Reply With Quote
btw if anyone got a good tech idea post it here. We still have time to make a couple hundred million before the bubble bursts
that's right. Here comes another of Che's famous predictions. The 2nd dotcom bubble is approaching. It will happen between the next few months to next couple of years.
Seriously, does anyone with a sane mind think facebook, twitter are valued correctly?
pandora valued at 3 billion???
Quora (a startup I'm sure you never heard about) valued at 300 million?
please post in this thread to update on this issue as it happens.
remember this: the bubble will be close to bursting when idiots start putting their retirement money into facebook or zynga
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-dotcom-bubble
Sitting in the lobby of Manhattan's Ace Hotel, one of new-school tech's favourite hangouts, Farai predicts the boom has just begun. "People who not long ago started startups because they couldn't get a job are turning down jobs now," she says. "There's so much money about. The idea that your idea could be the next big idea is very real. There's a real air of excitement." Could it all end in tears? "It always does."
Right now, though, who wouldn't be excited? Every week, one of the new generation of internet firms seems to attract a sky-high valuation. Zynga, the social-network games company that has tempted millions to grow virtual vegetables in its FarmVille game, has been valued at $9bn (£5.54bn). Profitless Twitter is said to be worth $10bn. Groupon, vendor of online discounts, rejected a $6bn offer from Google and is considering a flotation with a potential valuation of $15bn. Tech-watchers say this is just the start: the real boom will come when Facebook, the head boy of the new dotcom frenzy, goes public, probably next year.
This month it emerged that Facebook staff are planning to sell $1bn of private shares at a price that values the private company at $60bn – that's $10bn more than January's valuation and close to 10 times the price Russian investor Digital Sky Technologies paid employees who sold shares in 2009.
Mark Cuban, the investor who made a fortune in the first dotcom boom, has compared the current funding frenzy to a pyramid scheme. In another recent interview, David Cohen, managing director of the well-known Silicon Valley start-up fund TechStars, says there is a bubble in the number of companies financing startups. Cross off stage 4.
The last dotcom boom really took off after the flotation of the internet software company Netscape in 1995. Patrick says this time it's likely to be Facebook that lights the fuse. So far, private investors have been locked out of the New Thing. But JP Morgan is setting up a fund, and Goldman Sachs recently tried to get its clients' money into Facebook. That would take us all the way to stage 8, in which case we're just waiting for stages 9 and 10 – where cabbies get in on the act and the game goes into reverse.
Last edited by cheguevara; 08-17-2011 at 09:15 AM.
btw if anyone got a good tech idea post it here. We still have time to make a couple hundred million before the bubble bursts
Dunno if they're valued correctly, but they do have at least have real revenue streams unlike the 2000 dot-coms.
You'd just share it with all your countrymen tbh.btw if anyone got a good tech idea post it here. We still have time to make a couple hundred million before the bubble bursts
meh... I've seen graphs comparing revenue streams of companies launching IPO's like Netscape and AOL compared to modern ones like Google and what was said above is correct. Most of the companies that are coming out with IPO's have solid revenue generation. Companies are a bit more wary of going public if their financials aren't in order nowadays.
If there is a bubble it'd be with some of the smaller micro/small level guys.
If there is a bubble it's probably with some smaller ones
Facebook may be hot, but SIXTY BILLION? Remember when myspace was the coolest latest hottest thing? , they can't give it away now.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...t_2003_Myspace
I'll have that big chunk of nothing that CC's selling........Myspace Sold To Specific Media For $35 Million
I get it, I get it......2000 times different. Just messing with ya.
Why not? They get more traffic than Google and Google is pushing $180B. Granted Google is into a bunch of different things now, but they started out as just a website. Who knows what different things facebook is going to get involved in once they suddenly find themselves flush with cash from an IPO?
I certainly give facebook better odds of living up to the hype than linkedin, pandora, bankrate, zillow or any of the other dotcoms that have come along recently.
Billions isn't what it used to be too. YouTube wasn't even making money and was sold for $1.8 billion IIRC.
agree. It's not that facebook is not a good business. But the price is way, way,way overvalued. It's ridiculous. Even worse for the hundreds of other little startups that value at 50-100 million.
It is pretty sick how much cash Google, Apple and Microsoft are sitting on. Facebook will be right there with them come their IPO. Motorola is a pretty big company and all Google has to do is break out the checkbook.
With Google's acquisition of Motorola's mobile division, and the fat pile of patents that represents, they are on the path to Appledom.
Well, Apple particularly has always been sitting on a ton of cash, even when they weren't doing well. Right now they're competing with Exxon for the le of #1 company.
It's also worth noting that Google isn't buying the entire Motorola company, just the Mobility division that Motorola spun off a while back. Motorola itself, best known for their semiconductors, is not part of the deal.
Yep. I left out Mobility. $12B is still a pretty damn big company by most measures.
It certainly is.
the signs are there. ing Bono makes 1 billion in 18 months off Facebook. that's 55 million a month
Last edited by cheguevara; 08-18-2011 at 09:25 AM.
Fears of new dotcom bubble
http://www.independent.ie/national-n...e-2850029.html
THE news that the Facebook stake owned by Bono's investment fund Elevation Partners has more than quadrupled in value in less than two years is good news for investors but will only add to fears of another 'technology bubble'.
This summer has seen a host of internet and technology companies valued at astronomical sums, despite the fact that they are only a few years old and have little or no profits at the moment.
That has led to comparisons with the period from 1999 to 2001, when technology companies were the "sexy" investment and were deemed the future of finance.
Amazon, the online retailer, was one of the poster boys of that period, with its shareprice topping $106 in December 1999, even though the company had never made a profit. By April 2001, the share was worth $8.63.
Facebook is hugely profitable for investors like Elevation, which bought shares in the company relatively early. In Elevation's case, it started buying into Facebook when the company was valued at some $9m in November 2009.
Since then, the company has been caught up in a near feeding frenzy, with rumours that the company is planning to float itself on the stock market regularly spreading across trading floors worldwide.
In June last year it was worth $23bn. Now it is worth $65bn.
LinkedIn, a professional social networking site that makes a small annual profit, more than doubled in value on the first day it was on the stock market this summer.
In May, Microsoft paid $8.5bn for the online telecoms company Skype, even though the company is loss-making and had never been sold for more than $2bn before.
So should the man on the street be looking seriously at putting money into technology companies? Matt Morris of the London financial house Baigrie Davies, thinks not.
"Although the sale of social media giants makes huge sums of money for the folk on Wall Street, we would be very sceptical of investing in a company whose value is based on excessive multiples of its revenue. It's not a sound place for most investors' money."
- Peter Flanagan
Mark Cuban: This Tech VC Bubble Is Like A Ponzi Scheme
http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/...-ponzi-scheme/
The billionaire first earned his riches from starting up MicroSolutions and selling it to CompuServe for $6 million in 1990, then more bountifully after co-founding Broadcast.com and convincing Yahoo to pay more than $5 billion for the company at the height of the dot-com bubble.
So as the valuations of Web companies like Facebook, Groupon, Twitter and Zynga skyrocket on the private markets, does Cuban think another bubble is brewing?
He’s calling this one a “technology VC bubble,” where new venture-capital money is paying off old money almost akin to, in his own words, “a Ponzi scheme” or “an old chain letter.”
In a video interview Friday with WSJ’s Alan Murray, Cuban said:
Rather than individuals benefitting or getting hurt, VCs are playing their own game of ‘bubble yes’ or ‘bubble no.’ What’s happening now is that if you’re an original investor in Twitter (as an example), that was great because the next VC who came in paid a higher valuation, gave some money to the company, but gave most of it to the first investors or to management….Then the next level that came in, they gave it to the previous. It’s more like a Ponzi scheme. It’s almost like an old chain letter.
Mark Cuban is spot on. How can you value a company like that if most of the money you are giving for the share is going to the previous investor.
Again, the bubble will really burst when re s start giving the VCs their retirement money or their kids college tuition
We are in the middle of a new dotcom bubble. The first bubble was fueled by the promises of Internet changing the world, the way we operate, communicate, buy... which was all true it just didn't happen as fast as people thought it will happen, it took time for the infrastructure to improve and people to change habbits, and most companies didn't survive long enough.
Similarly the value of today's companies is driven by the prospect of analyzing all that user data, but like with the commercialization of internet this will not happen as fast as people think. Data mining is hard and not nearly as simple as many think. There is some low hanging fruits that are relatively easy, but then it gets harder and it's only going to get harder, not easier, as it becomes more and more about smart algorithms and brain power to build those algorithms, not cpu power (whis is getting cheaper and cheaper).
So at his point most of these companies are overvalued, and as long as there is that much money out there looking for "good" investments, they will get more and more overvalued. Still, as long as these companies keep operating in the black (or at least not burn through their cash reserves as fast) and mostly invest in people/knowledge/technology, they can survive the bubble burst and eventually in a decade or so fulfill their potential. By the looks of it many more companies know this now, then at previous bubble, but there are plenty of companies still out there with no clue as to how to make the money right now and only with a vague idea of how they will "change the way people operate".
The mobility aspect is also revolutionizing the market in no small part. We actually are in that segment now, and we've received in the last two months investment offers to expand that we've not received in the past 10 years. Tablets, smart-phones, cloud syncing. People want all the data all the time from everywhere. And right now we're entering a stage where that's actually deliverable and priced in a way that's accessible to everybody.
http://t.co/vPuN7OD interesting read
Instead of constantly questioning their valuations, let's seek to understand how the new generation of technology companies are doing what they do, what the broader consequences are for businesses and the economy and what we can collectively do to expand the number of innovative new software companies created in the U.S. and around the world.
It's not just the dot com businesses that are raping investors to pay VCs though. Check out the startup solar firms that promise the moon and deliver a moon pie.
social networking sites aint worth billions, when the users can always move onto the next thing....
I have an idea for a startup that could be worth billions but not the time to work on it....I will sell it to someone for a cool $1 million dollars today.....ha! we'll see how crazy this latest frenzy is
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
