so why not? You don't come to these threads to
| deal with the truth, you just voice your feelings or farm
| karma.
| cletus wrote:
| Disclaimer: Ex-Facebooker.
|
| The first thing to know about Facebook is that they view the
| social media landscape in two dimensions: format and audience
| size. Format here means text -> audio -> video. So if you look at
| the match up between audience of 1:1,000,000 and text you'll find
| Twitter, for example.
|
| This has served FB quite well but what happens after video, if
| anything? Well, the company believes the next two steps are VR
| then AR. In this context, the Oculus acquisition makes more
| sense.
|
| Meta is ultimately (IMHO) suffering from a problem similar to
| what Microsoft had in 2000: it didn't know where to go and lacked
| leadership and direction. With MS and Netscape, MS really
| believed they were doing normal MS things until the governmen
| tintervened and they didn't really know what to do.
|
| There have been three big initiatives from the top at FB that
| IMHO didn't and still don't make sense:
|
| 1. In respons eto the misinformation aroundd and subsequent to
| the 2016 election, FB decided to try and police truth with "fact
| checking". This is a huge mistake. Nobody is going to be happy.
| There will always be a line where people disagree. Even in clear
| cases of false information, as we've seen you're going to still
| upset a lot of people. This was always a losing strategy;
|
| 2. They decided to merge WhatsApp, FB Messenger and IG Direct to
| try and "win" the US messaging market against iMessage. Years
| before this there was no concerted effort to merge FB, IG and WA
| accounts. When asked, Mark said they were differnt ecosystems
| with different permissions. It didn't make sense to try and unify
| them. Well that fell by the wayside and angered users in the
| process; and
|
| 3. The Metaverse. Much like VR in general, I don't htink is ever
| going to be mainstream. It doesn't solve any problem. AR might if
| we can ever get AR glasses to work but that's a pretty big if.
| For now, people love their phones. They don't love VR headsets
| and (again, IMHO) they never will.
|
| So now Meta stock has lost half its value. The best performers
| will be looking at the door. An effort to weed out low performers
| is going to make things incredibly toxic. It won't weed out
| bottom performers. It'll weed out those who are the worst at
| politics because that's what employee calibration is.
|
| None of this is address the real problem: leadership. There is no
| top-level direction (that makes sense). Who you should be looking
| to lose is 50% of the people from directors right up to Mark's
| level. ICs and "leaf" managers don't decide company strategy.
| Direct this at those who do.
| chrisco255 wrote:
| Re: #2, they also decided to merge Facebook with Oculus login,
| and I still refuse to buy an Oculus for that reason alone. I'm
| tired of my data being cross analyzed and seeing creepy ads
| follow me around the internet. Last thing I want to do is plug
| into some Facebook metaverse where even my eyeball movements
| are analyzed and processed.
|
| As a kid I thought I would love VR. And even as solid as the
| modern experiences have gotten, spending more than 15 minutes
| in a headset is nauseating, and there's so much ceremony to get
| set up and you pretty much are expected to stand while playing.
| I'd rather veg out on the couch with a PS4 controller, I guess?
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| > As a kid I thought I would love VR. And even as solid as
| the modern experiences have gotten, spending more than 15
| minutes in a headset is nauseating, and there's so much
| ceremony to get set up and you pretty much are expected to
| stand while playing. I'd rather veg out on the couch with a
| PS4 controller, I guess?
|
| Yeah VR tech needs to become much more seamless before it
| impacts the market. But we can see that as headsets get
| better, a larger market segment is willing to take part.
| Every upgrade in experience and ergonomics opens up another
| tier of user.
| dnissley wrote:
| re: The merging of facebook with oculus login -- next month
| you'll be able to create a standalone "meta" account, which
| are basically the equivalent of the old oculus accounts. You
| don't have to link them with a facebook account or any other
| existing account (but you will have the option).
|
| https://store.facebook.com/help/accounts/?intern_source=blog.
| ..
|
| Disclaimer: I work on a team that's helping out with this
| effort
| Karrot_Kream wrote:
| > So now Meta stock has lost half its value. The best
| performers will be looking at the door. An effort to weed out
| low performers is going to make things incredibly toxic. It
| won't weed out bottom performers. It'll weed out those who are
| the worst at politics because that's what employee calibration
| is.
|
| Just FYI this is not a uniquely Meta problem or even a Big Tech
| problem. This is going to hit almost every tech company. Stocks
| are down across the board, and Meta stock losing half its value
| is just business as usual in this economy. Best performers will
| look at the door to... end up at another company shedding its
| stock value for the same. Layoffs and cuts always create lots
| of FUD and while they're generally based around performance,
| politics is omnipresent and will always result in unjustified
| winners and unneeded losers.
| DeRock wrote:
| On a 5 year period:
|
| -MSFT: up 267%
|
| -GOOG: up 143%
|
| -AMZN: up 131%
|
| -AAPL: up 316%
|
| and META? down 6%
| yuppie_scum wrote:
| You hate to see it
| mannymanman wrote:
| Ties are back on the menu https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-
| mark-zuckerberg-wore-tie-...
| newfonewhodis wrote:
| https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/27/facebook-parent-meta-earning...
|
| - Earnings: $2.46 per share vs. $2.59 per share expected,
| according to Refinitiv
|
| - Revenue: $28.82 billion vs. $28.94 billion expected, according
| to Refinitiv
|
| - Daily Active Users (DAUs): 1.97 billion vs 1.96 billion
| expected, according to StreetAccount
|
| - Monthly Active Users (MAUs): 2.93 vs 2.94 billion expected,
| according to StreetAccount
|
| - Average Revenue per User (ARPU): $9.82 vs. $9.83 expected,
| according to StreetAccount
| jstummbillig wrote:
| Okay at the danger of outing myself as financially incompetent
| at big company level, the difference seems neglible?
| spaceman_2020 wrote:
| The market tracks the future, not the present.
| Underperforming, even marginally, against expectations
| implies that the trend for the next quarter is going to be
| down as well.
| alliao wrote:
| the game is you're supposed to beat analysts figures at the
| very least. easier when you have headroom or extra trick up
| your sleeves. I vaguely remember there was a time when
| facebook was so hot they were able to cook up a nice round
| figure for revenue or something prior or for IPO. pure
| flexing.
| pid-1 wrote:
| Why?
|
| Facebook isn't a Hedge Fund. They want to beat their
| competitors, not market research predictions.
| mhh__ wrote:
| Hedge funds also aim to beat their competitors
| uoaei wrote:
| > They want to beat their competitors
|
| Not quite. They want to satisfy shareholders. Beating
| competitors is second-order because the shareholders will
| be happy (read: get more money) when that happens.
| threeseed wrote:
| Zuckerberg doesn't need to care about shareholders when
| he can't be removed.
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| The part that's missing here is the expenses, which have
| risen substantially.
| themanmaran wrote:
| The market largely agrees with you. With the stock remaining
| flat over the last month (including today).
| pclmulqdq wrote:
| Apparently the market was basically expecting this, and
| Facebook now is priced like IBM in the early 2000's.
| maronato wrote:
| There's a difference between the market expecting a great
| quarter and FB missing by a little, and the market expecting
| a bad quarter and FB doing even worse.
| tmaly wrote:
| The note on Reality Labs is pretty big in my opinion given the
| rebranding as Meta.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-07-27 23:01 UTC)