Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Facebook The Almighty Buck Businesses

Mark Zuckerberg Becomes World's Third-Richest Person (bloomberg.com) 110

Posted by BeauHD from the cash-cow dept.
Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg has overtaken Warren Buffett as the world's third-richest person, reports Bloomberg. Zuckerberg only trails Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates. From the report: It's the first time that the three wealthiest people on the ranking made their fortunes from technology. Zuckerberg, 34, is now worth $81.6 billion, about $373 million more than Buffett, the 87-year-old chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway. Zuckerberg's ascent has been driven by investors' continued embrace of Facebook, the social-network giant that shook off the fallout from a data-privacy crisis that hammered its shares, sending them to an eight-month low of $152.22 on March 27. The stock closed Friday at a record $203.23.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mark Zuckerberg Becomes World's Third-Richest Person More

Mark Zuckerberg Becomes World's Third-Richest Person

Comments Filter:

  • Third riches business person, you mean (Score:5, Informative)

    by magarity ( 164372 ) on Friday July 06, 2018 @05:02PM (#56904212)

    Let's see, Kim Ill owns his whole country outright, then Xi and Putin pretty much de facto own theirs... then there's the members of the junta who own Myanmar, etc, etc.

  • ...in action. Facebook's got electrolytes.

  • Precarious position? (Score:3)

    by Peter P Peters ( 5350981 ) on Friday July 06, 2018 @05:51PM (#56904480)
    Seems like an awfully precarious position for Zuckerberg to be in since his company effectively has one product which could easily be copied. And this is the bit I don't get get, where are the FB clones? Most people I know hate FB and would switch to another similar product if it were available, but there simply are none. Every competitor tried to do something different and failed (hello Google Plus) .
    All that most people are after is the simple connect with 'friends', share a newsfeed format, and messaging but without the ads and the spying. Can't someone make something like this and put us out of FB misery forever? How hard is to build something just like the original FB (without the videos, the trending news, the autoplay ads etc) but with a different logo and colour scheme?

    • Because the value is not in the product; it's in the people using it, and the people are all on Facebook. Metcalfe's Law means that it'll need something pretty damn disruptive to unseat them at this stage.

      • Because the value is not in the product; it's in the people using it, and the people are all on Facebook. Metcalfe's Law means that it'll need something pretty damn disruptive to unseat them at this stage.

        Not really. Like with say Twitter or Instagram, users already have multiple Social Media Apps. If you made an FB clone but without intrusive ads and tracking, people can use both. Over time FB2 would reach a critical mass that FB would have to rethink their strategy. It happens all the time Apple Music or Tidal vs Spotify, Apple Maps vs Google Maps, Bing vs Google Search etc

        • Music services aren't social apps, and neither are mapping and search engines, in the sense of having a network of friends. It's the network that's the important part; I don't care whether my friend uses Bing or Apple Maps instead of Google - but I do care if they can't see my Facebook feed, and I can't see theirs. Twitter and Instagram are indeed social apps, but they both serve quite different audiences so they don't so much compete.

          Sure users could post everything to FB2 as well as FB - but why would the

          • Sure users could post everything to FB2 as well as FB - but why would they? It's twice the effort,

            I don't think you understand the Social Media users these days. Based on my anecdotal experience of working for a 'cool' youth retail head office with a dedicated social media team, and the owner of two heavy social media teenagers I can assure that if you had 50 social media apps, they would post shit 50 times to ensure no-one missed out on what they have to share. Ultimately 50 is not sustainable so the uncool ones would die a natural death. I believe that FB has past it's peak hype point so is ripe for a

    • you're basically untouchable, right? Zuck is now a member of the ruling class. We do not spill the blood of kings.

    • And this is the bit I don't get get, where are the FB clones? Most people I know hate FB and would switch to another similar product if it were available, but there simply are none.

      Two words: Network effect. Everyone uses Facebook because everyone else uses Facebook.

      Every competitor tried to do something different and failed (hello Google Plus).

      That's because the only way to break the network effect is to offer an alternative that isn't a clone, but is actually significantly better in some compelling way. It has to offer something that will entice people to leave their friends and family. If what you offer is exactly the same as Facebook, then what's the incentive for people to move?

      All that most people are after is the simple connect with 'friends', share a newsfeed format, and messaging but without the ads and the spying.

      Most people don't care so much about "the ads and the spying". And even if they

      • Two words: Network effect. Everyone uses Facebook because everyone else uses Facebook.

        Yeah I hear this all the time, but it doesn't really explain why it clone wouldn't work.

        That's because the only way to break the network effect is to offer an alternative that isn't a clone,

        Not necessarily. If people have general distaste with a product, then they'll try anything new even it's an exact clone but in a different colour.

        but is actually significantly better in some compelling way. It has to offer something that will entice people to leave their friends and family. If what you offer is exactly the same as Facebook, then what's the incentive for people to move?

        Because you don't have to leave straight away, it is possible to run multiple Social Media Apps together. I currently have friends and family that I reach either by Skype, Viber, Whatsapp, Slack, Txt, Phone, Email whatever and it's not a problem.
        FB2 would gain all the people t

        • but is actually significantly better in some compelling way. It has to offer something that will entice people to leave their friends and family. If what you offer is exactly the same as Facebook, then what's the incentive for people to move?

          Because you don't have to leave straight away, it is possible to run multiple Social Media Apps together. I currently have friends and family that I reach either by Skype, Viber, Whatsapp, Slack, Txt, Phone, Email whatever and it's not a problem.

          I think maybe you don't know what social media is. Most of the things in your list are person-to-person messaging tools, not social media tools. Perhaps you only use Facebook for messaging?

          Most people don't care so much about "the ads and the spying". And even if they did... how would this alternative social network be funded if it didn't use targeted advertising?

          The same way every other tech project is funded, through VC.

          And how are the VCs going to make money? They only invest if they think they can see big payback later. So where is that going to come from?

          To support billions of users you need hundreds of thousands of servers, terabits of bandwidth and the operations and engineering staff to build and support all of it.

          Like Tinder and Twitter and every other Tech App that makes no money?

          Twitter is profitable -- it makes its money through targeted advertising, AKA "the ads and the spying". Tinder is not profitable, but is being run as a loss leader by the company tha

          • I think maybe you don't know what social media is.

            Which doesn't answer the question why a user can't have multiple social media accounts at one time.

            And how are the VCs going to make money? They only invest if they think they can see big payback later. So where is that going to come from?

            A lot of VC works on potential. ie Find customers first, work out how to monetise it later. eg Twitter and Tinder

            Targeted advertising has proven to be the most effective way to fund large-scale online services. Until someone comes up with an alternative model, social media systems will all be funded by targeted advertising.

            The proposition is that there is potential to steal hundreds of millions of customers from FB by developing a clone product and marketing it to target groups who are ready to jump to something else.
            Whether you introduce ads a few years down the track, a subscription model, or something else to mone

  • The Rothchild family laughs at this silly list.
  • No matter how much material wealth he manages to acquire over the course of his gods-be-damned life, he will still not have enough silver to pay the Ferryman.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday July 06, 2018 @06:06PM (#56904542)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Is he married an ugly woman after he got the money.

  • I feel so sorry for the poor boy [woodcruft.co.uk].

  • A few years back he said he would give 90% of all his money away that NO ONE needed so much money. ... and that of course was a lie!!!

  • How's his status on the most-hated person list?

  • These rankings are lies they donâ(TM)t include rich willows and heirs, only people that are âoeself madeâ,so they can perpetuate the lie that the richest people are self made

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Close