Lonnie Lazar

Lonnie Lazar
Location
Here, And, Now
Birthday
August 08
Bio
Everything changes.

MY RECENT POSTS

Editor’s Pick
JANUARY 3, 2011 5:33PM

Facebook Valuation Boggles the Mind

Rate: 19 Flag

From the What's It Worth? Department - big news in the world of finance today:  the great minds at Goldman Sachs have conjured up a way for wealthy investors to get a piece of the Facebook action without actually having to take the company public.

Plunking down $450 million of its own money for a share of Facebook common stock which values the Internet equivalent of a high school lunchroom at $50 billion, Goldman won the right to create a "special purpose vehicle" whereby a select list of its own wealthiest clients can pony up an additional $1.5 billion to fund Facebook's operations and, presumably, reward its founders and directors for being brilliant, savvy players in the post-Crash era.

Hey, well, bully for them all around.  Smoke 'em if ya got 'em, as the old saying used to go.

Just for kicks, though, I thought I'd poke around and see what $50 billion looks like in today's world. While it won't buy what it used to back in the day (ie: the entire gross debt of the United States was about $50 billion in 1940; it is over $1.3 trillion today ), you can still take down some pretty rad gear for that kinda dough.

To wit:

If I were to give you a dollar per second without stopping, ever, to sleep, eat or take a dump, we'd each have to live for nearly 16 centuries to complete the transaction.

If we converted the money to $1000 bills we'd have to stack them more than 5 miles high to put them all in a single pile.  Or we could trade that stack for a single $50 billion note at the Exchequer of Zimbabwe, but I think we might get screwed some on the exchange rate since that note buys two loaves of bread in Zimbabwe.

If we were Bank of America and wanted to buy the investment bank that sold itself for years as the one that was "bullish on America," $50 billion would get us Merrill Lynch at its most favorable valuation, allow us to add more than 16,000 investment advisers to our roster and become the largest investment brokerage in the world. That actually happened.  Back in 2008, remember?

If we were 70 of the IT world's most important CIOs we could band together and pool our annual IT spend to try and create an alliance to define the standards that will comprise this thing everyone is calling "the Cloud."  And we did. And we do spend that much - every year.

If we were a prominent figure in high society, a member of the nation’s most exclusive clubs and a former NASDAQ chairman who founded one of the most successful securities firms in New York, we could create a $50 billion ponzi scheme, get caught, go to prison and drive our own son to suicide like Bernie Madoff did.

If we were the fastest-growing military and industrial power on the planet and we wanted to ensure continued access to the IMF teat at which we have suckled to nourish our stature as a force-to-be-reckoned with, we could do that for $50 billion as China did about 18 months ago.

If we were green-minded and thought about doing something tangible to shift the balance of power away from old-school, dead-fossil energy production and into low-impact, sustainable earth-friendly energy production we could buy about 40,000,000 solar photovoltaic panels. Installed.

If we weren't high-concept and just wanted to buy stuff, we could get about 25 billion McRib sandwiches; 2 or 3 nuclear reactors; about 20 professional sports stadiums; 500 Andy Warhol paintings; 29,000 Bugatti Veyrons (the most expensive production car in the world); 600 America's Cup-worthy racing yachts; 150 million pairs of Levis; or 200 million lightweight cotton hoodies like the one Mark Zuckerberg wears to work every day.

Or, if we were Apple Computers, we could just have it in the bank.

I don't know whether or not Facebook is really worth $50 billion and I don't know whether Goldman Sachs or any of its high-falutin' clients is going to make or lose money investing in Facebook at that kind of valuation.

I suspect if they do make a profit, however, it means the money I have in my bank account is worth a whole heck of a lot less than I thought it was.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
FIRST! It's an honor, Lonnie.
Back after reading. My mind feels boggled alright. I checked the world census today and that's 4 McRibs for every person on the planet. Feed the world, Facebook!
"If we were green-minded and thought about doing something tangible to shift the balance of power away from old-school, dead-fossil energy production and into low-impact, sustainable earth-friendly energy production we could buy about 40,000,000 solar photovoltaic panels. Installed."

That's what I'm talkin about.
And the talking heads onthe cablenewsblathernetworks talk about the "market bubble"as if it was a thing of the past.
It's pretty odd ain't it? I would KILL for 29,000 Bugatti Veyrons!
To clarify; by "odd" I meant "Here we go again ladies and gents!"
Was just watching a talking head on PBS's Newshour. He was saying (I think) that what Goldman Sachs is trying to do is create a vehicle wherein a bunch of outside investors can be involved in Facebook without triggering the SEC requirement that the company's financial operations be made transparent to the public if more than 500 shareholders are involved. This will (I think) position said Goldman Sachs vehicle very favorably once Facebook eventually does make an IPO. The main question at this point is whether the ploy is legal or not, and given that entities like Goldman Sachs routinely get to make up the rules as they go along it seems quite possible they'll get their way.
Please disregard my previous comment; you already said it nearly word for word in this post. My only excuse for repeating it is that I was overly excited about the Bugatti Veyrons.
Where the hell did my comment go? Probably deleted by some asshole at Goldman Sux
Should this make me feel very uncomfortable? Or is it just that I cringe every time I hear the words Goldman Sachs. I don't know, but something smells funny.
Can I just get 12 billion McRib sandwiches and one nuclear reactor, please?
There aren't many outlets that have an exposure in the hundreds of millions. TV shows are big hits today if they draw 2 or 3 million viewers, a pretty pathetic level. The dispersal of media has made society somewhat more interesting in certain ways, but it requires more effort. I tend to think that those who complain are incapable of it.
Rated.
These economics seem like they're through the looking glass. The $50 B valuation is based on the flow of advertising dollars. Are the companies paying for the ads really getting back enough in extra sales to make it worthwhile? They should know better than me but it's hard not to be skeptical.

Facebook's website says there are more than 500 million active users. So the $50 B value equates to $100 per user. I'm on Facebook. Some advertiser, or better said, Goldman, thinks that the discounted PROFIT stream from me for the advertisers is worth $100? Really?

Somehow it reminds me of a house of cards.
The "transparency gods" must be laughing at all of us. All the way to the bank.
Here we go again. Another special purpose vehicle. Now we just have to wait to the other firms to apply it to some other (less actually valuable) entity and voila! Le Crash du jour.
And, if somebody pulled the plug, the whole thing would disappear. There is nothing real about this.
The incredulity that led me to peck these musings out stems from a weird appreciation for the fact that FB may have 500 million active users -- of which I am one -- and the dead certainty that those 500 million people would find something else to do with the time they spend on FB in a heartbeat if the site ceased to exist tomorrow.

I guess one might put a current value on such a thing (and kudos to you, Abrawang, for making it understandable as $100 per user) but to then turn around and use it to make an investment decison about what that value might be in the future? Maybe it just goes to explain why I never managed to make any money in the stock market.
Of course Facebook could collapse by having its younger audience migrate to a new social networking site. It could become the Myspace/wasteland of tomorrow. Maybe. But then, that's part of the fun of investing...don't you know that by now?
Well, you know what's interesting BOKO, is that nobody gave a flip about Facebook when it had just its "younger audience". Only in the last two years, when all these older people (like me) with jobs and money to spend (unlike me) joined did the big money people start paying attention. I'm kinda with Abrawang in questioning whether the per user profit stream is really $100 - or ever will be. I know I'm an outlier in this regard, but I have never clicked on an ad served up by Facebook and while I might have navigated to a FB advertiser's site on my own from time to time, nobody's made $100 off of my presence on Facebook.

As far as the fun of investing goes, I'll admit I had a lot more fun back in the days when I had more capital and a higher tolerance for risk. At this point in my life investing in equities has lost quite a bit of the lustre it once had.
Attempting to revisit my original comment ...

The Facebook Fiasco shows just how desperate Ponzi artists are for a new bubble machine. This time around they have had to resort to the dot.com bubble 2.0, just as the real estate bubble was the S&L crisis 2.0.

While this sort of folly is nothing new -- remember the Tulip Bubble? -- there is a new danger that could not exist without the presence of the computer. The computer has made it possible for those with inside, secret knowledge to replace investment with speculation. Problem is, EVERYONE else will suffer the consequences.

I've mentioned David Halberstam's book The Reckoning which warned in 1977 that the rising power of money-managers and the declining power of producers would lead to exactly the present disaster. And people as diverse politically and socially as George HW Bush and myself saw this coming, too, and knew that Reaganomics was Voodoo Economics. But millions of voters and thousands of "sophisticated" investors apparently weren't smart enough to see what was as plain as the nose on Karl Malden's face.

I defy anyone to explain why the stock market has recovered when neither the job market or consumer spending has recovered satisfactorily. Yeah, yeah, I know all about lag -- does anyone really believe the real estate crisis is over? Does anyone really believe all those good-paying middle-management jobs are suddenly going to return?

If you do, maybe you should try to get in on Goddamn Sux latest Ponzi scheme and invest in the invisible empire that is Facebook.
$50,000,000,000 seems like an awful lot for just "the latest big thing." I don't get it.

Lezlie