Facebook Loses Users, Satisfaction Higher at Google+ 274
benfrog writes "Facebook has lost what (by the standards of their userbase) is a modest number of users over the last six months, which is perhaps one of the causes of a fall in their stock price. In the meantime, a study shows that Google+ users are more satisfied with the site than Facebook users, who are (understandably) upset about the number of recent UI changes, the amount of advertising, and other elements, according to a statement accompanying the study. Figures also show dramatic growth in Google+ usage."
Re:Misleading google+ figures (Score:5, Informative)
In absolute numbers, that's G+ increasing by 11.6 M and Facebook increasing by 4 M - or G+ increasing 2.9X as fast as Facebook. In percentages, that's G+ increasing by 57% and Facebook increasing by 2.6%. So I'd say that's dramatic growth at G+, and mild growth at Facebook. Mind you, part of that is because Facebook is practically saturated.
Re:Hmmmm, yeah (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, and Google Instant (where photos you take automatically upload to a private area) is the killer feature there - just that alone can be so helpful even if you don't circle anyone or use the other features.
Re:Google+ and Circles (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone can add you to their circles, but unless you either a) post everything as public for EVERYONE to see, or b) add them to one of your circles in return, they won't see anything you post anyway, so what's it matter?
This is one thing Google Plus has done right. The default for posting is to only show your posts to people in your own circles, but you can show stuff to the entire world if you want.
If you want to talk about what's "mean" the only thing I don't like is that people can see who you have in your circles, so sometimes you feel pressure to add someone just to be polite, of course you can always have a circle for those people and not share anything with them... They can't see WHICH circle you put them in...
Re:Google+ and Circles (Score:4, Informative)
Well, the visibility of the things you publish is based on who you have in your circles, so it doesn't really matter who adds you. That's kind of the point of the circles. You don't need a separate "fan" page, for instance, in order to publish different things for public/private consumption.
The high water mark. (Score:4, Informative)
Hardly surprising really that just after the IPO the numbers start flatling. It seemed obvious to me that the IPO was simply to cash in while the going was good, rather than to move on from there.
There's no sustainability in social networking, and I imagine the smart money knew that already. I imagine the people who invested in it were the same ones who thought that the housing market would never crash.
Comment in subject idiocy (Score:1, Informative)
It's amazing how difficult it is to read your entire comment, when half of it is in the subject.
Re:Not just UI changes - stop changing SETTINGS! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It is true (Score:5, Informative)
Facebook's mobile app is mediocre at best. If you believe even half the hype, that will be enough to seriously hurt them in the long run, especially considering they've admitted it themselves that they don't know how to do mobile well.
1.6 billion shares could be dumped in 12 months (Score:5, Informative)
The actual problem for FB is that 1.6 billion shares could be dumped by insiders in the next several months. I don't expect it to happen, but a bunch will. But, but, but... didn't they only sell 421 million shares at the IPO. Yeah, but, insiders have been granted 1.6 billion shares beforehand. See http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/columnist/krantz/story/2012-05-25/facebook-insider-lockup-period/55208546/1 [usatoday.com]
> The onslaught of Facebook stock looks like an avalanche. At the 91-day point after
> the IPO, insiders are able to sell 268 million shares of stock. Between 91 and
> 181 days after the IPO, insiders can sell an additional 137 million shares. And
> then after 181 days following the IPO, another 1.2 billion shares are free to be sold.
I don't think that every insider will cash out (e.g. Mark Z wants to retain control) but obviously a bunch of "paper millionaires" will want to get out while the getting out is still good. For a country-by-country breakdown of Facebook's numbers, over various timeranges, check out http://www.socialbakers.com/facebook-statistics/?interval=last-month#chart-intervals [socialbakers.com]
Re:Misleading google+ figures (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hmmmm, yeah (Score:5, Informative)
That's why some of my friends call it "FazeBook" (or worse .. F**Book). I have no opinion, I don't use it.
Just like LiveJournal before MySpace, the social medium is fad-based. Same with clothes / fashion.