DISQUS

I'm very disappointed with the new format. The tabs make for a clumsier look and feel. The single page profile is cleaner. I don't know why they had to fix something that wasn't broken. I don't see the migration to the new format effecting Fb's user base, at least in the intermediate term, but I imagine the other social networks are taking notes. The lesson: keep it clean, simple, and visually appealing.

Congratulations, Nick. Happy anniversary!

For some of us Twitter is not necessarily a medium for providing true status updates as it is a microblog - that is, providing snippets of insight or highlighting news items. So the "is twittering" prefix actually provided some much-needed context. For example, if I Twittered "Oil prices expected to reach $200 a barrel by mid 2009," the status update of "is twittering" helps with the flow. Otherwise it says "David is Oil prices are expected . . . etc," which is clumsy. I actually removed the app as a result of the change.

No doubt Blodgett was discredited during the .com implosion. But it's always interesting to read any contribution to 2.0 valuation theory.

Nick, you must be inspired by the valuation for Huffington Post. You too can be a millionaire blogger!

Just an FYI: SAI values Twitter (a "contender") at $75 million. It's easily confused as the real-time valuation figures are in thousands.

Check out mEgo.

http://beta.mego.com/site/en_us/login

The NVCA (National Venture Capital Association) just published a report - Fastest Growing Regions for VC Outside Silicon Valley. The D.C. metro area ranked fifth with a 71% increase in the number of deals over the last ten years (105 to 180), and a 130% increase in funding ($558 mil to $1.3 bil).

http://www.nvca.org/pdf/Fast_Growing_07Q4.pdf

The main problem is the precedent it sets. Analysts and pundits will expecting such disclosures in the future, and if they are not forthcoming, or are hedged, this is the same as bad news. It certainly would seem to indicate that FB has no plans for an IPO anytime in the forseeable future. Based on 2008 est. $50 million EBITDA and an estimated valuation of $15 billion, the implied forward P/E ratio is about 300.

There's Rackspace too, but clearly Joyent is Facebook-centric.

I have to admit, 2.0 valuation science is becoming eerily similar to that of late 90s tech stocks. The difference is that - so far - there is no attempt at "revisionist analysis" - that is, inventing new metrics simply to justify lofty price tags. Given the size of investments relative to AUM, it's clear that the VC/PE guys are taking a fairly conservative approach and not looking for a quick exit. They want to be there should things take off, but not be hammered should they go sour.

Just a bit of perspective: DivX, a developer of media app-related products and services has a market cap of nearly $500 million, but earned $11 million on revenues of $77 million for the year ended 9/2007. Maybe not a fair comp, but is Slide even close?