Mediaboss Marketing

Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) was downgraded by Zacks Investment Research from a hold rating to a sell rating in a research note issued to investors on Friday, Zacks.com reports. They currently have a $229.00 target price on the social networking companys stock. Zacks Investment Researchs price target suggests a potential upside of 4.41% from the companys previous close.

According to Zacks, Facebooks shares have outperformed the industry in the past year. Growth in Instagram Stories and Feed, and Facebook News Feed is expected to aid mobile ad revenues. The companys initiatives to improve privacy, transparency and authenticity of ads are likely to boost user trust and engagement. The launch of Facebook View app, Facebook Pay and catalogs in the WhatsApp Business app aimed at small businesses is noteworthy. Meanwhile, estimates have been stable ahead of the companys fourth-quarter earnings release. The company has a mixed record of earnings surprises in the recent quarters. However, a persistent mix shift toward Stories is anticipated to hurt ARPU. Also, the companys rising regulatory headwinds, including the antitrust investigation and the EUs investigation of Libra, are concerns.

Other equities research analysts have also recently issued research reports about the company. Credit Suisse Group restated an outperform rating and set a $270.00 price objective (up previously from $260.00) on shares of Facebook in a report on Thursday, October 31st. Piper Jaffray Companies began coverage on Facebook in a report on Tuesday, December 3rd. They set an overweight rating and a $230.00 price objective for the company. HSBC began coverage on Facebook in a report on Thursday, December 5th. They set a reduce rating and a $178.00 price objective for the company. Mizuho reduced their price objective on Facebook from $247.00 to $240.00 and set a buy rating for the company in a report on Thursday, October 31st. Finally, Goldman Sachs Group set a $231.00 price objective on Facebook and gave the stock a buy rating in a report on Wednesday, October 30th. Two equities research analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, four have assigned a hold rating and forty-five have assigned a buy rating to the company. Facebook presently has an average rating of Buy and a consensus target price of $235.15.

Facebook stock traded up $1.03 during midday trading on Friday, reaching $219.33. 7,348,133 shares of the companys stock were exchanged, compared to its average volume of 13,129,395. Facebook has a 52 week low of $140.84 and a 52 week high of $218.38. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.09, a quick ratio of 4.66 and a current ratio of 4.66. The firm has a market cap of $623.87 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 28.97, a P/E/G ratio of 1.15 and a beta of 1.05. The stocks 50-day simple moving average is $203.29 and its 200 day simple moving average is $192.83.

Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) last posted its quarterly earnings results on Wednesday, October 30th. The social networking company reported $2.12 EPS for the quarter, topping analysts consensus estimates of $1.91 by $0.21. Facebook had a return on equity of 20.39% and a net margin of 27.08%. The business had revenue of $17.65 billion during the quarter, compared to analysts expectations of $17.35 billion. During the same quarter last year, the company posted $1.76 earnings per share. Facebooks quarterly revenue was up 28.6% on a year-over-year basis. Research analysts forecast that Facebook will post 8.48 earnings per share for the current year.

In other Facebook news, CAO Susan J.S. Taylor sold 1,133 shares of the businesss stock in a transaction that occurred on Wednesday, November 20th. The shares were sold at an average price of $198.58, for a total transaction of $224,991.14. Following the completion of the transaction, the chief accounting officer now directly owns 1,505 shares in the company, valued at $298,862.90. The sale was disclosed in a document filed with the SEC, which can be accessed through the SEC website. Also, CEO Mark Zuckerberg sold 118,500 shares of the businesss stock in a transaction that occurred on Monday, October 14th. The shares were sold at an average price of $183.62, for a total transaction of $21,758,970.00. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last 90 days, insiders have sold 1,472,240 shares of company stock valued at $278,644,107. Company insiders own 14.53% of the companys stock.

A number of institutional investors and hedge funds have recently made changes to their positions in the business. Strategic Blueprint LLC boosted its position in Facebook by 3.8% during the fourth quarter. Strategic Blueprint LLC now owns 1,346 shares of the social networking companys stock valued at $276,000 after acquiring an additional 49 shares during the last quarter. Wealthcare Advisory Partners LLC boosted its position in Facebook by 1.0% during the third quarter. Wealthcare Advisory Partners LLC now owns 5,624 shares of the social networking companys stock valued at $1,002,000 after acquiring an additional 54 shares during the last quarter. Personal Wealth Partners boosted its position in Facebook by 12.9% during the third quarter. Personal Wealth Partners now owns 481 shares of the social networking companys stock valued at $86,000 after acquiring an additional 55 shares during the last quarter. Burke & Herbert Bank & Trust Co. boosted its position in Facebook by 1.5% during the fourth quarter. Burke & Herbert Bank & Trust Co. now owns 3,730 shares of the social networking companys stock valued at $766,000 after acquiring an additional 55 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Lester Murray Antman dba SimplyRich boosted its position in Facebook by 1.3% during the third quarter. Lester Murray Antman dba SimplyRich now owns 4,424 shares of the social networking companys stock valued at $783,000 after acquiring an additional 57 shares during the last quarter. Institutional investors and hedge funds own 63.76% of the companys stock.

About Facebook

Facebook, Inc provides various products to connect and share through mobile devices, personal computers, and other surfaces worldwide. The company's products include Facebook that enables people to connect, share, discover, and communicate with each other on mobile devices and personal computers; Instagram, a community for sharing photos, videos, and messages; Messenger, a messaging application for people to connect with friends, family, groups, and businesses across platforms and devices; and WhatsApp, a messaging application for use by people and businesses to communicate in a private way.

See Also: What does the Dogs of the Dow mean?

Get a free copy of the Zacks research report on Facebook (FB)

For more information about research offerings from Zacks Investment Research, visit Zacks.com

Receive News & Ratings for Facebook Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Facebook and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

Read more from the original source:
Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) Lowered to Sell at Zacks Investment Research - Riverton Roll

Its a cliche at this point to compare bitcoin to the early days of the internet, since they are both examples of emerging technologies.

But does the cliche actually hold true?

If we work with a vague definition of the World Wide Web going live in 1991, then within the first decade that ecosystem grew faster and had more demand for compliant use cases than bitcoin arguably has today, one decade in.

In 1994, the New York Times reported that companies were rushing to set up shop via the World Wide Web, although the user experience was still slow and crude. Just like blockchain technologists, early internet companies ran into scaling issues. The 1994 Times report described the web as already showing signs of suffering from its own success, as crowds compete for access to popular databases. Yet people were already starting to think about subscription paywalls for content distribution.

Industry insiders were so bullish on the commercial potential that in the December 1995 issue of Wired magazine, Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy predicted the rise of disposable word processors and spreadsheets priced per use and delivered via Java software.

Within the first decade it was clear the internet could be used for commerce, interpersonal communications, marketing and education. There were established companies using it to turn a modest profit.

Blockstream alumnus and founder of the Blockchain Commons, Christopher Allen, said he is concerned about the lack of bitcoin adoption at this stage, which is why he is so optimistic about scaling solutions like the lightning network.

Lightning does have the potential to be where you buy your steak and bread, Allen said. Until you buy your bread or steak with bitcoin, youre going to have to convert to some other currency, no matter how good it is as a censorship-resistant medium.

To be fair, cryptocurrency has already proven its usefulness through cross-border collaboration. For example, the Decred treasury has distributed roughly $3.5 million worth of cryptocurrency to more than 60 contributors, according to the communitys press representative. Roughly 30 percent of these contributors hail from Latin America and 15 percent are from Africa, a more global distribution than comparable Silicon Valley startups.

Even so, such experiments are a far cry from the mainstream adoption many fans predict bitcoin will undergo in becoming a global, self-sustaining currency.

Community roots

Bitcoin may be behind the internets timeline in terms of commercial use cases, but it has already achieved comparable social functions.

By 2001, the New York Times was describing internet services like email as a platform for relationship-building with former coworkers and classmates, while startups pioneered video and music streaming services.

One such Yahoo group reportedly included 600 people exchanging hundreds of messages a month about the bankruptcy proceedings, health insurance and the fate of their retirement plans. This may be comparable to crypto communities today, which rely on forums, GitHub and social networking platforms like Twitter.

According to Allen, who focused earlier in his career on core internet protocols, the internet was also designed to offer more freedom of choice to the users even though, through big-tech consolidation, the industry eventually failed to reach that vision.

Zcash co-creator and Electric Coin Company CEO Zooko Wilcox agreed that the early software projects he worked on were supposed to offer freedom and end wars, because people would just talk things out over the internet.

Wilcox said, looking back at his time in the 90s working on bitcoins predecessor, Digicash, that he idealistically underestimated the importance of economic incentives.

What I would tell myself, if I could use a time machine, is just being compatible isnt good enough, Wilcox said. This was a fatal flaw in the overall design of the [open software] movement, that is relied on ongoing volunteers or donations. It didnt have a built-in economic feedback loop.

In this regard, bitcoin has a great track record during this first decade. Yet it remains to be seen if bitcoins ecosystem provides a self-sustaining model.

Similar risks

Some coders believe early advocacy for strong legal frameworks that protect freedom, coupled with forward-thinking precautions, could help the decentralized Web3 avoid or minimize early mistakes.

Protocols would have a lot of flexibility in terms of what types of security you need, etc., and along the way we ended up creating the central Certificate Authority (CAs) business not quite realizing that 20 years later all the CAs all got consolidated, Allen said. We were supposed to be able to choose which CA we trusted. Centralization crops up in odd ways.

Marco Peereboom, a Dell alumnus and Linux veteran who is also currently the Decred communitys New Systems Development Lead, agreed with Allen that the internet was built by idealistic young men who wanted to uplift humanity. (Not unlike crypto adherents today.)

Im extremely disappointed with where we are today, Peereboom said. The amount of snooping the government is doing, I didnt anticipate. More cryptography early on would have done the internet a lot of good, and more advocacy as well.

Along these lines, Allen is focused on work related to user-friendly-yet-secure key management and blockchain identity standards. Meanwhile, Peereboom is working to refine Decreds open source funding experiments, which is how he earns a salary today.

Much like the altcoin project Dash, Decred pays freelancers through public votes and grants collected from the network itself. Plus, Decred developers can earn money anonymously based on the merits of their contributions.

Until the internet moves away from the ad-sponsored model, it will only get worse, Peereboom said, referring to potential surveillance and corporate dominance via upcoming Web3 models.

I think anonymous payments are a must-have feature for any cryptocurrency to be around, he said. I hope Im not making the same mistake twice. But I really do believe cryptocurrencies have the potential to change the world.

Beyond bitcoin

From the perspective of veteran bitcoiners like Peereboom, many of whom are now focused on altcoin projects, bitcoins weakness is how difficult it is to update the software.

He said there must be a middle ground between constant changes and nearly impossible changes.

Writing bug-free software just doesnt happen, Peereboom said. You need a mechanism to deal with consensus changes.

Plus, bitcoiners like Peereboom and Wilcox are both prioritizing the privacy-enhancing aspects of cryptocurrency. Is it possible for governance mechanisms to resist centralization over several decades? Thats what Wilcox is trying to figure out.

It would be dishonest and overselling to tell people this is inevitable, Wilcox said.

He added Linux failed, in his opinion, because the movement redefined success to match corporate adoption rather than broader social change. As larger institutions profit from or leverage bitcoin, just like with the internet, the risks to users personal freedoms increase.

Theres going to be a lot of challenges along the way, and harm. Id like to mitigate the harm as much as possible, Allen concluded.

The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is a media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk is an independent operating subsidiary of Digital Currency Group, which invests in cryptocurrencies and blockchain startups.

More here:
Is Bitcoin in 2020 Really Like the Early Internet? - CoinDesk

Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) had its price target cut by Citigroup from $45.00 to $36.00 in a research report report published on Wednesday, December 18th, BenzingaRatingsTable reports. They currently have a neutral rating on the social networking companys stock.

A number of other research analysts have also recently weighed in on the stock. Pivotal Research reaffirmed a buy rating and issued a $35.00 price objective on shares of Twitter in a report on Thursday, October 24th. Jefferies Financial Group reaffirmed a hold rating and issued a $38.00 price objective (down previously from $44.00) on shares of Twitter in a report on Friday, October 25th. Mizuho cut their price objective on shares of Twitter from $35.00 to $31.00 and set an underperform rating for the company in a report on Friday, October 25th. Macquarie cut their price objective on shares of Twitter from $43.00 to $36.00 and set a neutral rating for the company in a report on Friday, October 25th. Finally, Robert W. Baird cut their target price on shares of Twitter from $40.00 to $39.00 in a research note on Thursday, October 24th. Seven equities research analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, twenty-five have given a hold rating and eleven have given a buy rating to the companys stock. Twitter currently has a consensus rating of Hold and a consensus target price of $36.36.

NYSE TWTR traded down $0.44 on Wednesday, reaching $32.78. 11,149,154 shares of the companys stock traded hands, compared to its average volume of 12,626,526. Twitter has a fifty-two week low of $28.63 and a fifty-two week high of $45.85. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.28, a quick ratio of 8.69 and a current ratio of 8.69. The stock has a 50 day moving average price of $31.30 and a 200-day moving average price of $36.52. The firm has a market cap of $25.66 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 59.60, a P/E/G ratio of 2.66 and a beta of 0.57.

Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) last released its quarterly earnings data on Thursday, October 24th. The social networking company reported $0.17 earnings per share for the quarter, beating analysts consensus estimates of $0.10 by $0.07. Twitter had a net margin of 47.67% and a return on equity of 6.07%. The company had revenue of $824.00 million during the quarter, compared to analysts expectations of $875.21 million. During the same quarter in the previous year, the company earned $0.21 earnings per share. The firms revenue for the quarter was up 8.7% on a year-over-year basis. As a group, equities research analysts anticipate that Twitter will post 1.98 EPS for the current fiscal year.

In other Twitter news, CAO Robert Kaiden sold 9,685 shares of the stock in a transaction that occurred on Friday, November 1st. The shares were sold at an average price of $29.72, for a total transaction of $287,838.20. The transaction was disclosed in a document filed with the SEC, which can be accessed through the SEC website. Also, insider Vijaya Gadde sold 8,332 shares of the stock in a transaction that occurred on Monday, October 21st. The stock was sold at an average price of $39.66, for a total transaction of $330,447.12. The disclosure for this sale can be found here. Over the last 90 days, insiders sold 70,993 shares of company stock worth $2,211,668. Company insiders own 2.65% of the companys stock.

A number of institutional investors have recently added to or reduced their stakes in the business. E&G Advisors LP acquired a new stake in Twitter during the 4th quarter worth approximately $266,000. Addison Capital Co lifted its holdings in Twitter by 1.6% during the 4th quarter. Addison Capital Co now owns 112,877 shares of the social networking companys stock worth $3,618,000 after buying an additional 1,750 shares in the last quarter. Sanders Morris Harris LLC acquired a new stake in Twitter during the 4th quarter worth approximately $1,841,000. Carroll Financial Associates Inc. lifted its holdings in Twitter by 238.5% during the 4th quarter. Carroll Financial Associates Inc. now owns 1,706 shares of the social networking companys stock worth $54,000 after buying an additional 1,202 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Accurate Investment Solutions Inc. lifted its holdings in Twitter by 2,012.0% during the 4th quarter. Accurate Investment Solutions Inc. now owns 2,112 shares of the social networking companys stock worth $68,000 after buying an additional 2,012 shares in the last quarter. Institutional investors own 71.67% of the companys stock.

About Twitter

Twitter, Inc operates as a platform for public self-expression and conversation in real time. The company offers various products and services, including Twitter, a platform that allows users to consume, create, distribute, and discover content; and Periscope, a mobile application that enables user to broadcast and watch video live with others.

Read More: How to build a Fibonacci channel

Receive News & Ratings for Twitter Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Twitter and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.

Link:
Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) PT Lowered to $36.00 at Citigroup - Riverton Roll

Facebook has announced plans to remove any videos doctored using artificial intelligence (AI) from its social networking platforms ahead of the upcoming US presidential election.

The videos, known as deepfakes, are modified to look real and have been shown to be highly convincing and difficult to debunk online.

In a blog postthis week, Facebook admitted thatdeepfakes present a significant challenge to technology and social networking sites, but promised to tackle all types of manipulated media.

Deepfakes are videos in which AI has been used to superimpose the face of a person onto the body of another.

The controversial practice first made headlines in 2017, when internet users published pornographic videos featuring the likenesses of female celebrities including Taylor Swift and Katy Perry.

Most of the sites hosting the videos subsequently removed the content and banned them from their platforms, but fake footage featuring high-profile figures from a variety of different fields has continued to spread online.

While these videos are still rare on the internet, they present a significant challenge for our industry and society as their use increases, writes Monika Bickert, vice president of global policy management at Facebook, in the blog post.

The social media giant, which also owns Instagram, has pledged to removed doctored videos if it wasnt obvious to an average person that they have been edited, or if they give a false impression that the subject of the video has said or done something that they have not.

There are people who engage in media manipulation in order to mislead, warns Bickert in the blog.

Banning deepfake videos is part of Facebooks attempts to get ahead of a wave of new misleading media and content expected to be shared in the run-up to the election in the US in November.

Some critics argue that Facebooks new policy does not go far enough. For instance, the ban on deepfakes will not apply to videos deemed to be parody or satire.

The social network was criticised last summer for refusing to remove a viral video of US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi that was doctored to make it sound like she was drunkenly slurring her words.

In a statement toReuters this week, Facebook said: The doctored video of Speaker Pelosi does not meet the standards of this policy and would not be removed. Only videos generated by artificial intelligence to depict people saying fictional things will be taken down.

So-called shallow fakes videos made using conventional editing tools and not edited by AI will also still be allowed.

To date, there have been no major examples of deepfake content being uploaded to Facebook platforms that would break the new rules.AsThe Guardiannotes, themost damaging examples of manipulated media in recent years have tended to be created using simple video-editing tools.

But computer scientist William Tunstall-Pedoe, whose AI companyEvi invented the technology behindAmazons Alexa, told the BBC that Facebook deserved credit for trying to tackle the difficult area.

The fact the video is fake and intended to be misleading is the key thing for me, he said. Whether sophisticated AI techniques are used or less sophisticated techniques isnt relevant.

The multinational is still dealing with the fallout of being accused of allowing the spread of disinformation during the 2016 presidential election and the 2018 US midterms.

AndFacebooks reputation has taken a furtherhit from its involvement in the Cambridge Analytica data harvesting scandal and controversies over targeted political advertising.

The resulting pressure from lawmakers, journalists and activists to crack down on the spread of misleading or false information may be a major factor in the new ban on deepfakes.

Go here to read the rest:
Why everyones talking about Facebooks deepfake ban - The Week UK

Popular messaging service WhatsApp will soon stop working on millions of smartphones.

From February 1, older operating systems on Apple and Android devices will no longer be supported by the hugely-popular app.

iPhone users running on iOS 8 or earlier and Android customers with versions 2.3.7 and older will be locked out next month.

This comes after WhatsApp stopped working on all Windows Phone operating systems on December 31.

If users want to save their data before they are locked out of the app, they need to go to 'Group Info' and 'Export Chat'.

WhatsApp is owned by Facebook, who paid A$27 billion (US$19 billion) for the messaging service in 2014.

In a blog post titled "A Privacy-Focused Vision for Social Networking" published in March 2019, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg wrote about his intention to integrate Instagram direct messages, Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp.

"In a few years, I expect future versions of Messenger and WhatsApp to become the main ways people communicate on the Facebook network," Zuckerberg wrote.

"We're focused on making both of these apps faster, simpler, more private and more secure, including with end-to-end encryption."

Here is the original post:
WhatsApp to stop working on millions of smartphones - 9News