I would not be surprised to find out Facebook wasn't nearly as profitable as it claims.
There are lots of ways to make revenues appear larger than they are. Remember back in the Tech bubble when other internet darlings would advertise with each other. No money changed hands, but advertising revenue would be inflated. Facebook is probably doing something different, but they have made it clear they don't want the SEC or anyone else auditing their accounting practices.
I agree with Mike. A simple page on their web site stating which facts they got wrong. If they want to include any commentary other than the facts it should be humours. If it was done write that single page could get more press than the movie.
I am no lawyer, but could the clothing manufacture sue them for using the jacket in the movie without permission? Seems like the next logical step. However if they held off until after the free advertising they are getting from being sued in the first place started to wane, they could refresh it with this suite. Both the movie and the clothing line are gaining from being in the news. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out they had gotten together on this in advance and were both in on it.
> I doubt very many (if any) people will really pay much extra
Customers are already use to paying extra in the restaurant business. 10-20% extra in the form of tips. I have never eaten at Panera, but if it is an average or below average restaurant, then I would agree with you that they won't see many people paying extra. However if their food is really good with great service, great atmosphere and a real fan base, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people paid extra.
Like other commenter's have said the "Celestial Steed" or other pets Blizzard sells for real world dollars offer no game play advantage. For instance having a faster mount could be considered a small game play advantage. The fastest flying mount in Wrath of the Lich King is 310% speed compared to the slowest at 100%. The fastest flying mounts can only be acquired through achievements in game play. The Celestial Steed will only go that fast if you already have a 310 mount. So what you are buying is purely cosmetic. Like a fashion accessory. An inexpensive purse can be just a functional as a Gucci bag, but many women would gladly pay for the more fashionable item.
Some people get a real kick out a cool looking mount, or a silly non-combat pet that does funny things and makes you laugh a little. Since there is a proven demand for them, Blizzard is making the game more fun for people who value them enough to pay for them.
> Aha.. interesting, well even so, the only reason Blizzard can do this is because they have such absolute control over the game's economics.
Comments like this give me the impression you still don't get it. Yes Blizzard has done a better job than most MMO's at designing the game so it has a thriving economy, but it is not so much control as designing the game to be as much fun as they can. You can get hundreds if not thousands of pets in game without buying them for real dollars. Again these things are more like a fashion accessory. They offer no game play advantage, but can still be fun.
I think the “Coolness” is only a small factor of something more important. Innovate or die! The warning sign is stagnation.
With each of the social networks that fell out of grace, someone took a look at what they are doing and came out with a better way of doing it. If top one had continued to innovate and improve faster than the new start ups they would of stayed on top.
For example look at Google. They weren't the first search engine. They came up with a better way of organizing search results and rose to the top. If they'd stopped innovating when they hit the top, someone else would have came up with something better and beaten them. But Google has continued to innovate and improve fast than any new upstart has even come close to so far.
If you don't see constant worthwhile improvements coming from a social networking site, then they are going to be out innovated by someone new.
On the post: Facebook's 3rd Biggest Advertiser Accused Of Being Affiliate Toolbar Scam; Facebook Says It's Never Heard Of The Company
There are lots of ways to make revenues appear larger than they are. Remember back in the Tech bubble when other internet darlings would advertise with each other. No money changed hands, but advertising revenue would be inflated. Facebook is probably doing something different, but they have made it clear they don't want the SEC or anyone else auditing their accounting practices.
On the post: How Should Facebook Respond To The Social Network Movie?
On the post: Twilight Producers Sue To Stop Fashion Design Firm From Pointing Out That 'Bella' Wore Its Jacket
On the post: Panera Bread Testing The 'Pay What You Want' Model
Customers are already use to paying extra in the restaurant business. 10-20% extra in the form of tips. I have never eaten at Panera, but if it is an average or below average restaurant, then I would agree with you that they won't see many people paying extra. However if their food is really good with great service, great atmosphere and a real fan base, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people paid extra.
On the post: Blizzard Sells $2 Million In Virtual Livestock In Four Hours
Some people get a real kick out a cool looking mount, or a silly non-combat pet that does funny things and makes you laugh a little. Since there is a proven demand for them, Blizzard is making the game more fun for people who value them enough to pay for them.
> Aha.. interesting, well even so, the only reason Blizzard can do this is because they have such absolute control over the game's economics.
Comments like this give me the impression you still don't get it. Yes Blizzard has done a better job than most MMO's at designing the game so it has a thriving economy, but it is not so much control as designing the game to be as much fun as they can. You can get hundreds if not thousands of pets in game without buying them for real dollars. Again these things are more like a fashion accessory. They offer no game play advantage, but can still be fun.
On the post: MySpace: That Great Club Everyone Used To Go To
With each of the social networks that fell out of grace, someone took a look at what they are doing and came out with a better way of doing it. If top one had continued to innovate and improve faster than the new start ups they would of stayed on top.
For example look at Google. They weren't the first search engine. They came up with a better way of organizing search results and rose to the top. If they'd stopped innovating when they hit the top, someone else would have came up with something better and beaten them. But Google has continued to innovate and improve fast than any new upstart has even come close to so far.
If you don't see constant worthwhile improvements coming from a social networking site, then they are going to be out innovated by someone new.
Next >>