Facebook Adds 96 Million Shares, Will Privacy Get Worse After IPO? 191
AlistairCharlton writes "Facebook has made yet another amendment to its S-1 filing, adding a further 96 million shares, pushing its initial public offering up to a potential maximum of $18.4bn (£11.5bn). In what is the eighth amendment to its S-1 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Facebook has also increased the number of shares allowed for over allotment, up from 50.6 million to 63.2 million." Facebook will have a lot of pressure to increase revenue after it goes public. jfruh writes in with a story about how that will impact their privacy policies. "There's been a steady drumbeat of panics over the past few years involving how Facebook uses the personal information you give it; nevertheless, someday you'll look back at 2012 as the golden age of Facebook privacy. That's because, once Facebook has its IPO, it'll come under huge pressure from the markets to extract more revenue from its business. And with display advertising not generating game-changing amounts of money, Facebook has only one valuable resource: your data, which is going to be monetized as hard as possible."
Re:Will it? Yes. And here's why. (Score:5, Insightful)
They have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximise profits, so of course they will do that by reducing privacy
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Google, unlike Facebook, actually makes money.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will it? Yes. And here's why. (Score:4, Insightful)
considering THEY ALREADY DO IT and HAVE DONE IT, it jives pretty well.
Re:is google any different? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or else he did a search for Acura to find the dealerships. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
What the HELL is it with this trend of new people having multi-paragraph posts up at the exact same time the article hits. Check the timestamps -- there's less than a minute between this post and the article going up. It's this account's first post, it's paragraphs long, it's up at the same time as the article, and it's telling you to buy Facebook stock. Draw your own conclusions.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Working in investment industry, I would seriously suggest buying Facebook shares
When people in the "investment industry" start talking about buying shares in anything publicly, that's usually about the time the general public should run, screaming, in the opposite direction.
You go ahead and buy yourself a few thousand shares, 'Mr. Investment Industry.' Good luck with your pumping and dumping.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Take a look at the original post. I SAID LOOK AT IT! Holy shit! IT'S FUCKING BEAUTIFUL. The grammar and punctuation is impeccable. It's the longest, most intensive, best edited FIRST POST! I've ever seen. Complete with embedded links! Almost as if he had it typed and ready to paste in advance of this story. Oh, and it's the only story ever commented on by a brand new ID. Get bent, astroturfer. We like Google better than you. Suck on it.
Re:is google any different? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or else he mentioned his fucking car in an email once.
But no, you're right, they've probably got their agents infiltrating the DMV as we speak!!! OH NOES, THE GOOGLE SPIDERS!!!! AIEIEEEEEE!!!!!!! [youtube.com]
Re:Will it? Yes. And here's why. (Score:4, Insightful)
And might be why they won't do it.
Facebook has managed to behave the way it does for the same way Wiretapping laws didn't apply to Skype for a long time, as long as you're a bit player in the business no one gives a shit what you do. As Facebook has gotten big governments have started to take notice. The bigger they are, and the more public they are the more likely governments are to take notice, and if rules don't exist they'll write new ones.
Governments are slow to react to change, that's the nature of the beast, and they have a lot of things on legislative plates that always seem far more pressing than whatever problem I think they should be addressing today. But that's beside the point, piss enough enough important representatives with TSA groping, Privacy Violations (wait until some important senators kid gets stalked via facebook and see how quickly the rules change), or whatever else and see just how quickly government can write new laws. And being publicly traded valued at 100 billion dollars means you don't have a lot of excuses about 'we can't afford to run our business like that' and if you don't comply your shareholders and the government will not be pleased.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:4, Insightful)
When Facebook makes a change to their privacy policy they are more concerned with getting that information to their customers rather than being concerned of the privacy concerns of their product.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, and I forgot to add, perhaps it's also because Google doesn't need to hire shills to troll Slashdot?
It's ironic, your very employment answers your own question - the reason people hate Facebook more than Google is precisely because Facebook hires too many people like you.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, this time, he actually did just that. "John Wiggenerstrom" == "Waggener Edstrom".
Trolling is an art. I miss the Chiropractor Troll, he was funnier.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:4, Insightful)
People get paid to do this, obviously, and Slashdot tolerates it because they know what side their bread is buttered on.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:4, Insightful)
I would seriously suggest buying Facebook shares
That's only if your a short term investor who has the capitol to put up for a large buy, the regular people that don't have access to those types of funds should stay away as FaceBook as a long term investment, is insane. It will slowly die out just as Myspace did after it was bought and pressured to make more money. In the short term the price will continue to go up until something new pops up, users will mass migrate, and the revenues will dry up like grandmas vagina.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Will it? Yes. And here's why. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you know that Facebook will have 1 shareholder with 55.8% of the voting shares?
I am pretty sure that Facebook is required to maximize the profit of all its investors, despite the fact that one investor holds a majority stake. As CEO, Zuckerberg does have a duty to all of Facebook's investors, not just his own vision...
The only shareholder that matters doesn't need maximized profits.
How do facts jive with your "reduce privacy to maximise profits" ideology?
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
Myspace launched in 2003, was bought by News Corporation in 2005 for $580 million, was totally irrelevant by 2008, and was sold again in 2011 to Justin Timberlake for only $35 million.
It seems to me that Google is a huge exception to an otherwise pretty bankable rule.
Re:Hateful geek comment (Score:5, Insightful)
People who are wondering about Facebook's end game can't see the forest for the trees. The IPO *is* the end game. The absurd valuation is paraded around like a supercar, like it's a sign of power and not of a huge loan that needs to be repaid.
Re:Let's compare this to Google's IPO (Score:5, Insightful)
If the OP typed up eight paragraphs in response to a Firehose submission just in case it got posted and then sat there ready to claim first post when it did, and he's not getting paid, he's just trolling, I think that's a good deal more self-humiliating than the people "falling for it".