Share This

Showing posts with label Social Networking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Networking. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Texting dilutes relationships

In our fast-paced world, texting is taking the place of face-to-face social encounters and devaluing our relationships. - AFP Photo

When people communicate with gadgets, rather than face-to-face; we increase the quantity, but perhaps not the quality, of our interactions.

I DON’T want to say something that is so painfully apparent that I get labelled as Captain Obvious, or even worse, as Admiral Apparent; but technology is changing the way we live.

Thank you, Ensign Evident.

Specifically, the way we socially interact is changing, and I’m not talking about our friendships on your favourite social media network. A recent study in the United States showed that more and more people are using their phones not to actually talk to anyone but to text.

The ratio of texts to phone calls was 5-1. In fact, texting is becoming the preferred method to ask someone out. That should come as no surprise, as the alternatives of the awkward phone call, or worse – the sweaty, white-knuckled face-to-face ask-out – are just terrible options; so terrible that it’s a wonder humans could even reproduce prior to the text message.

About one third of those surveyed said that they prefer to ask the person they are interested in to meet in a group setting, rather than meeting for a one-on-one traditional date.

The rationale, besides the obviousness of it being less awkward, is that if they don’t click, they will waste less time, as opposed to several hours on a date.

Which makes it seem that people are like paperbacks which should be judged by their synopsis before one commits to spend time with that person.

But why is texting becoming the way that we socially interact? It seems like the refuge of the introvert, but it’s so widespread that it can’t just be introverts who are choosing this method of communication. Extroverts – those assertive bold individuals that crave and seem to thrive off human interaction – must also be texting, even if it seems to go against their nature.

Why is this? The advantage to texting, even if you’re an extrovert, is that you engage others on your own time and pace. The great thing about texts is you can take the time to get it right, whereas in a face-to-face encounter, the right words may only come at the end of the conversation.

Also, phone calls and speaking face-to-face have the problem where you actually have to listen to the other person, you know ... talk. Even that takes time.

In a text message, first off, most people won’t send you a life story via text. Secondly, if you see a message more than a sentence long, you can simply skim it, or not read it at all and fire back an emoticon.

Not sure what to say? Or didn’t even bother reading? Send that smiley with the grimace, it’s emotionally ambiguous.

If people were telling a happy story, this Swiss army knife of emoticons looks sufficiently pleasant that they’ll think you get it; if the story was tragic, it looks dissatisfied enough that they’ll think you empathise with them. Emoticons are the inauthentic, ineffectual, pre-packaged greeting cards of text messaging.

Does this mean texting is making us all into self-centered introverts? Yes it does.

There’s no other way around it. If texting takes the edge off asking people for dates and conversing, it also takes the edge off rejecting people.

It’s hard to say “no” to someone face-to-face, but over a text message, it’s easy. That’s why there’re so many confrontational people in online forums and message boards on the Internet.

How many people do you argue with in real life? And how many people do you argue with online? If you’re sucked into actually commenting on the Internet, you’ll probably end up arguing with everyone!

If texting makes it easier to interact because the weight of interaction is reduced, it also makes our relationships more fleeting. Take for instance an interaction I had the other night on Steam, a gaming platform. I logged on with a couple of friends to get some online gaming going on. One of them introduced me to a friend, and we added him to our party.

Now when I say introduced, I mean he typed “My friend wants to play”, and he then popped up on the messaging service and said, “Hi”. That was it. He was in.

One of my friends just disappeared – went AFK or “Away From Keyboard” – something that probably wouldn’t happen in real life. It’s not like we’d agree to play squash and then somebody just walked away without telling us, that would be rude. But online, it was accepted.

Then my other friend had trouble with his computer and had to reboot. I ended up playing with the friend of a friend, who I didn’t know at all, except that we’d said hello.

Now that is the great thing about the Internet and texting. We started playing and it was fine, communicating like we knew each other, polite laughter and all. Halfway through the game, I started having trouble with my connection, and thinking it might be a sign (to perhaps go off and write this article!), I exited the game without bothering to sign back in and give an explanation to my new “friend”.

I too had just walked out of the squash game with no explanation, because I knew it wouldn’t really bother the stranger I’d been playing with, and I’m sure it didn’t bother him.

Communicating via text is great, it’s easy, it puts things on our own terms. But maybe human relations were never meant to be that simple, and ultimately, relationships are reciprocal – we get out of them what we put in, and if all we put in are text messages ... then that’s really all we’ll get back.


Big Smile No Teeth by JASON GODFREY
Jason Godfrey can be seen hosting The LINK on Life Inspired (Astro B.yond Ch 728).

Related post:

Technologies: Life like video games?

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Facebook paparazzi

People should exercise a little consideration and common sense when uploading photos of others. 

I RECENTLY saw some extremely unflattering photos of a friend on Facebook.

One photo shows her at a party with a drink in one hand and a cocktail sausage on a stick in the other. Her mouth is half open as she guides the sausage towards it, and her eyes have a wild, glazed look about them. The caption reads, “Come to Mama!” In another photo, she’s drinking her wine with one eye closed and the other rolling upwards, as she hovers around the half empty platter of sausages. In yet another photo, she’s sitting on a sofa with her blouse unflatteringly bunched up over her stomach, giving the impression that she’s just about to give birth – possibly to a giant sausage.

If you didn’t know this woman, you’d probably mistake her for a humongous wine-glugging sausage scoffer.

Damage

In reality, she’s a moderate drinker of average weight who only ate one sausage that night. But the damage has already been done. The Facebook friends of the woman who posted the photos, many of whom probably don’t know my friend all that well, will have already formed an opinion of my friend just by looking at those photos.

Like who cares what strangers might think about us? Some of you might be saying just about now. And you do have a point, to a certain extent. But what if you’re going for a job interview and the person responsible for hiring you doesn’t know you but remembers seeing you in a Facebook photo stuffing your face and looking as if you like to lubricate yourself way too much? And what if the job you’re after entails operating heavy, dangerous machinery; or dispensing potent medication; or anything to do with air traffic control? Jobs that require a clear head at all times.

All I can say is that you’re screwed. You might as well burn your interview clothes, delete the carefully worded résumé and drown your sorrows in a bottle of chardonnay.

In the same way that celebrities are wary of the paparazzi, who take great pleasure in snapping them falling out of bars and nightclubs in the wee hours of the morning in a dishevelled state, or going to the grocery store for a loaf of bread without any make-up, regular, everyday people now need to be extra careful when someone whips out a camera or an iPhone at a social function.

I have nothing against my photo being taken and subsequently being posted on Facebook, but I wish that people would exercise some consideration and common sense when uploading photos of others.

We all know Facebook is full of narcissistic, egocentric, self-absorbed photographers. We see evidence of their activities in newsfeeds every day. For example, I’ve seen photos of a certain young woman (who shall remain nameless) buying a pair of shoes, photos of her feet in the new shoes, photos of her wearing a dress with her new shoes, photos of her dancing at a party with her new shoes, and photos of her delicately eating sausages and consuming alcohol with her new shoes.

What she doesn’t show you are the photos of her wincing in her bunion-forming shoes after two minutes dancing, photos of her in her new shoes throwing up in the toilet bowl, and photos of her with just one new shoe on, passed out on her bedroom floor …

Such people are usually very careful when it comes to selecting photos that show them in a good light, but when it comes to others, they don’t always accord them the same respect.

Offending photo

Whenever I want to upload a photo that includes other people onto Facebook, I ask myself if those people would be happy seeing themselves as they are depicted. And if the answer is no, I simply delete it. I know it’s easy to remove your tag from a Facebook photo, but the photo still remains online for all to see.

Of course, you could write to your Facebook friend and ask him or her to remove an offending photo. But that would make you sound a bit like a narcissistic, egocentric, self-absorbed twat. And makes you a possible future target for such photographers, who might claim that they’re only having a bit of harmless fun. And besides, where’s your sense of humour?

It would be enough to make you choke on your sausage.


BUT THEN AGAIN
By MARY SCHNEIDER

Related posts:
Laws of attraction
Pretty woman picture all it takes for Netizens to reveal all
FB postings became street fight!

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Bloggers doing their bit to champion a good cause

BLOGGER Dr Angelo Nino M. Santos brought his eight-year-old son to visit three children’s homes so that the little boy would appreciate what he had in his life.



“My son Antonio Gabriel was so excited to come.

“He packed his old toys and clothes to be donated to the children here,” he said while at Ramakrishna Orphanage in Scotland Road, Penang.

The visit was in conjunction with the ‘Responsible Blogging 2013: Time To Give Back’ programme.

A total of 40 bloggers visited Rama-krishna Orphanage, Children’s Pro- tection Society and Shan Children’s Home to give away food and other items.

The programme was organised by Crowdpot Sdn Bhd, a social media marketing company.

Crowdpot director Leslie Loh said they planned to help educate bloggers about safe blogging and to achieve one million ‘responsible actions’.

“For example, if each blogger who posted about this event in his or her blog receives about 100 comments, we consider that we have generated responsible action,” he explained.

Dr Angelo, 36, a lecturer at the Allianze University College of Medical Sciences, said it was the first time he was taking part in such a programme.

He said he started blogging in 2007 and his blog mainly focuses on the 3Fs — family, food and fun.

Also present was Penang Health, Welfare, Caring Society and Environ­ment Committee chairman Phee Boon Poh.

Loh said Crowdpot was also giving away prizes for those who helped to blog about the homes.

“The prizes include three iPad Minis sponsored by Crowdpot and six Ninetology Black Pearl 2 dual-core Android smartphones sponsored by Ninetology Malaysia,” he said.

The contest is until March 23.

For details, visit www.responsibleblogging.my. - The Star

 Related post:

Rightways: Food for blog

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Google+ launches vanity URLs, catching up to Facebook, Twitter

The tech giant starts rolling out custom URLs for certain brands and users, like +britneyspears and +toyota. Now, memorizing those long strings of numbers could be a thing of the past.

Both Twitter and Facebook have offered vanity URLs personalized to users' accounts for years -- something that has been glaringly vacant in Google Plus' URLs. But, that's about to change.

Google's social network announced today that vanity URLs for profiles and pages are on their way. It has even begun rolling out a few for celebrities, like soccer player David Beckham and pop singer Britney Spears, along with brands like Toyota, Delta, and Hugo Boss.

Here's what Google product manager Saurabh Sharma wrote in a blog post today:

Your Google+ profile is a place for you to share your passions with the millions of people who come to Google each day...Today we're introducing custom URLs to make it even easier for people to find your profile on Google+. A custom URL is a short, easy to remember web address that links directly to your profile or page on Google+. 

Sharma writes that at first just a few "verified profiles and pages" will get custom URLs, but eventually they will be offered to "many more" people and brands around the world. It's not clear how Google is choosing who is "verified" and who isn't and the timeframe for the greater inclusion of vanity URLs.

This is likely welcome news for most Google+ users since memorizing long strings of numbers isn't exactly easy. For example, CNET's Google+ URL is https://plus.google.com/105198124856956810263/posts. But wouldn't https://plus.google.com/+CNET be much more manageable?

In other Google+ news, the social network also announced today that it is launching a new audio setting for hangouts called "Studio Mode," which optimizes sound specifically for music. Beforehand, hangout sound was tweaked for conversations; but now by clicking settings and switching from "Voice" to "Studio Mode," music should sound more like a live concert than a video conference.

"Since we launched Google+ a little over a year ago, we've seen a thriving community of musicians connect with fans in really cool ways," Google product manager Matthew Leske wrote in a blog post today. "In particular: singer/songwriters like +Daria Musk, bands like +Suite 709, and many others are using Hangouts On Air to perform live for global audiences, and jam with fans face-to-face."

Dara Kerr
Dara Kerr, a freelance journalist based in the Bay Area, is fascinated by robots, supercomputers and Internet memes. When not writing about technology and modernity, she likes to travel to far-off countries.  

 Newscribe : get free news in real time  

Sunday, August 5, 2012

LinkedIn is not Facebook: Earnings/Revenue Up 89%

LinkedIn once again proved it's not Facebook: The business networking site reported that sales nearly doubled from a year ago, led by a huge increase in revenue for its job posting services.

LinkedIn Earnings: Revenue Up 89% YoY
LinkedIn has released its Q2 earnings report. Revenue is up 89% year-over-year at $228.2 million. Net income, on the other hand, was down to $2.8 million for the quarter, from $4.5 million the same period last year. The company beat Wall Street expectations.

During the quarter, the company launched its iPad app, redesigned LinkedIn Today, released targeted status updates and follower stats to companies with active profiles, and completed the rollout of Talent Pipeline.
“LinkedIn had a strong second quarter with all of our key operating and financial metrics showing solid performance,” said CEO Jeff Weiner. “Our ongoing investment in product innovation drove healthy engagement as measured by unique visiting members and member page views, and our three revenue streams all experienced significant growth.”

Here’s the release in its entirety:

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., Aug. 2, 2012 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) – LinkedIn Corporation (NYSE:LNKD), the world’s largest professional network on the Internet, currently with more than 175 million members, reported its financial results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2012:
  • Revenue for the second quarter was $228.2 million, an increase of 89% compared to $121.0 million in the second quarter of 2011.
  • Net income for the second quarter was $2.8 million, compared to net income of $4.5 million for the second quarter of 2011. Non-GAAP net income for the second quarter was $18.1 million, compared to $10.8 million for the second quarter of 2011. Non-GAAP measures exclude tax-affected stock-based compensation expense and tax-affected amortization of acquired intangible assets.
  • Adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter was $50.4 million, or 22% of revenue, compared to $26.3 million for the second quarter of 2011, or 22% of revenue.
  • GAAP EPS for the second quarter was $0.03; Non-GAAP EPS for the second quarter was $0.16. 
“LinkedIn had a strong second quarter with all of our key operating and financial metrics showing solid performance,” said Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn. “Our ongoing investment in product innovation drove healthy engagement as measured by unique visiting members and member page views, and our three revenue streams all experienced significant growth.”

Second Quarter Financial Details and Operating Summary
  • Hiring Solutions: Revenue from Hiring Solutions products totaled $121.6 million, an increase of 107% compared to the second quarter of 2011. Hiring Solutions revenue represented 53% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012, compared to 48% in the second quarter of 2011.
  • Marketing Solutions: Revenue from Marketing Solutions products totaled $63.1 million, an increase of 64% compared to the second quarter of 2011. Marketing Solutions revenue represented 28% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012, compared to 32% in the second quarter of 2011.
  • Premium Subscriptions: Revenue from Premium Subscriptions products totaled $43.5 million, an increase of 82% compared to the second quarter of 2011. Premium Subscriptions represented 19% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012, compared to 20% of revenue in the second quarter of 2011. 
Revenue from the U.S. totaled $147.3 million, and represented 65% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012. Revenue from international markets totaled $81.0 million, and represented 35% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012. 

Revenue from the field sales channel totaled $129.4 million, and represented 57% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012. Revenue from the online, direct sales channel totaled $98.8 million, and represented 43% of total revenue in the second quarter of 2012.

GAAP net income for the second quarter was $2.8 million, compared to net income of $4.5 million for the second quarter of 2011. Non-GAAP net income for the second quarter was $18.1 million, compared to $10.8 million in the second quarter of 2011.

Adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter was $50.4 million, or 22% of revenue, compared to $26.3 million for the second quarter of 2011, or 22% of revenue.

GAAP EPS was $0.03 based on 112.3 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding compared to $0.04 for the second quarter of 2011 based on 103.1 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding.  Non-GAAP EPS was $0.16 based on 112.3 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding compared to $0.10 for the second quarter of 2011 based on 103.1 million fully-diluted weighted shares outstanding.

“Strong performance across our three product lines drove record levels of revenue and adjusted EBITDA,” said Steve Sordello, CFO of LinkedIn. ”As we continue to invest aggressively in technology, product, and our businesses, we remain focused on achieving our long-term goals.”

For additional information, please see the “Selected Company Metrics and Financials” page on LinkedIn’s Investor Relations site.

Second Quarter Highlights and Strategic Announcements

In the second quarter, LinkedIn:
  • Launched its first app designed for the iPad. The app was received positively, and engagement trends are encouraging as more than half of page views on the app are being generated by content-focused products such as updates, news and groups.  
  • Simplified the design of its flagship social news product LinkedIn Today and added deeper integration into the homepage. Engagement on LinkedIn Today is now up more than 150% since the introduction of these new features. 
  • Released Targeted Status Updates and Follower Statistics to all of the more than two million organizations on LinkedIn with active Company Profiles.
  • Completed the rollout of Talent Pipeline to the entire universe of LinkedIn Recruiter customers. In less than three months, Recruiter customers have already added more than one million prospective candidates into Talent Pipeline, enhancing their ability to quickly identify and hire new talent for their organizations.
Additionally, in July LinkedIn began rolling out a significant redesign to the homepage, enabling members to discover, share, and discuss the professional information that is most important to them. The redesign has begun to positively impact engagement metrics; for example, shares originating on LinkedIn, including status updates, are now at all-time highs.

Business Outlook

LinkedIn is providing guidance for the third quarter of 2012, and revising guidance upward for the full year of 2012 on revenue, adjusted EBITDA, and stock-based compensation, while narrowing the full-year outlook for depreciation and amortization. 
  • Q3 2012 Guidance: Revenue for the third quarter of 2012 is projected to range between $235 million to $240 million. The company expects adjusted EBITDA to range between $42 million and $45 million. The company expects stock-based compensation to range between $27 and $28 million and depreciation and amortization to range between $20 million and $22 million.
  • Full Year 2012 Guidance: The company has revised its expected revenue range upward to $915 million to $925 million from the prior range of $880 million to $900 million. The company has also revised upward its expected adjusted EBITDA range to $185 million to $190 million from the prior range of $170 million to $175 million. The company now expects stock-based compensation to range between $85 million and $95 million, while the range for depreciation and amortization is now $75 million to $80 million.
Quarterly Conference Call

LinkedIn will host a webcast/conference call to discuss its second quarter 2012 financial results and business outlook today at 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time. Jeff Weiner and Steve Sordello will host the webcast, which can be viewed on the investor relations section of the LinkedIn website 

at http://investors.linkedin.com/. This call will contain forward-looking statements and other material information regarding the company’s financial and operating results. Following completion of the call, a recorded replay of the webcast will be available on the website. For those without access to the Internet, a replay of the call will be available beginning at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time on August 2, 2012 through August 9, 2012 at 9:00 p.m. Pacific Time. To listen to the telephone replay, call (855) 859-2056, access code 96053756.

Upcoming Event

Management will participate in upcoming financial Q&A discussions at an investment industry event on September 6th. LinkedIn will furnish a link to this event on its investor relations website, http://investors.linkedin.com/ for both the live and archived webcasts.

About LinkedIn 
Founded in 2003, LinkedIn connects the world’s professionals to make them more productive and successful. With more than 175 million members worldwide, including executives from every Fortune 500 company, LinkedIn is the world’s largest professional network on the Internet. The company has a diversified business model with revenue coming from member subscriptions, marketing solutions and hiring solutions. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, LinkedIn also has offices across the Americas, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific. 

The LinkedIn logo is available at http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=11096

Non-GAAP Financial Measures
To supplement its consolidated financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, the company uses the following non-GAAP financial measures: adjusted EBITDA, non-GAAP net income, and non-GAAP EPS (collectively the “non-GAAP financial measures”). The presentation of this financial information is not intended to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for, or superior to, the financial information prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP. The company uses these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision making and as a means to evaluate period-to-period comparisons. The company believes that they provide useful information about operating results, enhance the overall understanding of past financial performance and future prospects, and allow for greater transparency with respect to key metrics used by management in its financial and operational decision making. 

The company excludes the following items from one or more of its non-GAAP measures:
Stock-based compensation. The company excludes stock-based compensation because it is non-cash in nature and because the company believes that the non-GAAP financial measures excluding this item provide meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance and liquidity. The company further believes this measure is useful to investors in that it allows for greater transparency to certain line items in its financial statements and facilitates comparisons to competitors’ operating results.

Amortization of acquired intangible assets. The company excludes amortization of acquired intangible assets because it is non-cash in nature and because the company believes that the non-GAAP financial measures excluding this item provide meaningful supplemental information regarding operational performance and liquidity. In addition, excluding this item from various non-GAAP measures facilitates internal comparisons to historical operating results and comparisons to competitors’ operating results. 

Income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustments. The company adjusts non-GAAP net income by including the income tax effects of excluding stock-based compensation and the amortization of acquired intangible assets.  The company believes that the inclusion of the income tax effects provides additional transparency to the overall or “after tax” effects of excluding these items from non-GAAP net income.

For more information on the non-GAAP financial measures, please see the “Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Financial Measures” table in this press release.  This accompanying table has more details on the GAAP financial measures that are most directly comparable to non-GAAP financial measures and the related reconciliations between these financial measures. Additionally, the company has not reconciled adjusted EBITDA guidance to net income guidance because it does not provide guidance for either other income (expense), net, or provision for income taxes, which are reconciling items between net income and adjusted EBITDA. As items that impact net income are out of the company’s control and/or cannot be reasonably predicted, the company is unable to provide such guidance. Accordingly, a reconciliation to net income is not available without unreasonable effort.

 Safe Harbor Statement

“Safe Harbor” statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: This press release and the accompanying conference call contain forward-looking statements about our products, including our planned investments in key strategic areas, certain non-financial metrics, such as member growth and engagement, and our expected financial metrics such as revenue, adjusted EBITDA, depreciation and amortization and stock-based compensation for the third quarter of 2012 and the full fiscal year 2012. The achievement of the matters covered by such forward-looking statements involves risks, uncertainties and assumptions.  If any of these risks or uncertainties materialize or if any of the assumptions prove incorrect, the company’s results could differ materially from the results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements the company makes.

The risks and uncertainties referred to above include – but are not limited to – risks associated with: the company’s limited operating history in a new and unproven market; engagement of our members; the price volatility of our Class A common stock; general economic conditions; expectations regarding the return on our strategic investments; execution of our plans and strategies, including with respect to acquisitions of other companies; expectations regarding the company’s ability to timely and effectively scale and adapt existing technology and network infrastructure to ensure that its website is accessible at all times with short or no perceptible load times; security measures and the risk that the company’s website may be subject to attacks that degrade or deny the ability of members to access the company’s solutions or that our security measures may not be sufficient to prevent unauthorized access to our member data; our ability to maintain our rate of revenue growth and manage our expenses and investment plans; our ability to accurately track our key metrics internally; members and customers curtailing or ceasing to use the company’s solutions; the company’s core value of putting members first, which may conflict with the short-term interests of the business; privacy, litigation and regulatory issues; increasing competition; our ability to manage our growth and retain our employees; the application of US and international tax laws on our tax structure and any changes to such tax laws; and the dual class structure of the company’s common stock.

Further information on these and other factors that could affect the company’s financial results is included in filings it makes with the Securities and Exchange Commission from time to time, including the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K that was filed for the year ended December 31, 2011, and additional information will also be set forth in our Form 10-Q that will be filed for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, which should read in conjunction with these financial results.  These documents are available on the SEC Filings section of the Investor Information section of the company’s website at http://investors.linkedin.com/.  All information provided in this release and in the attachments is as of August 2, 2012, and LinkedIn undertakes no duty to update this information.

LINKEDIN CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)

June 30,  December 31, 
2012 2011
ASSETS
CURRENT ASSETS:
Cash and cash equivalents  $ 286,376  $ 339,048
Short-term investments  330,761  238,456
Accounts receivable (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $3,516 and $5,460 at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively)  136,536  111,372
Deferred commissions  15,715  13,594
Prepaid expenses   20,923  10,799
Other current assets  21,601  12,658
Total current assets  811,912  725,927
Property and equipment, net  152,448  114,850
Goodwill  113,268  12,249
Intangible assets, net  33,456  8,095
Other assets  28,078  12,576
TOTAL ASSETS  $ 1,139,162  $ 873,697





LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

CURRENT LIABILITIES:

Accounts payable  $ 44,195  $ 28,217
Accrued liabilities  63,662  58,644
Deferred revenue  191,993  139,798
Total current liabilities  299,850  226,659
DEFERRED TAX LIABILITIES  40,612  18,551
OTHER LONG TERM LIABILITIES  15,525  3,508
Total liabilities  355,987  248,718
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES 




STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY: 

Class A and Class B common stock  11  10
Additional paid-in capital  767,995  617,629
Accumulated other comprehensive income   129  100
Accumulated earnings   15,040  7,240
Total stockholders’ equity  783,175  624,979



TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY  $ 1,139,162  $ 873,697

LINKEDIN CORPORATION
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended

June 30,  June 30, 
2012 2011 2012 2011
Net revenue  $ 228,207   $ 121,040   $ 416,663   $ 214,972 





Costs and expenses:



Cost of revenue (exclusive of depreciation and amortization shown separately below)  30,367   18,403   55,500   35,186 
Sales and marketing  75,740   36,019   141,624   65,380 
Product development  60,080   30,414   107,173   55,149 
General and administrative  30,974   16,673   55,828   30,287 
Depreciation and amortization  17,548   9,602   32,430   17,761 
Total costs and expenses  214,709   111,111   392,555   203,763 





Income from operations  13,498   9,929   24,108   11,209 





Other income (expense), net  (668)  11   (444)  460 
Income before income taxes  12,830   9,940   23,664   11,669 
Provision for income taxes  10,019   5,427   15,864   5,078 
Net income   $ 2,811   $ 4,513   $ 7,800   $ 6,591 





Net income per share of common stock:



Basic  $ 0.03   $ 0.07   $ 0.08   $ 0.12 
Diluted  $ 0.03   $ 0.04   $ 0.07   $ 0.07 





Weighted-average shares used to compute net  income per share:



Basic  104,185  69,395  103,198  56,631
Diluted  112,317  103,129  111,813  100,131

LINKEDIN CORPORATION
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE INFORMATION
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended

June 30,  June 30, 
2012 2011 2012 2011
Revenue by product:
Hiring Solutions  $ 121,592  $ 58,620  $ 224,152  $ 104,953
Marketing Solutions  63,105  38,570  111,055  66,253
Premium Subscriptions  43,510  23,850  81,456  43,766
Total  $ 228,207  $ 121,040  $ 416,663  $ 214,972

Revenue by geographic region:
United States  $ 147,253  $ 82,739  $ 268,102  $ 147,859
Other Americas (1)  15,047  6,146  27,056  10,745
Total Americas  162,300  88,885  295,158  158,604
EMEA (2)  50,057  25,859  92,902  45,590
APAC (3)  15,850  6,296  28,603  10,778
Total  $ 228,207  $ 121,040  $ 416,663  $ 214,972

Revenue by channel:
Field sales  $ 129,448  $ 66,699  $ 230,919  $ 117,327
Online sales  98,759  54,341  185,744  97,645
Total  $ 228,207  $ 121,040  $ 416,663  $ 214,972






(1) Canada, Latin America and South America
(2) Europe, the Middle East and Africa (“EMEA”)
(3) Asia-Pacific (“APAC”)






LINKEDIN CORPORATION
RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)

Three Months Ended Six Months Ended

June 30, June 30,
2012 2011 2012 2011


Non-GAAP net income and net income per share:

GAAP net income   $ 2,811  $ 4,513  $ 7,800  $ 6,591
Add back: stock-based compensation  19,323  6,815  31,949  10,658
Add back: amortization of intangible assets  1,851  862  3,159  1,671
Income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustments  (5,933)  (1,414)  (7,923)  (2,392)
NON-GAAP NET INCOME  $ 18,052  $ 10,776  $ 34,985  $ 16,528



GAAP DILUTED SHARES  112,317  103,129  111,813  100,131




NON-GAAP DILUTED NET INCOME PER SHARE  $ 0.16  $ 0.10  $ 0.31  $ 0.17





Adjusted EBITDA:

Net income  $ 2,811  $ 4,513  $ 7,800  $ 6,591
Provision for income taxes  10,019  5,427  15,864  5,078
Other (income) expense, net  668  (11)  444  (460)
Depreciation and amortization  17,548  9,602  32,430  17,761
Stock-based compensation  19,323  6,815  31,949  10,658
ADJUSTED EBITDA

By

Sunday, January 22, 2012

Yes, Facebook addicts, must get out to socialize more!

 

Facebook addicts should get out and socialise more

The Star/Asia News Network

WITH every new level of technology comes a corresponding wave of casualties.

From theft victims careless with their bank ATM cards to gullible folk cheated in online scams, the story is familiar enough.

So today we see the rise of Facebook addicts. The fact that this involves victims without criminal perpetrators does not make it any less serious.

Facebook addiction has been known to affect the psychological and physical health of its victims.

It also affects the personal relationships that victims had, or might have had, with others around them.

It is therefore a personal, domestic and social problem. The affliction is universally acknowledged by health professionals who have dubbed it Facebook Addiction Disorder (FAD).

It is compulsive, invasive of one's personal life, distorts priorities, damages one's capacity to relate to others around them and disorientates one to reality.

There are withdrawal symptoms, pangs of “cold turkey” and it is all downright senseless and wasteful.
How can it then be addressed effectively?

Relying on addicts to stop their addiction is not going to work. Neither will legislation, since Facebook can all too easily be accessed through computers or smartphones.

With children and young adults, FAD is particularly pernicious because it eats away at their health in their formative years.

Yet, it is with young addicts that the problem is perhaps easier to avoid with prudent parental intervention.

Adults as parents or guardians therefore have a responsibility to ensure that those under their care do not fall victim to FAD. And as adults anyway, with or without others under their care, they need to set an example by not falling victim themselves.

If push comes to shove, there is always the off switch.

For Malaysians to “have the most Facebook friends in the world” may at first sound gratifying, but in reality it is a condition ridden with problems and liabilities.

The best friends tend to be those you encounter in the flesh. A “friend” in cyberspace may be very unreal, whether as a notional friend of a friend, a fictional character, or even a predator.

If Malaysians have the most virtual friends in the world, it may well be that we have the least real friends in the world. And that would be another tragedy in itself.



Hi, I was a Facebook addict

I REFER to “Hooked on FB”  (Jan 20), on Facebook Addicton Disorder (FAD), and agree with Dr Nivashinie Mohan’s statement that people with this disorder “continue to go undetected because most addicts do not realise or admit they have a problem”.

If there had been a circle of addicts on the floor at the FAD forum, I would have introduced myself and said: “Hello everyone, I was a Facebook addict”.

When I decided to navigate to the “deactivate account” button last December, I thought I was making the hardest decision I would ever make, having been a Facebook member since 2006.

I did not have hundreds and thousands of friends (most of whom we ignore anyway and just concentrate on the five to ten so-called friends), but it was the excitement of waking up every morning literally dying to know what the rest of the world was up to.

I was an active lurker looking into my friends’ beautifully edited photos of where they went on holiday, what they cooked for their children last night, friends updating their status every five minutes (as if having a huge following on Twitter wasn’t enough) somebody’s wedding, graduation and etc.

After a while, I felt funny. Why is this so important? Why can’t we call, visit or text each other instead? Wouldn’t this be more intimate, more humanly possible to touch base sans the social network?

Aren’t we concerned about the security of our information over the Internet? A paedophile would have a field day ogling at our children’s profiles and the repercussions would be devastating.

And aren’t political and racial updates overly nauseating?

Don’t make me start with friends who actually upload positive thoughts by the dozen until you actually think they are really closet pessimists who crave attention (yes, that is yet another disorder).

Then again, self realisation is the best way to overcome any disorder, and admitting it is the next step to get oneself out of the problem. Who knows, maybe FAD sufferers may get help from support groups or toll free numbers in future.

To each his own, as the old saying goes.

For the majority, it is necessary to maintain one’s Facebook account as it is a vital part of one’s life and we are, as long as we are the ones in control.

For the minority, like me, we choose not to be the norm and will find other alternative communicating routes to get our messages across.

SUZLENE ZAKARIAH,
Seri Kembangan.

Have clear policy on FB for workers 

Bosses must devise solutions to deal with this IT challenge!

I WOULD like to share my opinion in relation to “Bosses face problem with workers wasting time on FB” (The Star, Jan 20). The use of social networking websites and its easy accessibility has posed a lot more challenges and problems to the employer than has been pointed out.

Social network, depending on the nature of the work, can be good or bad for productivity. For some it’s one of the most cost and time effective way to promote and achieve sales targets.

Some government agencies and NGOs use it in their work to reach more people and to better know their stakeholders.

For those who work long hours or are on the graveyard shift and are detached from family and friends, it may help reduce stress.

Social networking can be a recruitment tool. Some employers and recruitment agents use it to do background checks on employees.

On the converse, it can severely affect productivity as employees waste countless hours on social networking. When done in the office, it increases unwarranted Internet traffic and slows down office network speed.

A major issue which has got a lot of attention globally is employees making statements about their employers that are considered negative by the employer.

While statements which tend to lower the reputation of the employer in public can be considered libel, it is more complicated when it comes to employment relationships. There are two schools of thought.

In the UK, the employment tribunal upheld a decision by Apple to sack an employee for posting on Facebook his displeasure about his iPhone and various aspects of his company even though his remarks only reached certain people due to the privacy settings.

In the US, the National Labour Relations Board (NLRB) came to an opposite conclusion and found illegal a company’s decision to fire an employee based on disparaging remarks about her employer and on a work place incident she sent from her home computer 
.
I feel the UK approach is better. A negative statement by an employee can severely affect the employer. The company’s reputation is at stake, and it may affect the employer’s business goodwill and profits. Some job seekers might shun the company purely based on hearsay.

And, in a more sinister way, social networking can be used to disrupt industrial harmony by organising illegal strikes to cripple an entire industry and bring down the economy.

I don’t feel that a strict policy on social networking may discourage young ones from joining a particular company.

The main concern for the working young, or everyone for that matter, is the pay and benefits, and of course job satisfaction.

An employee frequently using social network at work should face disciplinary action to serve as a reminder to the perpetrator and to show others how serious the employer views such complacency.

And of course for the company to take disciplinary action it has to have rules to begin with. As long as there are no sanctions, employees will continually flout company rules and slack.

But again some might argue that it may not always be practical in real life as the world and society are addicted to social networking.

Some young employees, fresh to the working world, have no clue on responsible working etiquette and may think that employers don’t mind them engaging in social networking during work hours.

It is important that a clear policy is drawn up by the employers and brought to the attention of employees on how the company feels about it and how it affects them.

The responsibility of discipline at work does not start with the HR/IR practitioners. Our education system should have an active role in educating and shaping young ones who will be joining the work force one day.

Not only institutes of higher education like colleges and universities but schools as well should inculcate responsible work etiquette which includes being on the social network during work hours, among other things. Sadly, this is lacking.

While it is almost impossible to prevent employees from accessing social network sites, as it can be easily accessed through their smart phones, both employers and capable HR/IR practitioners have to come up with proper solutions to deal with whatever challenges advancement of technology throws at them.

JOHN MARK,Segamat.

Related post: 
You addicted to Facebook ?

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

The Secrets to Mastering Facebook, Get Ready For F-Commerce!





Dan Schawbel

 With over 700 million users now, Facebook is growing rapidly and becoming more entrenched in our society. In order to learn more about Facebook, and how we should and shouldn’t be using it, I caught up with Mikal E. Belicove, who is a business strategist, author, and writer for Entrepreneur Magazine. He  specializes in content development, market analysis, and messaging/positioning for a select group of individuals and businesses. Mikal’s latest book is The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Facebook. I asked him if Facebook can hurt your career or business, to reveal some Facebook secrets, what the true value of Facebook is, and more.

Could it hurt your career and/or business if you’re not active on Facebook?

Having a strong Facebook presence is more important for businesses than it is for advancing one’s career (in fact, you could easily argue that Facebook has hurt more careers as a result of user naivety than it has helped). In the current marketplace, where discretionary spending is anything but discretionary, and where anyone can attempt to sell anything, businesses must prove why
 

Mikal E. Belicove

they’re special, and one of the best ways to do that is to leverage engagement and word-of-mouth. Facebook now reaches nearly 75 percent of the total U.S. Internet population each month. Businesses that fail to include the world’s largest social utility in their business-aligned communication strategy do so at their own risk.

What are a few Facebook secrets that most people don’t know about?

The Privacy page is deceptively simple; it doesn’t show all privacy settings on one screen. I encourage users to go to their Privacy page and then check the settings for Connecting on Facebook (click View Settings), Sharing on Facebook (click Customize settings), and Apps and Websites (click Edit your settings).

Also, Facebook is in the process of rolling out Check-in Deals. If you’re a consumer, you can check in at a business location using a smartphone or other mobile device to obtain promotional offers. If you’re a business owner, you can use Check-in Deals to promote and drive repeat business. But really, not much is secret on Facebook, because if a feature is cool enough to use, everyone’s talking about it.

Do you think that Facebook is worth $100 billion dollars? Why or why not?

Placing a value on a private company while it’s experiencing exponential growth is an inexact science. That said, Facebook appears to be on track to earn around $4 billion in FY11, which is slightly more than double what I conjecture it earned in FY10. While revenue growth won’t maintain its current pace, the company could earn around $10 billion in 2015. At that rate, with net margins of 15-20 percent and a growth multiple of 20-25x, I peg Facebook today to be worth something more along the lines of $30-$35 billion. And while competition for consumers’ time and discretionary dollars is fierce — and the fact that more people are spending more time on Facebook gives it an incredible potential to generate revenue — unless SMBs realize unmatched ROI and ROE (return on engagement) from the site, I feel $100 billion is nothing more than unbridled enthusiasm.

If you make your entire profile private, can people still access your pictures and updates?

The Complete Idiot's Guide to Facebook
Your name and profile picture don’t have privacy settings, so even if you make your entire profile private, people can still find your name and profile image on Facebook by searching for you by name. As for other pictures you upload and status updates, you can choose to have all of them accessible to only yourself, friends, friends of friends, everyone, or only certain friends. In addition, whenever you post something on Facebook, you can click the lock icon and choose who can see it.

What do you think is the future for Facebook? Will they consume all other social networks?

Certainly not all networks, and “consume” is too strong a word. I suspect Facebook will command the lion’s share of the most popular social networking features. For example, Facebook hasn’t completely replaced photo-sharing networks including Flickr and Photobucket, but it did rise very quickly to become the number one place for sharing photos on the Web. YouTube remains top dog in the video-sharing arena, and I don’t see Facebook ever taking that over. Bottom line… Facebook does an excellent job of incorporating the best of what other more specialized social utilities and platforms offer. You can see this with Facebook’s Groupon clone – Deals. This could make Facebook a one-stop-shop for users and businesses, giving Facebook a huge competitive edge in many social categories.

Dan Schawbel, recognized as a “personal branding guru” by The New York Times, is the Managing Partner of Millennial Branding, LLC, a full-service personal branding agency. Dan is the author of Me 2.0: 4 Steps to Building Your Future, the founder of the Personal Branding Blog, and publisher of Personal Branding Magazine. He has worked with companies such as Google, Time Warner, Symantec, IBM, EMC, and CitiGroup.
Newscribe : get free news in real time 


Attention Facebook Shoppers: Get Ready For F-Commerce

Written by Tim McMullen
Tim McMullen: Shopping Facebook.

Ready or not, we’re approaching the age of F-commerce: Facebook-based retailing.

It’s time for retailers around the world to prepare for the rise of the Facebook consumer, a new breed in convenience-seeking online shoppers. From shoes to plane tickets, it’s all right there on the social network.

Facebook now offers options for retailers to tailor their Facebook page layout to look less like the familiar profile page and more like a Web page. The simple click-and-pay option seems to be attracting more shoppers. And where shoppers flock, retailers follow.

One thing in particular that’s encouraging businesses to participate in F-commerce is the fact that the platform is completely free. There are no hosting or domain fees (yet), and Facebook isn’t keeping portions of your profits. As more and more people adopt social media, F-commerce will only grow and take on more retailers.

Facebook has more than 600 million members, a fat slice of the world’s online population. People want to be social, and shopping is a social act in itself. And retailers are paying attention to the changes taking place within the online shopping world.

When businesses post news or updates to their Facebook account, they hope that users “like” what they have to say. Now, instead of sharing thoughts, people can share discounts and products. “Sally now likes Delta and has purchased two tickets to Hawaii,” could show up in your news feed anytime. Delta, Coca-Cola and Barneys New York are just a few of the major brands that have added a Facebook shop to their fan page.

Best Buy is one retailer that wanted to offer more options for their customers, so they created a Facebook page that has a shop-and-share option. This is in addition to their e-commerce site; savvy sites are not switching but rather adding channels to their arsenal of outlets.

Now, disregard the fake profiles for newborns and people’s cats and go straight for the fastest growing demographic on Facebook: Women over 55. I’m thinking online shopping has a great deal to do with their interest in Facebook. And I couldn’t be more… right.

According to a survey conducted for Kirkland’s, a home decor specialty store with brick-and-mortar and online stores, that’s exactly what this growing audience wants. It’s important for retailers to recognize that they must prepare for F-commerce by engaging their Facebook audience first. With Kirkland’s specifically, coupons and discounts are their game.

s was a virtually unknown retailer in the social commerce space that blew everyone away when they became the sixth-fastest growing fan page on Facebook. Just four days after launching their Cha-Ching! interactive game promotion, Kirkland’s went from 43,000 fans to 140,000. They have since surpassed their goal of 200,000 fans. Now, this is all without actually selling merchandise on their Facebook page. They are still in the engagement stage, working with their customers to make their Facebook site more fun and trustworthy at the same time.

The promotion included a $25,000 cash prize and a chance to win Kirkland’s merchandise in a swap game where people trade virtual merchandise with other players. And everyone who plays the game receives a coupon for future purchases.

This is a positive step into the direction of F-commerce. Interactive games will keep an audience interested, and will solidify pages in terms of getting sales. In the survey, Kirkland’s found a majority of their Facebook customers wanted to save money, and to see merchandise and prices alongside content such as decorating ideas.

After conducting the survey, they saw a purpose and direction for their Facebook page that was different from their online community, mykirklands.com, and they went for it. The survey clearly showed that more and more Facebook users want to engage on Facebook. Campaigns such as the Cha-Ching! promotion are driving users to the social media hub and retailers must quickly follow to meet the demands of the users.

With the Kirkland’s campaign, we saw that 36-45 year old females were more involved with the online community, and that 46-55 year olds were more engaged with the Facebook page (which squashes the belief that F-commerce is limited to young and hip brands). Another interesting find was that the online community members were generally not interested in Facebook. They went online for different reasons.

The critics of F-commerce have begged the question, if Facebook starts to overlap with more traditional means of online shopping, why have two touch points? As we learned from the success of Kirkland’s, it seems that it would be best practice to have multiple touch points because the consumers have the option of how they do their online shopping. There was little crossover between the online users at mykirklands.com and the Facebook users, which shows that there isn’t that universal preference just yet.

It’s no secret that people spend hours on their Facebook pages weekly or even daily, whether it’s on their smart phone, tablet or computer. This sort of accessibility is what’s driving retailers to set up shop on the social network. F-commerce is still in its early stages, but judging by the consumer response so far, many more retailers are sure to begin exploring it within the next few months.

Tim McMullen is President and partner at redpepper, an  integrated marketing agency with offices in Atlanta and Nashville.

Newscribe : get free news in real time