Facebook 4Q Monthly Active Users Up 16%

REPLAY VIDEO
Your next video will start in
Pause

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments

  • VIDEO TEXT

Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) –- Telsey Advisory Group Senior Research Analyst Tom Forte discusses Facebook earnings and what the numbers mean for the company with Trish Regan, Adam Johnson and Cory Johnson on Bloomberg Television’s “Street Smart.” Forte does not own any stock in Facebook. (Source: Bloomberg)

Take on the numbers?

If you look at the numbers, they were very good.

Mobile advertising was more than one point $2 billion.

The real action from facebook wasn't in the numbers, but on the earnings when i talked about the decline in teen usage and holding the ad load.

Doesn't this effectively quell the naysayers?

Mobile daily active users up 49%? the numbers are fantastic, without a doubt.

Use saw the company basically went horizontal.

They gave you the opportunity to flip through ads on a left right basis.

What would be a concern?

Social networking 2.0, we talk about teens versus moms will stop generally speaking, teens are the fire starters.

They make a brand popular and in the moms make it mainstream.

When a search you monetize, the teens leave the service.

It's not cool but the moms are a better demographic to monetize.

Even if facebook does something in that regard, the great buying opportunity.

So moms are a better demo than teams -- better demo than teens customer they are more likable.

Is in the issue that you want the next iteration?

Your 13 to 17-year-old is going to be the next mom.

The 13 to 17-year-old is more likely to drop to the next service their parent is not on like snapshot.

Then the moms get on snap chat and they're able to monetize the moms.

You don't want to be on the same site as your mom.

You don't want to be in a company that's making money.

Not all investors are as hip as trish.

What you see with this research is what facebook might have been looking at with instagram.

A lot of people look askance at spending a billion dollars, but spending $700 billion to buy a company with zero revenue looks crazy.

I think facebook look at the growth chart and the one that struck me was the android users for instagram.

Those are people having a social networking experience that has nothing to do with facebook all stop not only were they not using facebook, they were going somewhere else to be social and that's an x essential risk for these guys.

Since we have you here, what do you make of this announcement that lenovo would be buying the handset business from google?

Independent of the purchase price, i think it's a great deal for google.

If you look at motorola and what it means, you are looking at a one billion operating loss to the extent they increase their investment spent.

I think this would be a good deal for google.

It points out what a bad deal it was in the first place.

It painted a giant target on their back that any inventor wanted to have it may end up costing google.

They thought they were buying an ip to protect them from getting sued.

To the extent they needed to support the android operating system, the deal it made sense will stop we will see how the cards layout but google has a lot of operating momentum right now.

Maybe they don't need to own a handset any fracture.

When you look at the mobile ad spending, i see turnaround with these guys have gone from having nothing and mobile to an amazing thing in mobile really quickly.

Is that something that will continue?

If you look at the three business models, commerce emma advertising, and payments, mobile advertising is starting to take off -- if you look at paypal -- mobile payments are still early stage.

For facebook and twitter, mobile advertising will continue and both of those companies will exploit those huge opportunities.

Thank you for being here.

Cory johnson, always good having

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.

Advertisement

BTV Channel Finder

Channel_finder_loader

ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change