I can pay facebook $12.20 to force my friends to see my post. It's called highlight.

[Rule Britannia]

Don't see too much of a problem with this.

My friends won't pay for this so I won't see this, if my friends do pay for it I'll block them and remove them as a friend; I don't wanna see that shit.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I really need to get around to deleting my facebook. It is just convenient to keep in touch with friends in other states.

How would you live without Spotify and the other miscellaneous happy apps?

I am out of touch because I don't even know what Spotify is. I don't use any apps. I don't even use a smartphone so I don't check anything from my phone.

 

[chadachada123]

I've already culled the assholes on my feed that like or share the Brandon Cyrus/etc shit, and I will not hesitate to cull some more 'friends' that feel the need to spam my feed with other inane drivel or appeals to emotion.

 

[Gennadios]

I'm sure there are people who would be willing to pay 12.50 for attention. FB stock IS in freefall and I understand that the average yearly profit per user is a measly $5, this may be an effort to drive that number up a bit.

 

[Ruedyn]

Well Ben Blackbar, I agree, this is a stupid and pointless thing to add.

 

[Kal-Adam]

And now, for only $12, you can have all of you FB friends leave you!
What a bargain.

 

[Realitycrash]

I have only 100 fb friends, and I am more than prepared to cull that list if one of my contacts feels the need to grab my attention by kicking my internet-door down, and shouting into my internet-ear.

x2. I have 60-ish, and more than willing to remove a few I rarely if ever speak to (or know that well).
Really, I don't even have any family or work-mates (because they aren't "friends" and don't need to know what I was up to last night).

 

[Realitycrash]

You think this is because [a href=https://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=0&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=maximized&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1338580800000&chddm=3910&chls=IntervalBasedLine&q=NASDAQ:FB&ntsp=0]there doing so well on the stock market[/a]?

Holy balls, what happened?!

From what I vaguely remember hearing on the radio a couple weeks back, they don't actually have a system of making money. The adverts apparently don't give them much at all.

I don't get it either. I either missed something or they are the most colossal idiots the world has ever seen.

It seems a common problem with web services. The problem is, people come up with some interesting idea, then turn it into a 'business'. Except, as interesting and/or useful as the idea itself is (not saying facebook is either, but let's leave that for another discussion), these services frequently aren't designed very well from a commercial perspective.

Or rather, they're great at what they do, but not so great at bringing in money.

The people that made twitter for instance still haven't figured out how to make any money from it at all.

Facebook meanwhile has hundreds of millions of members, and still can't seem to make a decent revenue stream? It makes you wonder...

At least the 'free to play' games model works quite well. That's built around the idea that only about 1 in 100 players will ever pay you anything, but those that do will earn you more than enough to cover the cost of the other 99 'free' players.

...so why can't they just... use adverts? Preferably ones that work? Like every other commercial site on the internet?!

Is there something I'm missing? Please tell me there's something I'm missing. No company can be this stupid.

Web advertising clearly isn't that reliable. Look at the escapist for instance. I have a subscription, but ask yourself why that exists? And why the ads by all accounts have been getting more & more intrusive?

Remember the scandal surrounding extra credits?
Do you recall they said many of the content providers weren't getting paid?

OK, generalising that isn't a great idea, but it really doesn't seem to bode well for the idea that advertising is a reliable source of income.

Aside from which, facebook should in theory be rolling in it if that were true, since their adverts (on paper at least) are ideal from an advertiser's point of view - advertise directly to people that you know are likely to want your product, and not to anyone else.
Seems perfect.

So why then would facebook be showing signs of such financial issues?

Perhaps a better questions is looking at the companies that clearly can make a lot of money from internet advertising. (Google for instance.)

What makes them good at it where so many others struggle?

It's all well and good saying 'advertising!', but getting that right isn't as easy as it sounds, clearly.

Wait...I see adverts all the time on facebook. Minor ones, sure, but stil adverts?

 

[launchpadmcqwak]

MY GOD...WHAT IF THIS POWER WAS PUT IN THE HANDS OF KYLO CHO...OR DIGGY SIMMONS!!!...imm off to my internet bomb shelter

 

[lunavixen]

the only thing it would do for me is be an easier way to clean out my friends list.

You'd think after their share crash debacle, which by the look of it is still ongoing, they'd stay away from any revolutionary ideas involving trying to get people to force their friends (or soon to be former friends) to view something they won't look at anyway, nice going facebook *sarcasm*

 

[ultrachicken]

Yeah, I don't think this is going to be a very big part of Facebook. First of all, it's pretty expensive. Second, as a SOCIAL networking site, anyone who does this will probably see their list of friends dwindle, especially if they do it with any regularity.

 

[MasterOfHisOwnDomain]

Facebook and its investors need to get over the fact that it's a product that will not be a cash cow. It just doesn't have any means of making a profit beyond advertising revenue, and even then that's limited by how much crap people can actually take.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Well I think they might as well do it if they get money. I don't use Facebook but more fool those who are willing to spend the money on highlighting.

 

[DPunch4]

I've never wanted to call someone "gay" that badly before...

Could you please elaborate?

 

[FamoFunk]

I could understand for business and what not. But it would actually make me un-like them if I kept seeing their shit at the top of my page.

As for friends using it, they can waste their money on it too if they wish, but it would probably just result in me hiding or deleting them.

 

[jpoon]

Really, sir? That is what you came up with? Shitbook?

Why I sure did, copyrighted and everything...so don't be stealing it! xD

I would also say it fits because a massive majority of all that exists on there is true to the word.

Perhaps... But I do believe FaecesBook is much more cutting [/quote]
Hahah, I think you just came up with the best one so far!

Fecesbook

 

[Shivarage]

I've never wanted to call someone "gay" that badly before...

Could you please elaborate?

It was a joke, I don't have facebook and even if I did, I doubt anyone would have anything more meaningful to say

 

[Vrach]

1. It's still in testing. Wouldn't be surprised if it gets nixed
2. There could well be an option to block that shit
3. If there isn't, it goes forward and it really works, those using it will start losing friends fast. Though I can't imagine a person who would use such a thing.