Facebook IPO Analysis: Fake Users and Investment Lessons

Originally published November 26, 2012 | Updated with retrospective analysis June 2025

Executive Summary

This comprehensive analysis examines Facebook’s initial public offering issues, user metrics concerns, and the complex relationship between platform integrity and financial performance during the critical period from 2011-2015. While Facebook’s revenue growth ultimately exceeded skeptics’ expectations, many of the underlying concerns about user authenticity, privacy practices, and regulatory scrutiny proved prescient.

Early Warning Signs: Facebook and Groupon Valuations (2011)

Social Media Bubble Valuations

Before Facebook’s IPO, both Facebook and Groupon represented the frothy valuations of the social media boom. Groupon’s valuations ranged wildly from $1.2 billion to $15 billion within a year, while Facebook estimates varied from Goldman Sachs’ $50 billion to SharesPost’s $82.9 billion.

Goldman Sachs Fee Structure Problems

Goldman’s involvement raised red flags. Despite public relations claims about employing the “best and brightest,” Goldman Sachs Asset Management trailed the average return of its peer group in every category. Goldman’s incentive structure included:

• 4% placement fee
• 0.5% expense fee
• 5% “snatch-back” of investors’ potential profits

Netscape founder Jim Clark, who had invested in Facebook through another firm at a lower price, called Goldman’s fee structure unreasonable, describing it as “just another way for [Goldman] to make money from their clients.”

Facebook Business Model Vulnerabilities

Both Facebook and Groupon succeeded because they were web-based networks requiring minimal management skills, minimum capital to start, and no barriers to entry. This was also their biggest vulnerability.

Facebook Revenue Challenges: Facebook was “free and always will be,” making money from ads and game revenues. The company had tremendous potential to exploit its 500 million users, but faced several hurdles:

• Phone apps didn’t display ads initially
• User acquisition of blocking ad-blocking software
• Fickle user preferences, especially among young users

Competitive Threats: Young entrepreneurs could easily replicate successful models. Catherine Cook’s myyearbook.com, started by a 16-year-old with $250,000, reached a $20 million valuation and offered fresh features like gift-giving and “lunch money.”

Smart investors typically look for highly skilled managers in industries with long-term competitive advantages. Between Groupon and Facebook, neither had established sustainable competitive moats, putting their margins, market share, and expansion abilities at risk.

Facebook IPO Performance and Financial Issues (2012)

Stock Performance After IPO

Facebook’s IPO came to market at $38 on May 17, 2012, rose to $45, but by November 2012 had fallen to $24—a 37% decline from IPO price and 47% from its high.

GAAP Losses and Revenue Decline

For the third quarter of 2012, Facebook lost 2 cents per share versus making 10 cents the prior year. The company lost money every quarter since its IPO on a GAAP accounting basis, with margins squeezed as decelerating revenues couldn’t keep up with growing costs.

Zynga Gaming Revenue Collapse

In 2011, 19% of Facebook’s revenues came from Zynga’s games, but Facebook’s algorithm changes caused sharp revenue declines for both companies. Zynga’s stock fell from $10 at IPO to $2.32 by November 2012, down 76%.

The Zynga Dependency Risk: Facebook’s own SEC filings emphasized the materiality of this relationship. In its 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2012, Facebook stated in bold italics:

“In the first nine months of 2012 and the full 2011 year, we estimate that up to 13% and 19% of our revenue, respectively, was derived from Payments processing fees from Zynga, direct advertising from Zynga, revenue from third parties for ads shown on pages generated by Zynga apps, and Facebook ads and Sponsored Stories displayed on Zynga.com. If Zynga does not maintain its level of engagement with our users or if we are unable to successfully maintain our relationship with Zynga, our financial results could be harmed.”

Contract Renegotiation: By late 2012, Facebook and Zynga were revising their five-year 2010 agreement to terms more favorable to Zynga. The new arrangement allowed Zynga.com to operate independently of Facebook’s login system and virtual payment platform, reducing Facebook’s 30% cut of Zynga’s sales. Any Facebook officer aware of this contract revision possessed material insider information, as Facebook itself had emphasized the relationship’s importance to investors just one month earlier.

Facebook Advertiser Exodus

GM famously pulled $10 million in advertising before Facebook’s IPO because it didn’t get results. Another advertiser left after research showed 80% of clicks Facebook charged for were from bots.

Insider Stock Sales

Between the IPO and year-end, approximately 1.4 billion shares owned by insiders and employees became available for sale. According to Facebook’s August 30, 2012 8-K filing, this excluded Zuckerberg’s 444 million outstanding shares and 60 million option shares because he stated “no intention to conduct any sale transactions for at least 12 months”—though this intention was not a legal obligation.

Schedule of shares available for sale: (From 8K August 30, 2012)

Major Executive Stock Conversions and Sales: After trading hours on October 26, 2012, several senior Facebook officers filed required Form 4s reporting conversion of high-vote “B” shares to tradeable “A” shares:

• Sheryl Sandberg (COO): 34 million shares ($790 million), with 15 million immediately ready for sale
• David Ebersman (CFO): 4.2 million shares ($97 million), with 2.2 million ready for sale
• Theodore Ullyot (General Counsel): 2.5 million shares ($58 million), with 1.4 million ready for sale
• David Fischer (VP Marketing): 1.1 million shares ($26 million), with 568,282 shares ready for sale
• Michael Schroepfer (VP Engineering): 2.8+ million shares ($66 million), with 1.5 million ready for sale
• David Spillane (Chief Accounting Officer): 0.7 million shares ($16 million), with 415,000+ ready for sale

Additionally, 45.7 million vested options held by former employees became eligible for sale on November 14, 2012, with approximately 4 million additional shares from restricted stock unit settlements expected by year-end. As Facebook noted, selling had already begun, with ongoing Form 4 filings posted on the company’s website.

Facebook User Metrics and Fake Account Problems

Facebook Fake User Growth Acceleration

Facebook’s own fraud estimates revealed a growing crisis:

• May 2012 IPO Prospectus: Estimated 5-6% fake accounts
• June 30, 2012 10-Q: Revised upward to 8.7% fake accounts
• The Math: This represented a 64-97% increase in fake users over six months, or 168-287% annualized growth in fraud

By June 30, 2012, Facebook reported 552 million daily active users (DAUs) and 955 million monthly active users (MAUs), with 83 million estimated fakes (91 million if Facebook had already netted out fakes before reporting).

Real Facebook User Behavior Survey Results

Our poll of 50 U.S. Facebook users revealed widespread multiple account usage:

• Gaming accounts separate from personal profiles
• “Spy” accounts for monitoring others (including ex-relationships)
• Fantasy persona accounts for role-playing
• Business accounts incorrectly created as personal profiles
• Fake information provided due to privacy distrust

IT World’s Dan Tynan reported his 13-year-old daughter had at least three Facebook accounts for different purposes, tracking with our survey results suggesting U.S. fake percentages could easily exceed 50%.

Facebook acknowledged the problem was worse in developing countries, admitting this estimate was “subjective opinion and may be flawed.”

Facebook’s Own Admission of Measurement Problems

Facebook’s own SEC filings revealed the depth of user measurement challenges. In their Form 10-Q for June 30, 2012, Facebook admitted:

“There are inherent challenges in measuring usage of our products across large online and mobile populations around the world.”

The company acknowledged that individuals “may maintain one or more Facebook accounts in violation of our terms of service, despite our efforts to detect and suppress such behavior.”

Facebook’s official categorization of problematic accounts included:

• Duplicate accounts: 4.8% of worldwide MAUs (users maintaining multiple accounts)
• User-misclassified accounts: 2.4% of MAUs (personal profiles for businesses, pets, etc.)
• Undesirable accounts: 1.5% of MAUs (profiles for spamming and terms violations)

Critical Admission: Facebook stated these “estimates are based on an internal review of a limited sample of accounts and we apply significant judgment in making this determination… As such, our estimation of duplicate or false accounts may not accurately represent the actual number of such accounts.”

The company also admitted to systematic overcounting through automatic mobile activity, estimating “less than 5% of our estimated worldwide DAUs” resulted from apps automatically contacting servers “with no user action involved.” Geographic location data was similarly unreliable, with users potentially “appearing to be accessing Facebook from the location of the proxy server… rather than from the user’s actual location.”

Facebook even disclosed a major algorithmic error discovered in June 2012 that affected geographic attribution for Q1 2012, overstating U.S. and Canada MAUs by approximately 3%.

Facebook Identity Theft Experience

In June 2011, an imposter created a fake profile using my name and information. To get it removed, Facebook required:

• Completed fraud report form
• URL of the fake profile (discoverable only through Google Alerts)
• Scanned government-issued photo ID
• No human contact or phone verification option

This experience revealed Facebook’s perverse incentives: the platform potentially benefited from identity theft both by counting fake users as real and extracting valuable information from victims trying to remove fraudulent profiles.

Facebook User Verification Problems

The process revealed broader problems:

• No verification required to create fraudulent profiles
• Victims bore the burden of proving identity
• Non-users could be impersonated without knowledge
• Facebook’s “controls” were demonstrably inadequate

Facebook Impersonation Catch-22 Cases

Bianca Bosker of Huffington Post discovered a profile impersonating her in November 2012. While she could get it removed (because the impersonator hadn’t blocked her), Facebook demanded a driver’s license scan and notarized statement for information about the fraudster.

Even worse was the case of “Andrew,” whose impersonator blocked him from viewing his own fake profile. Facebook’s system created an impossible situation:

• Only the real account owner could report fraud
• But Andrew couldn’t access reporting because he was blocked
• His wife couldn’t report it for him
• The impersonator remained protected by Facebook’s own blocking system

Facebook User Growth Deceleration

Facebook US Market Decline

The deceleration was most pronounced in Facebook’s primary revenue market:

September 2011-2012 Growth:

• Daily Active Users: Only 8 million increase (6% growth) from 124M to 132M
• Monthly Active Users: Only 13 million increase (7.3% growth) from 176M to 189M

Facebook Desktop Usage Collapse

From October 2011-2012:

• U.S. desktop visitors declined 10.2% from 166 million to 149 million
• Five consecutive months of desktop decline
• Meanwhile, Myspace’s U.S. audience increased 1% to 28.8 million

Given Facebook’s own estimates of fake account percentages, the number of genuine U.S. users may have actually declined when fraud was factored in.

Facebook Global Growth Patterns

Worldwide Deceleration (September 2011-2012):

• Daily Active Users: 28% growth (down from 55.9% in 2011)
• Monthly Active Users: 26% growth (down from 45% in 2011)
• Mobile growth also decelerating: 61% (down from 92% in 2011)

The Double-Counting Problem: Facebook acknowledged it couldn’t accurately measure multi-platform users, potentially inflating mobile growth numbers. The company estimated 5% of mobile daily users were just automatic activity, but admitted this could be higher.

Facebook Mobile Revenue Strategy Risks

Facebook Sponsored Stories Lawsuit

Facebook’s mobile revenue strategy depended heavily on “sponsored stories”—taking users’ likes and promoting them as endorsements. A California consumer privacy lawsuit threatened this model:

• Adults would be able to opt out under proposed settlement
• Children’s participation required parental consent battles
• Facebook’s core mobile monetization strategy was at legal risk

Facebook Regulatory Backlash

European Resistance: Nordic countries threatened legal action against Facebook’s “suggested post” spam, claiming it violated privacy laws. European regulators said Facebook’s privacy policy changes conflicted with law.

New Ad Problems: Facebook began inserting unsolicited “suggested posts” from brands users never liked, further alienating users and regulators.

Mark Zuckerberg Trust and Governance Issues

Zuckerberg College IM Revelations

Mark Zuckerberg’s controlling 57% voting share raised governance concerns, especially given his revealed college attitudes:

The Infamous Exchange:

• Zuck: “I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS”
• Friend: “What? How’d you manage that one?”
• Zuck: “People just submitted it. I don’t know why. They ‘trust me.’ Dumb f*cks.”

While Zuckerberg expressed regret about the IMs, the pattern of privacy violations and user exploitation suggested the underlying philosophy remained entrenched in Facebook’s culture.

Facebook Governance Accountability Issues

With Zuckerberg maintaining control through a tiered stock structure, users and advertisers had little recourse for addressing:

• Privacy policy violations
• Fake user proliferation
• Algorithm changes affecting reach
• Data sharing with third parties

Facebook Legal and Regulatory Pressures

Facebook Multiple Litigation Fronts

Active Lawsuits (2012):

• IPO-related litigation from investors
• $15 billion lawsuit for secret user tracking after logout
• California “sponsored stories” privacy case
• European regulatory investigations

Emerging Issues:

• Child pornography enforcement failures
• Private message scanning admissions
• Mobile number exposure vulnerabilities
• Data sharing violations

Facebook Regulatory Environment Shift

Facebook’s rapid international expansion coincided with increasing privacy regulation worldwide. The company faced:

• European Directive violations on privacy communications
• GDPR precursor regulations
• U.S. Federal Trade Commission scrutiny
• State-level privacy law development

Facebook Stock Trading Strategy and Lessons (2015)

Facebook Put Options Results

I bought puts on Facebook shortly after the IPO and monetized them profitably as the stock declined 37% from IPO price.

The Reinvestment Mistake: Using profits to buy additional puts gave back gains when Facebook’s stock recovered. Key lesson: when betting “windfall” profits from previous trades, maintain strict loss control.

Short Selling Risk Management Rules

John Templeton’s Short-Selling Rules:

1. Control your losses
2. Remember the first rule

Templeton Tech Bubble Strategy

John Templeton’s approach during the 1999/2000 tech bubble offered relevant lessons:

• Focused on price action over fundamental views
• Targeted stocks that tripled from IPO price during lockup expiration
• Used strict stop-losses when trades moved against him
• Took profits at 95% declines or PE ratios below 30

Results: Risking $185 million, Templeton made $90 million profit—demonstrating that even skilled short-sellers find execution challenging and profits more modest than expected.

Market Timing vs Facebook Analysis

What We Got Right:

• User fraud was a serious, growing problem
• Privacy practices would face regulatory scrutiny
• Growth was decelerating in key markets
• The business model had structural vulnerabilities

What We Underestimated:

• Market tolerance for governance issues during revenue growth
• Management’s ability to pivot and adapt
• Network effects’ resilience despite user quality problems
• Advertiser willingness to pay despite bot traffic

Facebook Analysis: What Proved Correct

Facebook User Authenticity Crisis

The fake user problems we identified became ongoing major challenges:

• Congressional Hearings (2018): Zuckerberg testified specifically about fake accounts and foreign interference
• Quarterly Fake Account Removal: Facebook later admitted to removing billions of fake accounts quarterly
• Bot Networks: Automated and inauthentic behavior became central to regulatory concerns
• Election Integrity: Fake accounts played roles in misinformation campaigns

Facebook Privacy and Data Misuse

Early concerns about data handling proved prescient:

• Cambridge Analytica (2018): Validated concerns about third-party data misuse
• Regulatory Fines: Billions in penalties from EU, FTC, and other regulators
• Ongoing Litigation: Privacy-related lawsuits continue globally
• Platform Integrity: Content moderation and authenticity remain central challenges

Facebook Regulatory Scrutiny Materialized

The regulatory challenges we anticipated came to pass:

• Congressional Testimony: Multiple appearances by Zuckerberg (2018, 2021)
• GDPR Compliance: Massive fines and ongoing European regulatory pressure
• Antitrust Action: Multiple government investigations and lawsuits
• Content Regulation: Requirements for political ad transparency, hate speech removal

Facebook Platform Governance Issues

Systematic problems we identified became recognized industry challenges:

• Algorithm Transparency: Calls for openness about content promotion
• Political Manipulation: Foreign interference in elections via platform
• Mental Health: Research on social media’s psychological impacts
• Advertiser Brand Safety: Ongoing concerns about ad placement

Facebook Revenue Growth vs Market Skepticism

Facebook Financial Performance Success

Despite persistent user quality and governance concerns, Facebook’s financial performance was remarkable:

Revenue Growth:

• 2012: ~$5 billion
• 2023: ~$135 billion
• Average annual growth rate: ~35%

Stock Performance:

• From $38 IPO to $300+ range at peaks
• Market capitalization exceeded $800 billion at times
• Consistent profitability after initial post-IPO losses

User Growth Continuation:

• Monthly active users grew from ~1 billion (2012) to ~3 billion (2023)
• Successfully monetized mobile transition
• Expanded globally despite regulatory resistance

Facebook Success Factors Underestimated

Advertising Effectiveness: Despite bot traffic and fake users, advertisers found Facebook’s targeting and reach valuable enough to drive sustained revenue growth.

Mobile Monetization: Facebook successfully transformed mobile from a threat to a primary revenue driver, with mobile ads becoming majority of revenue.

Platform Expansion: Strategic acquisitions (Instagram 2012, WhatsApp 2014) diversified revenue streams and user engagement.

Network Effects Resilience: User engagement patterns proved more durable than user count quality issues, with time spent on platform remaining high.

International Markets: Revenue growth in developing markets offset U.S. stagnation concerns.

Social Media Market Efficiency Questions

The disconnect between platform integrity concerns and sustained financial performance raises important questions:

Investor Priorities: Markets appeared to weight revenue growth and user engagement over governance and authenticity issues.

Regulatory Discount: Investors seemed to view regulatory fines and oversight as manageable business costs rather than existential threats.

Network Effects Premium: The platform’s social network characteristics created switching costs that protected revenue despite user experience degradation.

Advertiser Behavior: Despite concerns about bot traffic and fake users, advertiser spending continued growing, suggesting either acceptance of these issues or difficulty measuring their impact.

Facebook Investment Analysis Lessons

Platform Analysis Timing vs Accuracy

Analytical Accuracy vs Investment Returns: Our fundamental analysis correctly identified serious structural problems with Facebook’s business model, user metrics, and governance. However, these correct insights didn’t translate to sustained investment returns.

Market Timeline Mismatch: Problems we identified played out over years rather than quarters, while investment positions required much shorter timeframes for profitability.

Revenue Growth Trump Card: Sustained revenue growth appeared to override concerns about user authenticity, privacy practices, and regulatory risks in investor decision-making.

Social Media Investment Risk Management

Position Sizing: Never bet more than you can afford to lose, even when fundamental analysis appears compelling.

Profit Taking: When speculative positions become profitable, taking some profits off the table preserves capital for when analysis proves wrong on timing.

Stop Losses: John Templeton’s emphasis on loss control proved more important than being right about fundamental problems.

Reinvestment Risk: Using profits from one successful trade to double down on the same thesis can eliminate all gains when markets reverse.

Platform Investment Market Structure

Short-Term vs. Long-Term: Markets may correctly price long-term risks while still experiencing significant short-term volatility that punishes premature positions.

Growth vs. Governance: High-growth technology companies may receive significant market premiums that offset governance and operational concerns.

Regulatory Risk Pricing: Markets may systematically underestimate regulatory costs until they become immediate rather than potential.

Platform Economics: Network effect businesses may be more resilient to quality and authenticity issues than traditional business models.

Current Social Media Platform Relevance

Platform Integrity Ongoing Challenges

User authenticity and content quality continue to challenge social media platforms:

• Regulatory Compliance Costs: Billions spent annually on content moderation and compliance
• Advertiser Confidence: Ongoing brand safety concerns affect pricing and demand
• User Trust: Privacy scandals continue to impact user behavior and engagement
• Competitive Threats: Platforms with better privacy or authenticity records gain market share

Social Media Analysis Framework Value

The methodology developed for analyzing social media companies remains relevant:

• User Metric Quality Assessment: Scrutinize claimed user numbers and engagement statistics
• Regulatory Risk Evaluation: Assess exposure to privacy, antitrust, and content regulation
• Revenue Concentration Analysis: Monitor dependence on advertising vs. diversified revenue streams
• Management Accountability: Evaluate governance structures and leadership track records

Tech Platform Regulatory Environment

The regulatory landscape has evolved significantly since our original analysis:

• Global Privacy Regulations: GDPR, CCPA, and similar laws worldwide
• Antitrust Enforcement: Increased scrutiny of platform market power
• Content Regulation: Requirements for political advertising transparency and hate speech removal
• Data Portability: Push for interoperability and user data control

Platform Investment Decision Framework

Key considerations for social media and platform investments today:

• ESG Integration: Environmental, social, and governance factors increasingly impact valuations
• Regulatory Cost Modeling: Factor compliance expenses and potential fines into financial projections
• Competitive Moat Assessment: Evaluate sustainability of network effects against regulatory fragmentation
• Management Crisis Response: Assess leadership’s ability to navigate privacy scandals and regulatory challenges

Conclusion: Platform Analysis Complexity

This comprehensive analysis demonstrates the inherent complexity of translating platform integrity concerns into investment outcomes. While our fundamental concerns about user fraud, privacy practices, and regulatory scrutiny proved largely correct and prescient, Facebook’s business model showed remarkable resilience and adaptability.

Social Media Investment Insights

Governance vs. Growth Trade-offs: Markets may tolerate significant governance and authenticity issues when revenue growth remains strong, though regulatory costs and reputation risks accumulate over time.

Network Effects Premium: Social platforms with strong network effects may be more resilient to quality degradation than traditional businesses, though this resilience has limits.

Regulatory Risk Timeline: Platform regulation moves slowly but persistently, creating long-term headwinds that may not immediately impact financial performance.

Management Adaptability: Leadership’s ability to navigate crises and pivot business models may be more important than initial business model perfection.

Facebook Analysis Methodology Lessons

Multi-Timeframe Analysis: Distinguish between short-term trading opportunities and long-term structural concerns when developing investment theses.

Market Efficiency Limitations: Markets may be efficient at pricing known information but struggle with novel regulatory and technological risks.

Platform Economics: Traditional valuation methods may inadequately capture both the opportunities and risks of network effect businesses.

Stakeholder Analysis: Consider all stakeholders (users, advertisers, regulators, employees) when assessing platform sustainability, not just financial metrics.

Future Platform Investment Framework

The ongoing evolution of social media regulation, privacy expectations, and competitive dynamics suggests several areas for continued focus:

Regulatory Compliance: Factor increasing compliance costs and potential business model restrictions into platform valuations.

User Trust Metrics: Develop better methods for assessing authentic user engagement and platform integrity beyond simple user counts.

Competitive Dynamics: Monitor how regulatory requirements and privacy expectations affect competitive positioning among platforms.

Technology Evolution: Assess how new technologies (AI, blockchain, decentralized platforms) might disrupt existing social media business models.

The Facebook analysis ultimately illustrates that being analytically correct about significant problems doesn’t guarantee investment success, but the analytical framework remains valuable for understanding platform businesses and their long-term sustainability challenges.

Contemporary Validation: Platform Fraud Continues (2022-2024)

The concerns about platform integrity and user fraud identified in Facebook’s early years continue to manifest across the technology industry. Recent high-profile cases demonstrate that the user authenticity issues we identified in 2011-2012 remain endemic to platform businesses.

The Frank Financial Aid Platform Case (2022)

JPMorgan Chase acquired startup Frank for $175 million in 2021, believing the platform served 4.25 million students. However, according to JPMorgan’s lawsuit, founder Charlie Javice allegedly paid a data science professor $18,000 to create a list of 4.265 million fake customer accounts. When JPMorgan tested marketing campaigns to Frank’s customer list, only 28% of emails were delivered (versus their typical 99% rate) and just 1.1% were opened (versus 30% typical rate). Frank actually had fewer than 300,000 real customer accounts, according to the bank’s allegations.

The IRL Social Media Case (2024)

Similarly, the SEC charged Abraham Shafi, founder of social media startup “IRL,” with defrauding investors of $170 million by making false statements about the company’s growth and user acquisition. According to the SEC complaint, Shafi portrayed IRL as having organically attracted 12 million users when the company actually “spent millions of dollars on advertisements that offered incentives to download the IRL app.”

These cases demonstrate that the user authenticity and platform integrity issues we identified at Facebook remain systemic challenges across technology platforms today. The Frank case particularly echoes our analysis of inflated user metrics and verification problems, while the IRL case reflects concerns about paid versus organic user growth—patterns that proved prescient across the broader technology landscape.

Disclosure

I bought and monetized puts on Facebook shortly after the IPO, as reported in the Wall Street Journal (“Investors Bet on Facebook Fall,” Kaitlyn Kiernan and Jonathan Cheng, May 19, 2012). Subsequent reinvestment of profits in additional puts resulted in giving back gains, illustrating the challenge of timing market reactions to fundamental concerns. Since then, I have held no position (long or short) in Facebook. or Meta other than through diversified funds.

About the Author

Janet Tavakoli is the president of Tavakoli Structured Finance founded in 2003. She a globally recognized structured finance expert and derivatives authority who has advised financial regulators, testified as an expert witness in major financial litigation, and authored definitive works on credit derivatives and securitization.

For comprehensive analysis of structured finance products and securitization strategies, consult Tavakoli Structured Finance.

Sources and References

1. Arrington, Michael. “Facebook Is Secretly Building a Phone.” TechCrunch, September 19, 2010.
2. Bercouvici, Jeff. “Facebook Sends Mixed Messages on Spam with Recent Moves.” Forbes, November 21, 2012.
3. Bosker, Bianca. “I Was Impersonated on Facebook.” Huffington Post, November 27, 2012.
4. Drury, Kate. “Facebook Accused of Being Lax on Child Porn.” The Age, August 20, 2012.
5. Facebook, Inc. “Form S-1 Registration Statement.” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, filed May 16, 2012.
6. Facebook, Inc. “Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2012.” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, filed July 31, 2012.
7. Facebook, Inc. “Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2012.” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, filed October 24, 2012.
8. Facebook, Inc. “Form 8-K Current Report.” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, filed August 30, 2012.
9. Facebook, Inc. “Prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4).” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, filed May 18, 2012.
10. Geron, Tomio. “YY: A Cross Between Skype, Zynga and American Idol.” Forbes, November 21, 2012.
11. Kiernan, Kaitlyn, and Jonathan Cheng. “Investors Bet on Facebook Fall.” Wall Street Journal, May 19, 2012.
12. Lyons, Dan. “Mark Cuban: Facebook’s Sponsored Posts Are Driving Away Brands.” ReadWrite, November 2012.
13. McCraney, Lacy. “Groupon Singled Out in Lawsuit: Man Claims Chicago-based Website Offers Illegal Gift Certificates.” NBC Chicago, March 2, 2011.
14. Miller, Catherine Cook. “Female Mark Zuckerberg: How Catherine Cook Created myyearbook.com.” Daily Mail, March 2011.
15. Prakash, Suriya. “Facebook Lists User Phone Numbers for All to See.” Fox News, October 2012.
16. Sablan, Kevin. “Myspace Grows as Facebook Slows.” Orange County Register, November 27, 2012.
17. Schrems, Max. “Europe v. Facebook Legal Challenge.” Various European privacy law violations, 2012.
18. “Spam in Your Hand.” AARP Magazine, October 2012.
19. Teitelbaum, Richard. “Blankfein Flunks Asset Management as Clark Vows No More Goldman.” Bloomberg News, January 24, 2011.
20. “The Next Web Reports Facebook Scanning Private Messages.” The Next Web, 2012.
21. Tynan, Dan. “Facebook’s Crazy Catch 22: How Imposters Can Assume Your Identity and Run Wild.” IT World, November 29, 2012.
22. Tynan, Dan. “Is Facebook Dying?” IT World, September 28, 2012.
23. Vargas, Jose Antonio. “The Face of Facebook.” The New Yorker, September 20, 2010.
24. “Washington Post Reports European Regulator Calls for Changes to New Facebook Privacy Policy.” Washington Post, November 23, 2012.
25. “Facebook’s $82.9 Billion Valuation Tops Amazon.com.” Bloomberg, January 28, 2011.
26. “Groupon Readies for an I.P.O.” New York Times DealBook, January 13, 2011.
27. “83 Million Facebook Users are Fake.” CNN, August 2, 2012.
28. Picchi, Aimee. “JPMorgan paid $175 million for a hot startup. Now it claims its CEO faked 4 million clients.” CBS News, December 23, 2022.
29. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “SEC Charges Founder of Social Media Company ‘IRL’ with $170 Million Fraud.” Press Release 2024-92, July 31, 2024.

Read more finance articles by Janet Tavakoli