How Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg Lost $4 Billion with One Post

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Mark Zuckerberg’s fortune suffered a $3.99B loss after he posted on Facebook about how the social network would be changing its news feed to cater to interactions between friends and family rather than content from publishers and brands. The change is expected to reduce the time that people spend on the site.

For much of the past few months, Zuckerberg has been thinking aloud about Facebook's mission, saying he wanted Facebook to become a place for meaningful social interaction. His resolution for 2018 was to "fix" Facebook, according to the South China Morning Post. Zuckerberg said in the post yesterday that he wanted to change the way Facebook ranks posts by putting more weight on social interactions and relationships.
 
Probably too little too late, but worth a try. We all remember how it worked for Dr. Frankenstein.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Eh, it's only wealth when he decides to cash in on it and his "wealth" is still nearly $75 billion, so ummmm yeah, not a huge deal.
Click to expand...
Astonishing. How can one man be worth $75 billion. Many European countries don't even have 1% of that in their defence budget. Insane
 
Zuul said:
Astonishing. How can one man be worth $75 billion. Many European countries don't even have 1% of that in their defence budget. Insane
Click to expand...
There's the thread about Epic Games suing someone for stealing in game currency, and a discussion about "value" ... head on to that thread to find out "how can" :D
 
things is when its tied up in stocks like this, he can't really cash out without causing the value to plummet. It took Gates forever to slowly cash out his fortune.
 
DejaWiz said:
They're all over Europe...


https://www.forbes.com/sites/natalierobehmed/2014/03/13/the-richest-people-in-europe/#72b20f1a3c06
Click to expand...
well yeah, but that was kinda my point. But good for them I guess. That money could be spent on something good instead of hoarding it. Look at that old cunt at 91 years old "worth" $34.5 billion. A retirement home won't ever set you back that much ;)

For comparison, I made $53.000 last year in the most taxed country in the world. And I think I worked harder than that old prune did. Well...either you lead or you slave
 
Zuul said:
well yeah, but that was kinda my point. But good for them I guess. That money could be spent on something good instead of hoarding it. Look at that old cunt at 91 years old "worth" $34.5 billion. A retirement home won't ever set you back that much ;)
Click to expand...


They earned it. Why should they have to forfeit it to their respective governments or some other entities? If those governments can't function on the already high tax rates they are instituting, then that's not the fault, nor should it be the burden, of these billionaires.
 
DejaWiz said:
They earned it. Why should they have to forfeit it to their respective governments or some other entities? If those governments can't function on the already high tax rates they are instituting, then that's not the fault, nor should it be the burden, of these billionaires.
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about forfeiting. I'm just wondering how that kind wealth is accumulated. I'd be happy with $1 million

edit. What I'm trying to say is that when is enough enough?
edit 2 for 1 person I mean. I get it if they want to ensure the waealt of their offsprings for the next 1000 years so they never have to slave for anyone
 
Zuul said:
well yeah, but that was kinda my point. But good for them I guess. That money could be spent on something good instead of hoarding it. Look at that old cunt at 91 years old "worth" $34.5 billion. A retirement home won't ever set you back that much ;)

For comparison, I made $53.000 last year in the most taxed country in the world. And I think I worked harder than that old prune did. Well...either you lead or you slave
Click to expand...

wow kinda rude dude.

She has probably paid more taxes in france and employed enough people to deserve to do what she wants with her money.

Your post reeks of jealousy
 
Makaveli@BETA said:
wow kinda rude dude.

She has probably paid more taxes in france and employed enough people to deserve to do what she wants with her money.

Your post reeks of jealousy
Click to expand...
haha noo....not meant to be rude at all. Jealous? no. I live a good life in my humble terms. No complaints. There's more to life than money
 
Zuul said:
haha noo....not meant to be rude at all. Jealous? no. I live a good life in my humble terms. No complaints. There's more to life than money
Click to expand...

calling someone an old cunt is not rude?

You worked harder than her last year?

she has worked more years than you have been alive......
 
well maybe that was little overboard

but still...what can 1 person do sitting on 34.5 billion. And I believe the company employed all those ppl not her

nm I see this is going south on me so I humbly take my leave now :D

edit: And I'd like point out that I did say "good for them" and something about slaves and leaders. So...

And if anyone deserves that kind of money, it shouldn't be because you slap some paint on girls faces. It should be about the technological advancement of mankind. Elon Musk comes to mind.

Anyways...it's past my bedtime. Have to go to work tomorrow...on a sunday. To make money for someone else LOL
 
Last edited:
Someone rich lost $4 Billion? It really tugs at the heart strings, seeing the plight of the 1%

In all seriousness, force-feeding people that use your services less crap is a nice sentiment, but no sweeping change is ever all positive. A lot of small businesses use Facebook to spread awareness of their services - for some it has become a primary means of building a customer base. Will accounts/activity like this be penalized in some way? I just wonder what, exactly, he's got in mind.
 
Zuul said:
And if anyone deserves that kind of money, it shouldn't be because you slap some paint on girls faces. It should be about the technological advancement of mankind. Elon Musk comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Maybe in the world you live in however in the real world you don't get to make that decision.

What do you know of her story and how she earned any of that money?
 
Last edited:
Lol my favorite quote "The change is expected to reduce the time that people spend on the site." Sorry I don't get how that makes any sense people don't go to facebook to see ads they go to see what people around them are talking about. What they meant to say is that they expect to see a decrease in ad revenue which is what really plunged the stock. But some how they claim that's not what they are saying.

I am also going to say this, Mark says he wants to make sure the time on facebook is time well spent. lol I understand that people should connect and communicate but really seeing what grandpa ate at the family diner is time well spent but reading actual material such as news that has the possibility to get people learning, critically thinking, and possibly even actively caring about the world around them is not time well spent? I can't agree with this. If you want quality time with friends and family you go talk to them or see them. Seeing more of their random posts doesn't make it quality time.

Zuul said:
I'm not talking about forfeiting. I'm just wondering how that kind wealth is accumulated. I'd be happy with $1 million

edit. What I'm trying to say is that when is enough enough?
edit 2 for 1 person I mean. I get it if they want to ensure the waealt of their offsprings for the next 1000 years so they never have to slave for anyone
Click to expand...

The wealth is accumulated by growing a portfolio of assets. In most of the cases of the richest people in the world that is from a company that they own a huge amount of stock in. So the most direct way to say it is, they invest that money which creates products and jobs. This is good for the people that work for them and arguably the people who buy the products are somewhat happy about it as well.
 
DejaWiz said:
They earned it. Why should they have to forfeit it to their respective governments or some other entities? If those governments can't function on the already high tax rates they are instituting, then that's not the fault, nor should it be the burden, of these billionaires.
Click to expand...
They earned it, sure. I'll tell you why they should pay proper taxes, which none of them do. They use public infrastructure to achieve their business goals. They use loopholes made by other rich people, like oh, say our so-called president. They are entitled to their earnings, but they are not entitled to mooching off the taxpayer.
 
resilient son of a bitch.
I thought facebook would be dead as myspace by now
 
lollerwaffle said:
They earned it, sure. I'll tell you why they should pay proper taxes, which none of them do. They use public infrastructure to achieve their business goals. They use loopholes made by other rich people, like oh, say our so-called president. They are entitled to their earnings, but they are not entitled to mooching off the taxpayer.
Click to expand...

I lost you at "so-called president"... I can't believe I'm going to defend Mark Zuckerberg, but he's paid somewhere in the $3-4 BILLION range in taxes. I'm sure he's paid for his fair share of public infrastructure much more so than the average nonsensical Californian.
 
lollerwaffle said:
They earned it, sure. I'll tell you why they should pay proper taxes, which none of them do. They use public infrastructure to achieve their business goals. They use loopholes made by other rich people, like oh, say our so-called president. They are entitled to their earnings, but they are not entitled to mooching off the taxpayer.
Click to expand...

Is "proper taxes" in your mind the same as "almost all of their earnings to fund recklessly spending with no accountability governments"?

Didn't our president's tax return get intercepted by a news pundit almost a year ago...only to show the result is that he actually paid a higher percentage than the very candidate that was running his platform on making the rich pay more to fund everyone's "free" college and healthcare?

Re-read kirbyrj's comment just above. I'm sure ole Zucky has shoveled out BILLIONS in tax money to both federal and state governments...
 
lollerwaffle said:
They earned it, sure. I'll tell you why they should pay proper taxes, which none of them do. They use public infrastructure to achieve their business goals. They use loopholes made by other rich people, like oh, say our so-called president. They are entitled to their earnings, but they are not entitled to mooching off the taxpayer.
Click to expand...

This isn't earnings its net worth, its just assets. It can all be worth nothing tomorrow if the stock market collapses which is something this article shows. They have to pay taxes if they cash it in.
 
rudy said:
Lol my favorite quote "The change is expected to reduce the time that people spend on the site." Sorry I don't get how that makes any sense people don't go to facebook to see ads they go to see what people around them are talking about. What they meant to say is that they expect to see a decrease in ad revenue which is what really plunged the stock. But some how they claim that's not what they are saying.

I am also going to say this, Mark says he wants to make sure the time on facebook is time well spent. lol I understand that people should connect and communicate but really seeing what grandpa ate at the family diner is time well spent but reading actual material such as news that has the possibility to get people learning, critically thinking, and possibly even actively caring about the world around them is not time well spent? I can't agree with this. If you want quality time with friends and family you go talk to them or see them. Seeing more of their random posts doesn't make it quality time.



The wealth is accumulated by growing a portfolio of assets. In most of the cases of the richest people in the world that is from a company that they own a huge amount of stock in. So the most direct way to say it is, they invest that money which creates products and jobs. This is good for the people that work for them and arguably the people who buy the products are somewhat happy about it as well.
Click to expand...
Learning and thoughtful pieces with critical thinking are great and all but does that ever show up on the news feeds anyway? Might as well just stick with Grandpa's dinner than people marketing bad products and bad ideologies.
 
SecretStash said:
Learning and thoughtful pieces with critical thinking are great and all but does that ever show up on the news feeds anyway? Might as well just stick with Grandpa's dinner than people marketing bad products and bad ideologies.
Click to expand...

Your opinion may be that it does not but whatever does show up there is simply a representation of society and its thought and our media. IE I don't view facebook discussion as any worse or better than what's on any other random communication channel, be it the network news, reddit, or here. Its not like you haven't ever seen a click bait title here and a troll thread blow up right?
 
DejaWiz said:
They earned it. Why should they have to forfeit it to their respective governments or some other entities? If those governments can't function on the already high tax rates they are instituting, then that's not the fault, nor should it be the burden, of these billionaires.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that the money shouldn't necessarily be forfeited to the government and especially if the reason it's being considered being redistributed is miss-management of tax money and government bloating. However, one should pay a reasonable amount to maintain the structures your business relies upon. Otherwise, it gets used and not repaired to the point it reaches a state of disrepair. See US's crumbling infrastructure. Ahem, a wonderful: D+.

The part I disagree with is while you say they earned it, do you actually know if they earned it with regards to the 91 year old worth $35.4 Billion dollars as you've stated? did they "earn" their money or did they inherit it?

Viewing the list of top 100 richest women in the world published on Forbes, if you read the bio for the first 20 or 30 women, literately everyone one is along the lines of "Beginning with a family fortunate of $15 Billion....this entrepreneur made 'this' fashion brand or cosmetics or service company" or "Widows/wife of rich oil tycoon // industrialist/etc" and so on. It might sound rude to say but I don't really think marrying someone very rich or being born into a rich family is earning.

Similarly, many men's lists for richest men in the world are inheritances. It's only when you get to the 90s or so when you start to see self-made women appear on the list and 50s for men with a very few notable exceptions in the top 50 like Gates and Zuckerberg. Don't believe me? Check for yourself:

Richest Women List (Forbes)

Granted, life isn't fair but let's not be unrealistic and equate being born with money with earning it. Most extremely wealthy people are born rich and not made rich. Moderate wealth in the order of 100 million, sure, some people reach that from poverty but that doesn't get you close to $90 billion networths. 90 billion dollars is as close to 100 million as someone who owns a $500k house(no mortgage, paid in full) is to a person whose total networth is a car that's several years old (no car debt, paid in full).

Makaveli@BETA said:
What do you know of her story and how she earned any of that money?
Click to expand...
Occam's razor? Is it most likely she inherited the money or she worked extremely hard founding a copy from the ground up and over one lifetime of rapid expansion managed to make her meager business starting at a networth of $10,000 into $34.5 Billion dollars? I think the former is more likely. The later kind of success stories are literately in 1 in 100 million. Inheriting money happens daily. Probably 1 in 2 people inherit money at some point in their life and the other 1 in 2 got unlucky in their ancestors spent it all or they were left out of the will for a multitude of reasons like giving it to charity, bad behavior, more need elsewhere in the family, etc.

Totally agree with you that calling her a c**t was totally out of line. Just because someone is born rich doesn't necessarily make them a bad person but it doesn't necessarily make them a good person either. I'd rather judge a rich person individually on their merits. Jobbs as an example, he's an a-hole by all accounts of people working with him were Gates is trying to use his money to eradicate diseases, provide clean drinking water and cure medical ailments to people in poorer countries around the world for free.

86 5.0L said:
My FB is mostly hot chicks in bikinis
Click to expand...
I'll trade you my Facebook for your Facebook. Yours sounds much more fun than mine of old classmates from decades ago.
 
Last edited:
WBurchnall said:
I agree with you that the money shouldn't necessarily be forfeited to the government and especially if the reason it's being considered being redistributed is miss-management of tax money and government bloating. However, one should pay a reasonable amount to maintain the structures your business relies upon. Otherwise, it gets used and not repaired to the point it reaches a state of disrepair. See US's crumbling infrastructure. Ahem, a wonderful: D+.

The part I disagree with is while you say they earned it, do you actually know if they earned it with regards to the 91 year old worth $35.4 Billion dollars as you've stated? did they "earn" their money or did they inherit it?

Viewing the list of top 100 richest women in the world published on Forbes, if you read the bio for the first 20 or 30 women, literately everyone one is along the lines of "Beginning with a family fortunate of $15 Billion....this entrepreneur made 'this' fashion brand or cosmetics or service company" or "Widows/wife of rich oil tycoon // industrialist/etc" and so on. It might sound rude to say but I don't really think marrying someone very rich or being born into a rich family is earning.

Similarly, many men's lists for richest men in the world are inheritances. It's only when you get to the 90s or so when you start to see self-made women appear on the list and 50s for men with a very few notable exceptions in the top 50 like Gates and Zuckerberg. Don't believe me? Check for yourself:

Richest Women List (Forbes)

Granted, life isn't fair but let's not be unrealistic and equate being born with money with earning it. Most extremely wealthy people are born rich and not made rich. Moderate wealth in the order of 100 million, sure, some people reach that from poverty but that doesn't get you close to $90 billion networths. 90 billion dollars is as close to 100 million as someone who owns a $500k house(no mortgage, paid in full) is to a person whose total networth is a car that's several years old (no car debt, paid in full).


Occam's razor? Is it most likely she inherited the money or she worked extremely hard founding a copy from the ground up and over one lifetime of rapid expansion managed to make her meager business starting at a networth of $10,000 into $34.5 Billion dollars? I think the former is more likely. The later kind of success stories are literately in 1 in 100 million. Inheriting money happens daily. Probably 1 in 2 people inherit money at some point in their life and the other 1 in 2 got unlucky in their ancestors spent it all or they were left out of the will for a multitude of reasons like giving it to charity, bad behavior, more need elsewhere in the family, etc.

Totally agree with you that calling her a c**t was totally out of line. Just because someone is born rich doesn't necessarily make them a bad person but it doesn't necessarily make them a good person either. I'd rather judge a rich person individually on their merits. Jobbs as an example, he's an a-hole by all accounts of people working with him were Gates is trying to use his money to eradicate diseases, provide clean drinking water and cure medical ailments to people in poorer countries around the world for free.


I'll trade you my Facebook for your Facebook. Yours sounds much more fun than mine of old classmates from decades ago.
Click to expand...


What are you ultimately getting at? That these billionaires, despite already having paid their respective governments billions in taxes regardless if they work for it (income taxes) or inherit it (inheritance taxes), should have even more of their fortunes seized to fund things like infrastructure rebuilding, despite their governments already factoring those costs into budget propositions they voted on and passed to work within the constraints of their tax appropriation rates, which they also voted on and passed?

Take the US, for example...the government is slated to already make a smidge under $7 trillion dollars from taxes/sources in 2018. The requested federal annual expenditures lately have been around $4.0-4.2 trillion dollars (I realize this figure doesn't include state expenditures).

Seems to me the federal and state governments need to get their shit together, because $7T annually should be more than enough to fund everything on the books, with some left over.

There's absolutely zero reason to cry about the rich (like Zucky) not paying enough in taxes. Let's focus on holding governments accountable for their spending which, in my opinion, would uncover a hell of a lot of funds misappropriation (bad deals and overpaying) resulting in unnecessary expenditures driving up the budget and increasing the national debt.
 
Last edited:
MrRuckus said:
I have been using RAID since the promise controller days
Click to expand...

DejaWiz said:
Seems to me the federal and state governments need to get their shit together, because $7T annually should be more than enough to fund everything on the books, with some left over.
Click to expand...

Whats interesting/strange/obscene is that facebooks market value is about 500 billion. So the entire United states of america GDP is only 14 times that of facebooks. One company, based on what people feel it should trade at. I dont know where to place this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top