The Entrepreneur Forum | Financial Freedom | Starting a Business | Motivation | Money | Success

Welcome to the only entrepreneur forum dedicated to building life-changing wealth.

Build a Fastlane business. Earn real financial freedom. Join free.

Join over 90,000 entrepreneurs who have rejected the paradigm of mediocrity and said "NO!" to underpaid jobs, ascetic frugality, and suffocating savings rituals— learn how to build a Fastlane business that pays both freedom and lifestyle affluence.

Free registration at the forum removes this block.

Challenge: Want to turn $1,000 into $40,000 before December.

A

Anon3587x

Guest
The same thing happened in the Facebook VS Microsoft deal. It had nothing to do with percentage ownership. Microsoft didn't give a f*ck about if they owned 0.1% or 10% of Facebook. The only thing they cared about was to dwarf Google and secure a future ad deal at Facebook. They will make their money back and then some (hopefully) with their advertising on that Facebook network. Not from the ownership. They wanted the exclusive rights on Facebook and paid the price to have it. That was the value (Facebook got $240 Million added to their war chest and Microsoft got their most wanted deal). That was what the value exchange was all about. So all of these people complaining about how silly the valuation was is rather moronic and rather sad to listen too. They portrait themselfs as smart an intellectual people, but in reality they miss the whole point behind the concept of "value exchange". But now you know:). Valuation is an outcome of a smart and valuable value exchange between two or more parties in business.

So Microsoft just wanted the rights to post ads through Facebook?

I just read Microsoft paid 240 million for a 1.6% stake in Facebook.
So what I'm assuming happened is these evaluators figured if each 1.6% stake of Facebook was equal to 240million then Facebook would be worth 15 Billion.

When really Microsoft only paid 240 million for the exclusive ad deal rights?

So these people are really to hard headed to understand each 1.6% is not worth 240million because each stake does not come with ad rights.
 

Pinnacle

Bronze Contributor
Read Fastlane!
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
41%
Oct 29, 2007
483
200
Edmond, Oklahoma
Don't feel bad about this. Nobody can predict the future.

Peter Schiff did. So did Ayn Rand.

I don't mean to be condescending or snooty at all, Rickson. I just needed to point out that with enough reason, education, and understanding of patterns that predicting the future (which can never be done to a "T") is entirely possible.
 

Rickson9

Gold Contributor
Speedway Pass
User Power
Value/Post Ratio
101%
Sep 4, 2010
1,682
1,699
Canada
Peter Schiff did. So did Ayn Rand.

I don't mean to be condescending or snooty at all, Rickson. I just needed to point out that with enough reason, education, and understanding of patterns that predicting the future (which can never be done to a "T") is entirely possible.

We would have to agree to disagree.

I don't believe that anybody can predict the future.

Others believe that some can predict the future.

Nobody can convince me otherwise and vice versa.
 
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

Post New Topic

Please SEARCH before posting.
Please select the BEST category.

Post new topic

Guest post submissions offered HERE.

Latest Posts

New Topics

Fastlane Insiders

View the forum AD FREE.
Private, unindexed content
Detailed process/execution threads
Ideas needing execution, more!

Join Fastlane Insiders.

Top