it's not the crime, it's the coverage

[rone]

So Om Malik wrote this thing about what impelled Facebook to buy Instagram.  First off, i can't get past Malik's assertion of "Facebook's achilles heel"[sic] being "mobile photo sharing".  Seriously?  Mobile photo sharing is a hard-driving revenue stream for anyone in this world?  Is there any evidence that this was considered a weakness by anyone at Facebook?  I can lean on my experience and tell you that sharing photos from my Android phone is stone easy to Facebook, because my phone came with the Facebook app installed.  I couldn't've done it on Instagram at all until very recently.  Facebook was worried about Instagram's mobile photo sharing mojo?  I call bullshit.

And calling Instagram "a platform built on emotion"... what the hell is that about?  I wonder if he's an advance Facebook stock share owner, because it sure as hell sounds like he's trying to talk himself into the deal, which is no less than ludicrous.  Who drops $1B, even if most of it is fake money, on an emotion-based platform?  Emotion fades.

Some are comparing it to Google buying YouTube, but others are comparing it to eBay buying Skype.  I think that it's far more likely to be closer to the latter, except worse.  Bottom line: even if, somehow, this turns out to be a good deal for Facebook, it won't be because of them addressing their supposed "Achilles heel", or because of the strength of Instagram's "emotion".

Bonus cluebie: some "business leader" thinks that Twitter "F$($#@ UP in somehow letting Instagram ended up inside of Facebook"[sic], because nothing says "mobile business advisor" than someone playing with ginned-up valuation numbers.

Comments

[haineux.livejournal.com]

Facebook bought themselves a lot of fixie-driving, artisanal cupcake-eating, ironic facial hair-toting hipsters (personal data, if not actual members).

And some fixie-driving, artisanal cupcake-eating, ironic facial hair-toting hipster developers.

(I know, I should quit the derision.)

[foomf.livejournal.com]

My goodness gosh, but that set of replies looks as sycophantic as anything I've ever seen.

I wouldn't have noticed the problems you point out but then I don't really think about Facebook and "business model" in the same mental framework - Facebook is, in essence and in my never-humble opinion, an accidental success and a danger to itself and others.

[kodi]

sure, you could post to facebook without Instagram on your Android phone... but were your photos yellow enough? I think not!

[ltempt.livejournal.com]

"Sun buying MySQL"

[freelikebeer.livejournal.com]

A BILLION dollars. I'm going to be sick.

[tskirvin.livejournal.com]

If I were a board gamer, I would believe that Facebook is trying to inflate the current Internet bubble as much as possible in time for its IPO, in order to inflate its share value; and that it is doing so by transferring money out of its coffers and into a new company and, perhaps, into some people's pockets.

Were I an 18xx board gamer, I would sense a company dump in the offing.

[rwx.livejournal.com]

it is an entirely rational business decision for facebook to throw a billion dollars at anything that looks like it might eventually morph into something that could unseat it. the rest of it is bullshit, although what instagram was doing with its api could have grown into something that could annoy facebook.