Forrester Research CEO: Mark Zuckerberg’s skills as a CEO are overrated

I just read an article from a “green eyed” CEO if you will……please!!!! Mark did his time in Hell and continues to be legally approached by people and is still a fairly young man with a different mind-frame to start with then the person writing this article…..in other words…..YOU DON’T GET HIM or his drive, interests, and concepts.

facebook connects a whole bunch of people and is more like a phone call, while myspace is like a pager.. this fucker didnt create facebook so his opinion is bullshit, he’s old and has no concept of what the public thinks. all he sees is on paper and paper is manipulated numbers.. so fuck him!

From my perspective I think that Facebook is nothing more than a clearing house and repository for ads. That said, it does allow people to connect in a spider format that moves data to many people all at once. However an email client can do the same thing, send info to a group of people quickly.

The thought of doing so by email might be considered a for of spam but then Facebook might be the ultimate passive spam scenario just more focused and protected.

People looking for the expanse of a network of friends or contacts might achieve the results that they want but the reality is that we are loosing some of the time test methods of simple old mail. I am part of the digital world and will die in the midst of bits and bytes hurling through the net. Are humans really in need of that much digital connection. Egos aside, we need to make sure that face to face contact does not become the extinct animal on the list of endangered species. The core of face book and other entities like it is the proliferation of digital contact.

My kids and grand kids use face book to detail events and things that are going on. I would much rather have a human call me, talk with me, or even come and visit me, than sending me a tweet or posting to the wall that a great thing has happened.

Also this allows minutia to creep into our lives that really is kind of worthless. I love it when my grand daughter calls me to ask a question, and I love that the rest of the world has no idea we are actually connecting.

I am not a baby boomer that has shunned technology, in fact I have worked my entire adult life to forward technology, I sold some of the first video phones and I patiently wait for my George Jetson car running on atomic fuel. But Face book, is just a viral event that will pass, and something else will take its place so for the future I see no sustainability and I see no real revenue stream. The Tech boom that came and went is history but history based on human interaction repeats itself, now, today, the repeat time has been shortened.

Get in your car, or walk, or ride the bus or take the train or fly on a plane to your friends and family, reach out and touch them, for real. Then you can engrave that image in your own face book or brain book, it lasts a lifetime.

IMHO

Mike

Facebook isn’t meant to be a product or a company, so typical business terms and standards do not apply. It is something beyond that. Mark Zuckerberg is CEO for the sake of formality, so people like the CEO of Forrester Research will take him seriously.

Ideas do not have CEOs. Art does not have CEOs. Parties do not have CEOs. But there are more ideas, more works of art and more parties in a single week than there are companies in the United States. Facebook is in the same category. It is an idea put into physical form. It is an idea that requires people to write code and work to keep it alive. By conventional standards, it has been called a company; but by the standards of a generation that has catapulted Facebook to what is it today, it is an institution. Institutions are not meant to be dynamic. They are meant to ideological. And while business people like to constantly evolve, expand, grow and diversify their company. Those verbs do not apply to Facebook.

CEO is just a term used to describe people that run things. Facebook isn’t about managing personnel or staying competitive in the marketplace. To change Facebook, to “morph” Facebook would be like adding a fifth base to baseball. Business people assume being a good CEO means making decisions to change the company and that change will improve the company; but sometimes a good CEO knows when to step the fuck back and let the idea live on its own. The users are the CEOs of Facebook and they do not want it to change. It works. It is closer to perfection than any competitor that has come before it. He made a company that does not need to change to stay competitive. And because of this, he has all of the other CEOs beat.

I think his restraint with his money says otherwise. Maybe they say he isn’t a good CEO because he doesn’t go on sweet cruises with the rest of them.

I HAVE BEEN LOCKED OUT OF FACEBOOK BECAUSE I WILL NOT REMOVE THE V (WHICH STANDS FOR VICTORY) FROM BEHIND MY NAME!!!!!!

In acknowledging that Facebook is an excellent concept, Mr. Colony also writes that Mr. Zuckerberg has not “morphed” Facebook all that much from its original form. It is still the same idea, and for that reason, the market-research company’s CEO is skeptical.

Actually, Mr. Colony, I would argue that it shows Mr. Zuckerberg is a GREAT CEO. He doesn’t mess with success but nurtures it. Bad CEOs always feel the need to change things or “mix it up” to make more money, and in doing so they nearly always lose sight of the core reason the business exists.

The best businesses tend to have boring, stable CEOs. Name the CEO of Exxon. Or Walmart. Or Bayer. Or Volkswagen. All are huge, stable, growing businesses that makes LOTS of money.

It’s EXTREMELY rare to have a CEO like Steve Jobs who can be so public, and try so many things and actually succeed on most; I credit that to his ability to hire great help/workers, rather than him personally (imagine Apple without Ive or Tim Cook or Bob Mansfeld.

About the only controversial tech CEO I can think of who’s actually succeeded (and that means increasing the profit margin and absolute profit dollars of his company) is Steve Ballmer. And it’s precisely BECAUSE – while being bombastic and a bit of a blowhard – sticks to the central core of the Microsoft business: developers.

So, Mr. Zuckerberg is doing precisely what a great CEO should do – understand what makes them money, and stick to it, only change when customers – not the press – demand it.

the guy is just pissed that mark zuckerburg is richer than he will ever be, and mark is way younger lol

in a year people wont even remember what facebook is anyone remember myspace ?

This is what makes Mark a great CEO. He has a multibillion dollar company built on simplicity, and he doesn’t let the shit talkers and haters get in his head. He keeps the site how fans want it, not how critics and people who don’t own companies declare he should run it. He’s a smart guy who came from Harvard, (unlike Tom from myspace) and as long as he keeps his head out of his ass and doesn’t make any obviously stupid decisions, Facebook should last for a long time just like applications such as email and Google.
What I mean by obviously stupid decisions, is going down the myspace path and: putting adds EVERYWHERE, not upgrading servers so the site lags like crazy, letting pornography and bands/businesses overrun the site, and changing the site constantly how fans don’t like it.

My two cents is that as long as he keeps Facebook for the fans, and not just making money(putting adds), then Facebook won’t just be a trend but a long-lasting useful tool.

If it ain’t broke……why monkey with it ?

just compare how rich this guy is to how rich Mark Zuckerburg is. bam. he wins

One wears a shirt and Tie and the other wears blue jeans, tee-shirts and sneakers. I think I’d rather wear the jeans and know I’m rich than be a pompas ass that is watching me and jealous.