 |
peilthetraveler
Registered: Jun 2005
Posts: 7105 |
08-07-12 11:21 PM
Lets say there is a restaurant on an island and most of the people on the island eat at this restaurant. Now there are a few other restaurants, but by far 90% of the island eats at this restaurant....(Well call the restaurant Fish Bucket, or FB for short)  So the owner of Fish Bucket decides he wants to sell. How much does he want to sell it for. Well the business makes $100,000 per year so the owner of Fish bucket, Mike Zacharyburg, decides to put it up for sale for $7,170,000. Now, we know the business can't keep growing much because nearly everyone on the island eats there, and there is always a risk that a new restaurant might pop up one day that sells better tasting fish. After all...Fish Bucket did once replace "MyFish" as the number one restaurant on the island some years back.
So tell me...would you buy Fish Bucket for $7.1 million dollars when it only makes $100k per year and you know it cant grow much more and it runs the risk of being replaced by a new restaurant one day?
Because Facebook and Fish Bucket are the exact same thing (at todays closing price of $20.72.) Fish Bucket is just scaled down.
It shocks me that so many people just hear "facebook" and no price matters. The name is popular enough to justify the price in their eyes.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
HurricaneUS
Registered: Aug 2008
Posts: 766 |
08-07-12 11:26 PM
Quote from peilthetraveler:
Lets say there is a restaurant on an island and most of the people on the island eat at this restaurant. Now there are a few other restaurants, but by far 90% of the island eats at this restaurant....(Well call the restaurant Fish Bucket, or FB for short) So the owner of Fish Bucket decides he wants to sell. How much does he want to sell it for. Well the business makes $100,000 per year so the owner of Fish bucket, Mike Zacharyburg, decides to put it up for sale for $7,170,000. Now, we know the business can't keep growing much because nearly everyone on the island eats there, and there is always a risk that a new restaurant might pop up one day that sells better tasting fish. After all...Fish Bucket did once replace "MyFish" as the number one restaurant on the island some years back.
So tell me...would you buy Fish Bucket for $7.1 million dollars when it only makes $100k per year and you know it cant grow much more and it runs the risk of being replaced by a new restaurant one day?
Because Facebook and Fish Bucket are the exact same thing (at todays closing price of $20.72.) Fish Bucket is just scaled down.
It shocks me that so many people just hear "facebook" and no price matters. The name is popular enough to justify the price in their eyes.
nicely done..see if you can get this posted as a featured article on motley fool
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
El Guapo
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 360 |
08-07-12 11:42 PM
Your story reminds me of the one where the guy thought his "Seven Minute Abs" video would never be beat. That is until "Six Minute Abs" hit the informercial highway, and there it went. A $40bn idea sunk because some scmuck marketed similar info and shaved a minute off your workout.
So, you think there is a better FB out there?
Anyway, I prefer eating at the Chum Bucket, Mr. Krabs can go pack sand; to hell with those Krabby Patties.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
peilthetraveler
Registered: Jun 2005
Posts: 7105 |
08-08-12 12:53 AM
Quote from El Guapo:
Your story reminds me of the one where the guy thought his "Seven Minute Abs" video would never be beat. That is until "Six Minute Abs" hit the informercial highway, and there it went. A $40bn idea sunk because some scmuck marketed similar info and shaved a minute off your workout.
So, you think there is a better FB out there?
That was from the movie "Something about mary" :P
There is currently nothing out there that can compete with facebook. But the problem is, there might be one day. Facebook can't really grow from where it is and advertisers are not getting a return for their ad revenue on FB, so they will have less and less advertisers soon.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
hajimow
Registered: Mar 2004
Posts: 2663 |
08-08-12 01:45 AM
Quote from peilthetraveler:
That was from the movie "Something about mary" :
There is currently nothing out there that can compete with facebook. But the problem is, there might be one day. Facebook can't really grow from where it is and advertisers are not getting a return for their ad revenue on FB, so they will have less and less advertisers soon.
I short FB once a while when I see the time is right. I called it a"short term cover" when it dropped to 19.80. I have no position on FB now but your reasonings have one big flaw.
You don't value a stock or avoid a stock because of a possible future competition. It can happen but it has not happened and is not for sure. When it happens or gets close to happen, price drops 50% like what happened to PCLN today which $100 was shaved off from the face of stock.
As I have always said, FB could have been $40 now if the initial public offering was at $15. FB pissed off many many many people. Small investors, big investors, brokers, .....
I agree FB is overvalued now and will see 15 and lower in 3 months.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
AAAintheBeltway
Registered: Oct 2001
Posts: 14596 |
08-08-12 01:58 AM
Nice analogy, but the restaurant at least knows how it intends to make money. It's just too expensive.
Everyone can see that FB has vast potential, if only there was a way to monetize it. It's like a city has a great seaside park that everyone loves to go to and hang out. They just can't make any real money off it. If they charge to go to the park, people will just go somewhere else.
FB has yet to demonstrate a way to make money, except for relatively dinky ad revenue and cuts from games like Zynga. Now it looks like even the ad revs may be suspect.
Amazon has a somewhat similar set of problems. They have never really made any money. Vast revenues, unlike FB, but everything gets plowed back into the business.
Interestingly, the same criticism has been made of the shale oil and gas producers. A horizontal well with 30 plus frac stages costs maybe $10 mill in the Bakken. These wells suffer an exponential decline in production volume over the first year, and some have claimed they will never be economic. Like Amazon, you have to keep investing in new wells constantly to keep production up.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
| Receive
an email whenever a new post is added to this thread by subscribing
to it. |
|
|
|
|
