I love that USA today is the reporting entity here (reprinted by Tina Brown at Beast)..
We've known about and been reading about this for months.. have mostly all blogged or tweeted this..
I talked about it on a panel 6 months ago.. NYT and WSJ wrote about it this summer..
But finally.. finally.. USA today, and The Beast.. decide it's worth talking about.
I think a Reader's Digest Cover Story.. and finally a month later Parade magazine.. will showcase the final distribution
of this story..
:)
On Nov 20, 2011, at 12:08 PM, Judi Clark wrote:
> Shocked. I'm simply shocked that this kind of behavior is tolerated.
> Who's in charge here?
>
>
> On 11/20/11 11:31 AM, Joyce Searls wrote:
>> http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/11/18/facebook-tracks-people-without-accounts.html#comments
>>
>> On Nov 18, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Devon Loffreto wrote:
>>
>>> As I think about it, the coordinated shorting is not the point... aside from an #OWS value objective... there doesn't really need to be any obvious coordination on the short side of the equation.
>>>
>>> Really its all about coordinating the disabling of accounts. That is the act that destroys the stock value and biz model.
>>>
>>> Can you think of a public stock where the product that creates revenues can turn itself off? Not even LinkedIn products can do that.
>>>
>>> Which means that Facebook is going to have to disable its products ability to disable themselves. You will have to stay or destroy your account, otherwise the biz model is exploitable.
>>>
>>> Thats a PR mess. It points to the flaw in the business model of social networks that have their users positioned as products.
>>>
>>> Devon Loffreto
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Devon Loffreto < "> > wrote:
>>> They may... likely would... but how many times does it happen before the Facebook model is structurally questioned to the point of a market movement that requires no coordination?
>>>
>>> People as product on a social network is a zero-profit formula... what does that realization do to the stock value?
>>>
>>> Devon
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Mary Hodder < "> > wrote:
>>> Wouldn't the SEC stop the shorting, if they noticed a coordinated effort like this to profit?
>>>
>>> Recently there have been several instances of the SEC stopping trades right after something happened that caused the market to
>>> act in concert.. in some way that they deemed uncool..
>>>
>>> I would guess they would reset all the trades and not allow it.
>>>
>>> mary
>>>
>>> On Nov 18, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Devon Loffreto wrote:
>>>
>>>> Has anyone on this list heard of any talk concerning making an example of the broken business model of Facebook?
>>>>
>>>> With each of its users structured as product, I have yet to see any talk about the three step process of taking Facebook down once they go public:
>>>>
>>>> Short:Disable:Profit
>>>>
>>>> Short the stock
>>>> Disable your account
>>>> Profit on the result
>>>>
>>>> If only 10% of the users were involved (80m), it would send shock waves through the Facebook revenue model. And it would seem that occupy style coordination would yield a far greater possibility than that.
>>>>
>>>> If groups like this want to manage their relationships with vendors more effectively, every opportunity to correct structural flaws must be seized.
>>>>
>>>> Negative screams, positive whispers.
>>>>
>>>> Moo!
>>>>
>>>> Devon Loffreto
>>>>
>>>> ps. Unless of course FB is planning on disabling your ability to disable your account once it goes public...? Better to know now than later.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Judi Clark, Digital ID Coach
> Helping you pull yourself together http://digitalIDcoach.com
>
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.