Google dominates (1) and I assume Facebook is trying to dominate (2) which includes a lot more display advertising (and TV, and billboards). Facebook probably thinks a lot of demand-driving advertising can be accomplished through viral online marketing through FB platforms and they are likely trying to exploit these channels with services for paying customers.
Imagine paying Facebook to simulate something being trendy among people's trend-setting friends. It'll be a fine line but this must be what they hope to do.
Agree the $100B is too high, but certainly they're easily a profitable company, long-term.
> 1) ones that give you what you want
> 2) ones that drive demand
A big part of Google's success is that #1 is much easier to prove than #2.
"People bought our product more because they had become familiar with it over the last month via newspaper/radio/Facebook ads" is a hard-to-prove claim.
"We got X clicks from Google ads leading directly to Y purchases" is much easier.
1) ones that give you what you want
2) ones that drive demand
Google dominates (1) and I assume Facebook is trying to dominate (2) which includes a lot more display advertising (and TV, and billboards). Facebook probably thinks a lot of demand-driving advertising can be accomplished through viral online marketing through FB platforms and they are likely trying to exploit these channels with services for paying customers.
Imagine paying Facebook to simulate something being trendy among people's trend-setting friends. It'll be a fine line but this must be what they hope to do.
Agree the $100B is too high, but certainly they're easily a profitable company, long-term.