Seeking Alpha

Facebook (FB) slides 4.4% to $21.85 premarket following a Barron's cover story suggesting the...

Facebook (FB) slides 4.4% to $21.85 premarket following a Barron's cover story suggesting the shares could be deemed expensive even at $15.
From other sites
Comments (18)
  • sa_member_756157
    , contributor
    Comments (1368) | Send Message
    Short sell in progress. They'll collapse the shares down then when you sell, they'll buy them back. With their high speed trade computers they can make money all the way down as you sell, and all the way up as you try to buy back in. That explains what you're seeing doesn't it?


    I realize that most people who have been trying to trade their own shares already know all of this. But some people don't and its worth sharing the info. about this once illegal practice that also involves use of media.


    Ban short selling before no one can make a dime in profit except the top 1% with high speed computers.
    24 Sep 2012, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • surfnspy
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
    Who's "they"?
    24 Sep 2012, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • Gloube
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
    "They" is the FBI and the CIA of course
    24 Sep 2012, 11:06 AM Reply Like
  • Abraxas
    , contributor
    Comments (299) | Send Message
    "Ban short selling"... seriously? Short selling prevents bubbles and is a very healthy arbitrageur for the market place.


    If you think Facebook is worth a higher price, you buy it. If you think it has reached the right price, you sell it. And if you think it is overpriced, you (borrow the shares and) short it. That's how healthy markets are supposed to operate. There is absolutely nothing wrong with proper short selling.


    Short selling is only harmful when done illegally. That is, when the short sell proceeds without having previously secured the borrowed shares. Other than that, short selling is very healthy for the marketplace.
    24 Sep 2012, 11:14 AM Reply Like
  • Ray Lopez
    , contributor
    Comments (1753) | Send Message
    Perhaps a Tobin Tax is what the OP meant...not a bad idea as liquidity is overrated (when you most need it, it dries up, so why not tax it when it is abundant? No big loss if you do).
    24 Sep 2012, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • surfnspy
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
    Ya, and the evil "1%ers."
    24 Sep 2012, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • Japhro
    , contributor
    Comments (11) | Send Message
    Just ban HFT activity, short selling is a necessary part of the market
    24 Sep 2012, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • Ceres
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
    There you go! Now THAT would be helpful! Short selling is vilified to an unreasonable degree. That's mostly due to ignorance. To LEGALLY short sell a stock requires borrowing the shares first, which isn't so easily done with many stocks that are appealing short sales. Or it is expensive to do. Also, most short sellers aren't "naked" shorts, but have some sort of hedged short position.


    HFT is a separate matter. If there is a problem of fairness in the markets, I'd blame HFT before short selling. Yet even HFT is not a collusive mass of "they"! It is a small number of firms, not individuals, who have an unfair advantage due to use of technology not available to retail/ personal or even most professional investors or investment managers. Yes, a very big problem, but not a nameless cartel of conspirators.
    24 Sep 2012, 02:01 PM Reply Like
  • realitybiter
    , contributor
    Comments (227) | Send Message
    I think folks need to detach their love of the service and their love of the stock.


    1) They say they have nearly a billion users (some are duplicates). How many users in the world matter? (From an ad dollar standpoint) A little less than a billion? This implies they cannot grow the user base.


    2) Will the model work? Don't know. I am sure somehow it will work. Subscription? Who knows. This is an enormous assumption and faith.
    How is the netflix model working? There is no way you can pay a cheap flat fee for content and also get great content. Why do you think it is expensive to go to the movie theatre? Eventually content providers quit letting them effectively steal the material. That is where we currently are with NFLX.


    3) Privacy. I think this issue has not been fully appreciated. Certainly not priced in. When folks decide to get really private, FB will be in great pain.


    I think $2 is a better target.
    24 Sep 2012, 09:46 AM Reply Like
  • jamesbwood
    , contributor
    Comments (306) | Send Message
    I have used FB daily and love it. But I don't buy products or pay for "extras" on Facebook Games. I'm not sure who does. Clearly some people do but what fraction of the users is this - what is the avg amount spent by FB per user?


    If they go to a sub. model, someone else will invent a free version, or we will use an already existing free version, and within months we will all have moved to the new platform.


    I wanted to buy into FB 8 years ago but it was private equity then and therefore not available for us mere middle class mortals.
    24 Sep 2012, 10:16 AM Reply Like
  • Minutemen
    , contributor
    Comments (1830) | Send Message
    If you read the Barron's article, even the $15 stock price was considered generous. This is third article by Barron's on FB and they have been very critical from the outset, warning investors not to buy into the IPO or the stock.
    24 Sep 2012, 10:20 AM Reply Like
  • idkmybffjill
    , contributor
    Comments (1826) | Send Message
    WOW some of those facebook puts are up over 300%. Damn.
    24 Sep 2012, 10:39 AM Reply Like
  • Moon Kil Woong
    , contributor
    Comments (12411) | Send Message
    Actually, Facebook is expensive at $10. All things considered, it is possible that Facebook may have to take a hit on earnings to reposition themselves as the faddishness dissapears and the myspace-likeness starts to emerge. You can only monetize such sites to a certain level before they just get skanky.
    24 Sep 2012, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • Ceres
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
    Every time I look at the comments on a corporate page on Facebook, I observe that "skankiness" seems to have set in already. The bulk of the "user engagement" is mostly spam and babble. Is their any faddishness left to Facebook? To some maybe, I guess. I don't think Facebook can be monetized even as-is.


    Yes, I believe you are correct, Mook Kil Wonk: Facebook IS expensive at $10. I have had similar thoughts since prior to the IPO. So have many readers of the Wall Street Journal online community, given their comments.
    24 Sep 2012, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • commander
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
    I think Barrons is a month late with that story. because Zuck has made some significant changes during the past thirty days...some that directly address the Barrons critiques.
    24 Sep 2012, 11:16 AM Reply Like
  • Trader's Profit Compass
    , contributor
    Comments (2045) | Send Message
    Barron's is a rear-view mirror publication. Stopped getting it for this reason. They identify trends 9 months after one starts and just before it ends......too many examples to list.......
    24 Sep 2012, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Ceres
    , contributor
    Comments (85) | Send Message
    True, regarding Barron's. It IS mostly recycled content from the Wall Street Journal and a few other sources!


    In this particular case, I don't think the retroactive viewpoint detracts from its validity. Facebook's recent announcements e.g. possible introduction of a search engine service, not yet included in Barron's coverage, don't make me feel any better about the future outlook for Facebook stock prices.
    24 Sep 2012, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • rephinbar
    , contributor
    Comments (228) | Send Message
    All that Zuck made are vague comments - nothing concrete and many people like you bought into the hype of it. There are lots of articles on SA explaining in depth the issues FB is facing. None are trivial and none have a concrete solution yet, so that leaves this stock very highly priced at this point.
    24 Sep 2012, 04:41 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs