Tag Archives: mark zuckerberg

How Linkedin gets 20x more money per user than Facebook

Forbes has LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner on the cover—but the professional social network’s business model is the real hero of the story.

Here are some of the amazing statistics Forbes’ George Anders reports:

  • LinkedIn users spend an average of 18 minutes a month on the site. Facebook users spend 6.4 hours a month.
  • But LinkedIn gets $1.30 in revenue for every hour those users spend on site. Facebook: 6.2 cents.
  • Anders describes LinkedIn’s most expensive product offering, LinkedIn Recruiter, as a “Bloomberg terminal” for talent scouts. It costs up to $8,200 a year per “seat,” or user license.
  • Adobe, a big LinkedIn customer, has 70 seats. At list prices, that’s about half a million in revenue a year from a single client.
  • LinkedIn’s top salespeople make as much as $400,000 a year selling Recruiter.
  • LinkedIn spends 33 percent of revenue on sales and marketing.
  • LinkedIn’s profits are expected to double this year to $70 million.

 

Via - How LinkedIn Gets TWENTY Times More Money Per User Than Facebook

 

**Note: Facebook’s profit in the last quarter was $205 million on revenue of $1.1 billion.

 

Continue reading

N.Y. Times interesting profile on Mark Zuckerberg’s wedding

 

The wedding of Mark Zuckerberg to Priscilla Chan last weekend here in the backyard of their $7 million home had all the staging of a carefully orchestrated celebrity event. A publicist for Facebook eagerly offered photos afterward of the beaming couple, who met at Harvard and have dated for much of the last nine years. Well-placed anonymous sources leaked to reporters the dinner menu, which included sushi and Mexican food, and the fact that Green Day’s Billie Joe Armstrong performed.

***

Ms. Pettibone said she realized Ms. Chan was wearing her design after the designer’s husband pointed it out in a photograph he saw of the new bride. “It’s not our top seller,” Ms. Pettibone said of the $4,700 dress, one of 40 in her bridal collection, in a phone interview. “But it’s respectable.”

All her dresses are made to order so, last week, Ms. Pettibone said she combed through her orders to see where the dress was sold. It was the Little White Dress boutique in Denver, and it was apparently bought by a third party.

the full profileFacebook’s Royal Wedding

 

**In the N.Y. Times article the photo above has 56K in Likes compared to the 1.5 million it has now.

California’s budget troubles – say hello to billions in tax revenue from Facebook’s IPO

California is hoping for another Google-effect like the one that happened in 2005, after the company’s IPO. From 2004 to 2005 the revenue from capital gains taxes in California shot up $14 billion.

Mark Zuckerberg, whose initial public stock offering in two weeks could value the company at $96 billion, will cut in the state for an estimated $189 million in cash, according to calculations from PrivCo, which researches private companies.

The federal government will be in the money too, collecting an estimated $714 million in federal income tax from Zuckerberg.

And that’s just the payout from Zuckerberg. The windfall for California from the rest of the IPO could net California hundreds of millions more.

…the IPO could pump nearly $2.5 billion into state coffers over the next five years.

via LA Times

 

// Photo - Håkan Dahlström

Facebook for Good: new update creates thousands of organ donors

Would you share your organ donor status on Facebook? You share what you’re making for dinner, how your garden grows, where you’re going on vacation…But what about your organs?

Mark Zuckerberg is hoping you will.

On “Good Morning America” on Tuesday, Zuckerberg and company Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg announced that Facebook is letting those U.S.- and U.K.-based users add whether they’re an organ donor to their timelines and the story behind the decision to become one. There’s also a link to the official donor registry for those inspired to become a donor.

via Tech Now

 

That was this morning and by lunchtime, of that same day, the news had gone viral:

“As of 12:30pm today, the Donate Life California registry has increased its online donor sign ups by nearly 800% from yesterday thanks to this mornings announcement of the partnership with Facebook! Thank you Facebook!”

The wait list can range from six to eight years, depending on the organ needed.

Donate Life California CEO, Charlene Zettel, said, “today, statistically, one-third on [the wait] list will die before an available organ is presented to them.”

via Tech Now

 

In the place where you normally update your status, there is now a "Life Event" section.

Why does Mark Zuckerberg hate "beta" development?

You know how everything Google does is launched in a “beta” mode. They know that their products are most likely going to break, fail, or simply invade your privacy. Google is so obsessed with beta releases that they often leave them in perpetual beta.

So why is Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg so against beta?

This massive company with more than 800 million users just rolls out new features to the entire group. One day you know how to use Facebook and the next day everything is different.

Then, as has happened 17 times before, they roll back and change many of those features because they weren’t tested properly with a large enough user group (i.e. beta testers).

A description of beta from Wikipedia:

It generally begins when the software is feature complete. The focus of beta testing is reducing impacts to users, often incorporating usability testing. The process of delivering a beta version to the users is called beta release and this is typically the first time that the software is available outside of the organization that developed it.

The users of a beta version are called beta testers. They are usually customers or prospective customers of the organization that develops the software, willing to test the software without charge, often receiving the final software free of charge or for a reduced price.

This practice is so common in the tech industry that it shocking that Facebook hasn’t had it from the start. I guarantee everyone at that company has experience with beta releases of products. Well maybe not everyone…

Perhaps, Mark Zuckerberg started so young at Facebook that he never learned the value of beta testing. A lot of people want to compare him to Steve Jobs and so maybe this is his own reality distortion field, “it should be so good we don’t need beta!”

Still, that doesn’t explain the stubbornness after having new updates to Facebook continually blow-up in his face. I’m sure that after each blow-up someone has said, “Hey Mark, this is what beta releases are for”.

Yet, here we are with the new auto-sharing feature instantly pushed live and everyone is complaining about it. The feature is brilliant but incomplete. Their are simple mistakes in the usability, like the problem with the “cancel” button that Marshall Kirkpatrick found.

This is such a simple fix, i.e. change the wording of the button so it’s not “pushy, manipulative and user-hostile.”

If found and fixed during beta it would have been a non-issue. Instead the flailing public is in hysteria and that crucial “first-impression” is of ruining sharing (Molly Wood) or gaslighting the web (Anil Dash).

It boggles the mind why Mark wants to avoid beta releases so bad that he enrages his user base.

There is hope. The new feature, Facebook Timeline, is in a semi-beta release in that it was open to developers early for testing. The tech journalists quickly hacked this and reported it to average users. Who then signed up as developers, created a fake app, and clicked several buttons that they had no idea what they were doing.

A surprising amount actually did all that, myself included, which means there definitely is an appetite for Facebook beta testers. Plus, Facebook has delayed releasing Timeline allowing all those users to test out the features. The situation looks an awful lot like a beta release…

Maybe Mark is realizing the value of beta testing? Or, at least the value of releasing a finished product as opposed to a brilliant but incomplete idea?

Why does Mark Zuckerberg hate “beta” development?

You know how everything Google does is launched in a “beta” mode. They know that their products are most likely going to break, fail, or simply invade your privacy. Google is so obsessed with beta releases that they often leave them in perpetual beta.

So why is Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg so against beta?

This massive company with more than 800 million users just rolls out new features to the entire group. One day you know how to use Facebook and the next day everything is different.

Then, as has happened 17 times before, they roll back and change many of those features because they weren’t tested properly with a large enough user group (i.e. beta testers).

A description of beta from Wikipedia:

It generally begins when the software is feature complete. The focus of beta testing is reducing impacts to users, often incorporating usability testing. The process of delivering a beta version to the users is called beta release and this is typically the first time that the software is available outside of the organization that developed it.

The users of a beta version are called beta testers. They are usually customers or prospective customers of the organization that develops the software, willing to test the software without charge, often receiving the final software free of charge or for a reduced price.

This practice is so common in the tech industry that it shocking that Facebook hasn’t had it from the start. I guarantee everyone at that company has experience with beta releases of products. Well maybe not everyone…

Perhaps, Mark Zuckerberg started so young at Facebook that he never learned the value of beta testing. A lot of people want to compare him to Steve Jobs and so maybe this is his own reality distortion field, “it should be so good we don’t need beta!”

Still, that doesn’t explain the stubbornness after having new updates to Facebook continually blow-up in his face. I’m sure that after each blow-up someone has said, “Hey Mark, this is what beta releases are for”.

Yet, here we are with the new auto-sharing feature instantly pushed live and everyone is complaining about it. The feature is brilliant but incomplete. Their are simple mistakes in the usability, like the problem with the “cancel” button that Marshall Kirkpatrick found.

This is such a simple fix, i.e. change the wording of the button so it’s not “pushy, manipulative and user-hostile.”

If found and fixed during beta it would have been a non-issue. Instead the flailing public is in hysteria and that crucial “first-impression” is of ruining sharing (Molly Wood) or gaslighting the web (Anil Dash).

It boggles the mind why Mark wants to avoid beta releases so bad that he enrages his user base.

There is hope. The new feature, Facebook Timeline, is in a semi-beta release in that it was open to developers early for testing. The tech journalists quickly hacked this and reported it to average users. Who then signed up as developers, created a fake app, and clicked several buttons that they had no idea what they were doing.

A surprising amount actually did all that, myself included, which means there definitely is an appetite for Facebook beta testers. Plus, Facebook has delayed releasing Timeline allowing all those users to test out the features. The situation looks an awful lot like a beta release…

Maybe Mark is realizing the value of beta testing? Or, at least the value of releasing a finished product as opposed to a brilliant but incomplete idea?

Create a Facebook Page for your pet (like Mark Zuckerberg)

At the last big Facebook conference Mark Zuckerberg and SNL comedian Andy Samberg kept talking about Beast, Mark’s new dog. They would show a Facebook Page with all these photos, comments, and fans.

Which got me thinking that if Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and CEO of Facebook, can have a page for his dog…then so can I!

I have been hoping for a way to bring my puppy into the social network, after all, my parents and friends from birth are on it. Why not our pets?

In four easy steps we can set-up a Facebook Page for your pet and have it look professional, just like Mark Zuckerberg’s. All you will need is some basic information and a few pictures. Let’s get started.

Step 1 – Create a Page

Choose what type of page you want. For your pet, start with “Artist, Band, or Public Figure,” then for your category choose ‘public figure’ and add the name of your pet.

Step 2 – Edit Info

After creating your page there will be a wizard but I suggest skipping it. After that you will be on your main page, click on “Info” on the left side menu. Then click “Edit Info,” located towards the top/middle.

From here you have a wide range of options, but if you want to follow Mark Zuckerberg then only fill out these:

  • Location
  • Affiliation
  • Birthday
  • Biography
  • Gender
  • Personal Interests
  • Website

*Note: you will need to wait a while or get 25 fans to choose a username. This is important because it also becomes your website URL (facebook.com/beast.the.dog). So start thinking of the username you want (I chose facebook.com/fuzzy.the.dog).

Once completed, hit “Save Changes,” (located at bottom) and then “View Page” (located at top right).

Step 3 – Add Photos

Mark has over 60 photos of Beast. I have twelve. You will need six to get started. Five of them for the photo bar at the top of your page and one for a profile picture.

Get your photos on your computer and then click “Photos” on the left menu, and then click “Upload Photos”.

You can select multiple photos at a time. Try to upload all six at once. While they are uploading add a name for this “album” like profile pics or getting started.

Once they are uploaded you can add descriptions and names to each photo. Hit “Save” and then “Publish” to finish the process.

Now, you are looking at all your photos in your album. Click on the photo you want as your profile picture for your pet. Scroll down towards the right and click on “Make Profile Picture for Page”.

Adjust the cropping and hit “Done Cropping”.

Good job! Now your page should be nearly complete and looking good:

Step 4 – Add Owners

From main view of your page go to the right menu where it says “Admins” and click “See All”. You will already be listed but you can add your partner, spouse, children, etc.

Once you add in the admins and verify everything, go to the menu on the left side and click “Featured”. Click on the box that says “Add Featured Page Owners”. Check all the boxes, hit save, and then on the top right-click “View Page”.

On the left menu you will now see the “Page Owners”, a great way to bring the whole family onto the page.

Done!

Voilà!

You now have a page for your pet. Let all your friends know so they can become a fan/like. Keep adding photos, share some stories, and enjoy having your pet on Facebook.

For more help and info check out the one I created: Fuzzy.the.Dog

The college dropout bubble

Did you know that every year $4 billion is lost due to college dropouts?

The number comes from lost income and compounds every year with new dropouts adding to the roll call. It’s an interesting statistic that highlights a problem in education.

One that I call the college dropout bubble, but unlike most bubbles this works backwards. It’s a negative bubble:

Positive bubble - trade in which products are at inflated values.

Negative bubble – trade in which products are at deflated values.

I propose that a college education in this country has a deflated value. To the vast majority of Americans it just isn’t worth it. We can get 87% of our multi-lingual/racial/cultural people to get a high school education but, when it comes to college degrees we are at 39%.

There are more college dropouts (17%) than high school dropouts (13%)!!

That is a definitely a negative bubble and is probably impossible to explain. One could say it’s due to the skyrocketing costs of college, or just blame the cool kids for shunning school.

I do have a few topics that really annoy me and one happy-positive solution.

There are a ridiculous amount of students picking “catch-all” majors like business, history, and health. The vast majority of which are only doing so to check the box, “got a college degree…now I should go figure out what I want to do.”

Another issue is the “point the finger” problem in education. Where everyone blames everyone else for our losing ways. Even the movie Waiting For Superman spreads it around liberally. Of course, we usually skip over the parents as if they play a role in getting a kid into and through college.

Then there is billionaire investor Peter Thiel offering $100,000 for students under the age of 20 to dropout. His rationale being that the cost of college is in a bubble (a positive one). An interesting argument until you realize that he is talking about exclusive Ivy-League and other private schools that cost $50,000 a year. As if they haven’t ever been over-priced…

For the record the average tuition at public schools is $7,600 and at private schools is $38,700.

This by no means covers all the issues and I bet my readers have many of their own.

For a solution I think we should go old-school. Pick up something that has been lost in our reverence for money and unhappiness, a hobby.

It’s easy to explain, ironically, by looking at America’s two most successful dropouts: Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg. Both have a hidden truth. Before they achieved instant wealth they were nerds in high school. I know very revealing, but it’s true and they spent an absurd amount of time playing with computers.

What’s the difference between us and them. Well, when high school hit we all dropped our hobbies for chasing girls/boys and lots of drinking. Few of us were successful with the opposite sex, though, we like to think we did better than Bill and Mark.

I hope that one day our youth (aka my future children), are able to drink less and tinker more. Pick up some nerdy, DIY hobby and run with it. Like the other day I saw a fellow on the beach testing out a remote control surfer robot, future billionaire…

It comes down to..

spending your weekends at a comic convention

Or..

spending weekends working on the Jager

Photos by

bubble – HKD

comics – Kevin Dooley

jager – GadgetBubba

Facebook's Social Mail and Innovation

When Amy and I started this company, 1×57, one of the things we wanted to do was pursue innovation. To create an environment where discussions can be open and frank, and lead us all to a better understanding of our world.

In this post I want to discuss social mail, Facebook’s latest innovation. I think this idea is innovative and revolutionary, but like any idea it is all in the execution. As the email wars heat up with AOL and Yahoo releasing updates to their webmail, it is clear that Google is in the lead. They recently released their Priority Inbox and the idea and execution are near perfect, in my opinion. Now, Facebook is entering the fray and here is why I think Google is scared..

To understand Facebook you have understand Mark Zuckerberg. The company does have countless managers, senior executives, VC’s, and nearly 2,000 employees but Mark is still king. The interesting part is that he doesn’t seem to be a good of a CEO but he is the boss for one reason and it is what drives Facebook. He wants to digitize our lives.

A process that I would argue is painful and frustrating for the average person. I think the frustrations over privacy and global domination are a thin veil for the truth. Of the 500 million users only a small fraction worry about that. The rest of us are more concerned about having our parents linked to us, or our ex-girlfriends, lame high school friends, etc.

When criticizing Mark Zuckerberg, as Debbie Weil does in her piece, I think its important to keep this in mind. Mark is not an evil genius, nor is he a polished executive. He is just a geek who regularly publicly humiliates himself. It sounds like such a familiar stereotype that I shouldn’t be surprised when the popular kids then make fun of and deride the geek. It is possible that we are blaming Mark for our own anguish over this digitization of our personal lives, even though any number of sites are pursuing this and it would have occurred anyways without him.

If you do pierce that veil you can start to see things a little more clearly. An objective business analysis shows that Google is deeply afraid of Facebook because their business model is built on turning weblinks into Page Rank. They maintain their edge over their competitors in the search market by jealously guarding that algorithm and relentlessly improving it. Facebook is built upon personal links between friends and colleagues and classmates. They maintain their edge in the same way by jealously guarding it and relentlessly innovating. The scary thing for Google is that their innovations are step based, meaning that they are only incremental improvements. In this area Google faces stiff competition from Bing and can only win by engaging in an arms race. A process that takes all the creativity and fun out of the job. It becomes a factory floor where stamping out regular new improvements is the job.

Contrast that with Facebook where innovation is exponential. This means big ideas, lots of creativity, and a real push to make it work today and you have an engineer’s dream job. It is easy to see why employees are leaving Google and joining Facebook en masse. Even though Techcrunch and most others would have you believe that it’s because of salary or a potential IPO. The real truth is that top talent cares more about the work they do than the money. Especially considering the environment they exist in where 100k salaries are paltry and talent is always paid well.

An example of this is Facebook Photos. In a silent but deadly way Facebook has come to dominate the entire online photo market, putting Flickr, Picasa, MySpace, and all the other niche sites in a distant second. It seems ridiculous how Facebook can ingest all of our photos, provide no vision for getting them out or even still having ownership of them, and still become the dominant player. Then you remember that all the other sites offered amazing features but no friends. It’s like if a (photo of) a tree falling in a forest and no one is around to see it, does it really fall?

This shows the power of personal relationships. Once you have that network built you can add countless pieces to it and people will love it. Video, links, threaded comments, events, groups. Each step adding millions more users and billions more dollars.

That is as long as each addition mimics real life as much as possible. You have to digitize our lives not filter them, because any filter will have a bias. Mark has learned this lesson many times over and now seems poised to move past it. He has a clarity of vision and is becoming very convincing to many of Silicon Valley’s brightest players.

Imagine if Mark came to you and said, ‘I want you to take your passion and create it online. I don’t want you to create one small part of it or even put your own mark on it, I want you to create a lasting perfect recreation of human culture online.” Then he shows you how he has done it before and how incredibly successful it has been. I don’t know about you but I would go googly-eyed and maybe even drop my company to do so.

This brings us back to Social Mail as Facebook’s entry into the email market. If you watch the announcement video and see it through the lens I just laid out for you, it becomes very clear. They are creating a message service that mimics our social lives as closely as possible. You want to talk to friends then talk to your friends and we will remove all the extra stuff like CC and Subject Lines. We will even add in caller blocking and other features that will make it easier to communicate. Each chapter of the video is designed to show you how much like real life Social Mail will be.

I think the idea is brilliant. The execution is the tough part. However, it seems that Mark Zuckerberg is putting all the right pieces into play, top talent, clarity of vision, and a relentless drive to make it happen.

Maybe he isn’t such a bad CEO after all…

Facebook’s Social Mail and Innovation

When Amy and I started this company, 1×57, one of the things we wanted to do was pursue innovation. To create an environment where discussions can be open and frank, and lead us all to a better understanding of our world.

In this post I want to discuss social mail, Facebook’s latest innovation. I think this idea is innovative and revolutionary, but like any idea it is all in the execution. As the email wars heat up with AOL and Yahoo releasing updates to their webmail, it is clear that Google is in the lead. They recently released their Priority Inbox and the idea and execution are near perfect, in my opinion. Now, Facebook is entering the fray and here is why I think Google is scared..

To understand Facebook you have understand Mark Zuckerberg. The company does have countless managers, senior executives, VC’s, and nearly 2,000 employees but Mark is still king. The interesting part is that he doesn’t seem to be a good of a CEO but he is the boss for one reason and it is what drives Facebook. He wants to digitize our lives.

A process that I would argue is painful and frustrating for the average person. I think the frustrations over privacy and global domination are a thin veil for the truth. Of the 500 million users only a small fraction worry about that. The rest of us are more concerned about having our parents linked to us, or our ex-girlfriends, lame high school friends, etc.

When criticizing Mark Zuckerberg, as Debbie Weil does in her piece, I think its important to keep this in mind. Mark is not an evil genius, nor is he a polished executive. He is just a geek who regularly publicly humiliates himself. It sounds like such a familiar stereotype that I shouldn’t be surprised when the popular kids then make fun of and deride the geek. It is possible that we are blaming Mark for our own anguish over this digitization of our personal lives, even though any number of sites are pursuing this and it would have occurred anyways without him.

If you do pierce that veil you can start to see things a little more clearly. An objective business analysis shows that Google is deeply afraid of Facebook because their business model is built on turning weblinks into Page Rank. They maintain their edge over their competitors in the search market by jealously guarding that algorithm and relentlessly improving it. Facebook is built upon personal links between friends and colleagues and classmates. They maintain their edge in the same way by jealously guarding it and relentlessly innovating. The scary thing for Google is that their innovations are step based, meaning that they are only incremental improvements. In this area Google faces stiff competition from Bing and can only win by engaging in an arms race. A process that takes all the creativity and fun out of the job. It becomes a factory floor where stamping out regular new improvements is the job.

Contrast that with Facebook where innovation is exponential. This means big ideas, lots of creativity, and a real push to make it work today and you have an engineer’s dream job. It is easy to see why employees are leaving Google and joining Facebook en masse. Even though Techcrunch and most others would have you believe that it’s because of salary or a potential IPO. The real truth is that top talent cares more about the work they do than the money. Especially considering the environment they exist in where 100k salaries are paltry and talent is always paid well.

An example of this is Facebook Photos. In a silent but deadly way Facebook has come to dominate the entire online photo market, putting Flickr, Picasa, MySpace, and all the other niche sites in a distant second. It seems ridiculous how Facebook can ingest all of our photos, provide no vision for getting them out or even still having ownership of them, and still become the dominant player. Then you remember that all the other sites offered amazing features but no friends. It’s like if a (photo of) a tree falling in a forest and no one is around to see it, does it really fall?

This shows the power of personal relationships. Once you have that network built you can add countless pieces to it and people will love it. Video, links, threaded comments, events, groups. Each step adding millions more users and billions more dollars.

That is as long as each addition mimics real life as much as possible. You have to digitize our lives not filter them, because any filter will have a bias. Mark has learned this lesson many times over and now seems poised to move past it. He has a clarity of vision and is becoming very convincing to many of Silicon Valley’s brightest players.

Imagine if Mark came to you and said, ‘I want you to take your passion and create it online. I don’t want you to create one small part of it or even put your own mark on it, I want you to create a lasting perfect recreation of human culture online.” Then he shows you how he has done it before and how incredibly successful it has been. I don’t know about you but I would go googly-eyed and maybe even drop my company to do so.

This brings us back to Social Mail as Facebook’s entry into the email market. If you watch the announcement video and see it through the lens I just laid out for you, it becomes very clear. They are creating a message service that mimics our social lives as closely as possible. You want to talk to friends then talk to your friends and we will remove all the extra stuff like CC and Subject Lines. We will even add in caller blocking and other features that will make it easier to communicate. Each chapter of the video is designed to show you how much like real life Social Mail will be.

I think the idea is brilliant. The execution is the tough part. However, it seems that Mark Zuckerberg is putting all the right pieces into play, top talent, clarity of vision, and a relentless drive to make it happen.

Maybe he isn’t such a bad CEO after all…