$8 Billion in 3 Years

I read an article in the WSJ a few weeks ago about how Facebook has internally valued itself at about $8 Billion and how it resisted bids to be acquired by Yahoo and Google. I just wanted to pause to consider how ridiculous that is. This WSJ blog entry also mentions that $8 Billion is about 267 times earning. An excerpt from the article about how old it is:

The site, founded by a Harvard University student in his dorm room three years ago, says it attracts some 30 million active members, nearly double the previous year. This has led to rampant speculation that Yahoo or Google will swoop in and take it over.

A continued excerpt that discusses offers from Yahoo and Google:

Turning down suitors has already proved smart. Yahoo offered to pay $1 billion for Facebook in September 2006. Google was said to have offered more than double that amount shortly thereafter. Recently, board member Peter Theil indicated the company is worth some $8 billion, based on internal valuations.

To put that in perspective, I did a quick stock screen of companies that have a market valuation of around $8 Billion. Here are a few:

Office Depot - $8.09 B

Eastman Kodak - $7.96 B

Harris Corp - $7.89 B

Avaya Inc - $7.71 B

Is it just me, or is this crazy that this Harvard undergrad kid could create an equal amount of value in 3 years as those companies have done in decades? What did I do in the last 3 years?

Comments

The Fortunate 400

So there's rich, and then there's super rich. I recently read an article in the WSJ about the top 400 taxpayers based on income. Pretty incredible statistics. Those top 400, or what they call the "Fortunate 400", pulled in $85.6 billion in income in 2005. That's over $200 million each ... in one year! Here's a quick graphic to drive that home: Very impressive. There's all the obvious jaw-dropping statistics to go with that. For instance, to make the cut to be in the 400 you had to pull in at least $100 million. With an average of $200 million, that means there's people pulling in well over that number. Obviously, quite crazy numbers, and generally speaking not necessarily anything to be concerned about. I'm all for capitalism. But one of the more disheartening statistics was that adjusting for inflation, the minimum income to make the cutoff into the Fortunate 400 has nearly tripled since 1992. That's probably not a good sign as I imagine that...

Nine Prescriptions for Building the Duke Entrepreneurial Community

I think Duke can have one of the strongest entrepreneurial communities in the world. Are we there yet? Well, not yet. But there's a tremendous amount of momentum that I saw build in just the past two years while I was getting my MBA at Duke. While leading Duke's 10th annual business plan competition, the Duke Start-Up Challenge (DSC) , last year, I witnessed a near doubling of participation on campus in just a single year. The interest on the ground was clearly there and building rapidly. But now that I'm an alum, I'm looking back and wondering ... how do we rev-up the Duke entrepreneurial community even more? I read a great article by Daniel Isenberg, a professor of management at Babson, called " How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution " in the June edition of the Harvard Business Review. Isenberg outlines nine prescriptions for governments that want to create entrepreneurship ecosystems in their countries. Although he was focused on governments an...

A Possible Solution to the Mortgage Crisis

Came across this one on Mankiw's blog as well (... someone has been stealing my WSJ's each morning before I can pick them up outside). Martin Feldstein, a professor at Harvard and chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors for Reagan, had an opinion article in the WSJ yesterday that outlined a possible solution to the mortgage crisis. Criteria for the plan is: don't shift burden to taxpayers, don't force banks to eat all the losses, and create an incentive for homeowners to stay in their homes. The idea is that the US government would provide loans to homeowners up to 20% of their mortgage amount, with a 15 year pay-back period and adjustable interest rate based on the two-year treasury note. The whole thing would be funded by selling more two-year treasury notes. This would obviously not stop anyone from walking away from their home if they have negative equity, but it might prompt those that are worried about that scenario happening to them in the future to sti...

Power Pal

Search This Blog