But is the long-term viability and success of Facebook a slam dunk?  You’d think so, considering 900 million people on the planet use the social network now valued at nearly $105 billion.

Not everybody thinks so.

The Telegraph’s Michael Deacon says he was once addicted to Facebook but now thinks its users hardly have anything to say on it compared with Twitter, which he calls “magnetic” because it “incessantly breaks and circulates news.” He even goes as far to say Facebook in a few years will “be as sad and lonely a ghost town as MySpace.”

I wouldn’t go quite that far, but he makes some valid points. Many people have grown tired of Facebook and do prefer alternate social networks, such as Google+.

Google certainly is serious about social and it’s no secret that Facebook wants more of Google’s advertising, but who will come out on top?

Social Networking Rivalry

Yes, Facebook has a huge head start in social compared to Google, but Google+ users tend to be fiercely loyal because, honestly, it’s a great — albeit very different — product .

Unlike Facebook, Google+ is where you’re more likely to engage with strangers — many of whom reach out from countries around the world.

Just this morning I had a Google+ chat with a blogger from India who, even though he uses both Facebook and Google+, was only able to reach me through the latter where in seconds we were having a conversation about the merits of both social networks. Such contact wouldn’t have happened on Facebook because my Facebook friends are all in the U.S. and most of them know me personally, which means I keep my chat disabled because I don’t want people I haven’t seen in 20 years messaging me every time I check my stream.

Eric Norstrom, a molecular and cellular neurobiologist, is another person with whom I’ve connected through Google+.

Here’s how he aptly puts it:

“G+ is not FB, Twitter, or anything else. It’s G+. It’s great for content aggregation and collaboration in addition to the services provided by the other major social apps. It’s not people bleating on a street corner. It’s more like, you walk down a street and don’t see anyone, but then you go into a building and you find that there’s a party going on. Not only that, it’s a good party with interesting people talking about things you care about and leaving out things you don’t. Less noise, more signal.”

He’s right about Google+ being a more lively place to hang out. You’re not likely to see inane posts — most contain photos, videos or links to other interesting content. This morning someone in one of my circles shared a post by Google Maps touting a NASA map that shows where the May 20 eclipse can be seen. (See also “Google+ vs. Facebook: See How They Compare.”

Google’s Many Products are an Advantage

While there certainly were some privacy concerns when Google said it would share user data across its products, it can’t be denied that the company has created a slick and seamless experience for users.  

On my Android phone I use Places, Maps and Navigation, YouTube, Voice, Talk, Calendar, Drive, Goggles, and Play Music, and many of these apps sync to the cloud for integration to the desktop.

In essence, Google has a very large window into what I’m doing, where I’m going, what I’m watching, and who I’m talking to. And this window stays open for much of every day I’m online or using my phone.

While Facebook also garners data from me when I’m on its network, I’m not there very often, relatively speaking.

Battle Over Advertising

Facebook has many fans, is growing on a billion users, and now has a big pile of money with which to continue to innovate. For instance, the company recently said that at some point it could launch an advertising network to display ads outside of its platform. That would be huge and put the company in a much better place to compete with Google.

CNET’s Rafe Needlemanwrote a great piece summing up the many ways Facebook and Google’s trajectories cross, particularly when it comes to advertising. And as he points out, both companies have their strengths.

“The infusion of public IPO money will embolden Facebook to take on Google directly in areas where it’s clearly weaker — primarily advertising, but also search and mobile. Google will defend its turf while simultaneously attacking Facebook in social (and hopefully in identity services),” he writes.

That last part — identity services that let you sign into a Website or account using your Facebook credentials — is definitely something Facebook has a good hold on, and as Needleman points out, it’s something Google needs to get better at marketing.

But Google is kicking it with mobile. CEO Larry Page, in a letter to investors last month said the company is “seeing a hugely positive revenue impact from mobile advertising, which grew to a run rate of over $2.5 billion by the third quarter of 2011 — two and a half times more than at the same point in 2010.”

Can Facebook figure out how to get some of that pie? It had better — its users are now using the social network more from their mobile devices than from their desktops.

If it doesn’t, Michael Deacon’s dire prediction about Facebook might just come true.

Follow Christina on Twitter and Google+ for even more tech news and commentary and follow Today@PCWorld on Twitter, too.

Google Inc. said Saturday that Chinese antitrust authorities have cleared the Internet giant’s proposed purchase of Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc., pushing the $12.5 billion deal over its last regulatory hurdle.

Google, a Silicon Valley giant that built its business on Web services, startled the tech industry last August by saying it would buy the company, a much older, Illinois-based maker of mobile devices and other hardware.

Motorola already produces a number of phones and tablets based on Google’s Android mobile software.

Antitrust authorities in the U.S. and Europe have already given their blessing to the merger. Chinese authorities cleared the …

The most eagerly awaited initial public stock offering in a long, long time fizzled Friday. The apparent culprit: simply too many shares foisted upon the public.

Facebook‘s 421-million share debut ended up just 23 cents above the offer price of $38, after the deal had priced at the high end of an expected range of $34 to $38 the night before. It closed 9% below the $42.05 at which it had opened. It was that rarest of creatures: a hot IPO with no “pop.”

While most people had been focused on the price—and the sky-high valuation it implied—some observers said after the fact that Morgan Stanley and the other underwriters simply had sold too many shares (ticker: FB), removing the rarity factor and spooking individual investors.

“I think what happened today is that the underwriters and the company misjudged market demand, and there were too many shares,” says analyst Michael Pachter of Wedbush Securities, who has a Buy rating on Facebook, and a $44 price target. Pachter knows investors who got 50% more of the shares than they had requested. “That made them nervous,” says Pachter. “They figured: ‘Oh, there must not have been as much demand.’” As a result, such investors sold the stock when trading opened at 11:30 Friday morning.

Pachter, who was watching volume as much as price Friday, notes that about 200 million shares moved almost immediately at the start of trading. “That’s a big chunk,” he remarks. Total volume for the day was 573 million shares. “High volume is an indication of nervous investors,” Pachter opines, and that probably made more investors nervous, starting a steady price decline in the first hour.

Not helping much was a series of delays—the stock had originally been scheduled to open at 11 a.m.—apparently caused by technical glitches at Nasdaq.

AS FACEBOOK SHARES STARTED to regain ground later on, newswires were printing speculation that the underwriters had stepped into the market to support the stock’s price. Says Pachter: “That spooked everyone.”

Michael Moe, portfolio manager of GSV Capital, a closed-end fund, agrees with the oversupply thesis. His firm owns Facebook shares, along with other social-networking stocks, such as Zynga (ZNGA). “In hindsight, it was, basically, an awful lot of stock to sell,” observes Moe “If instead of selling $15 billion worth, they had sold $1 billion, you would have had shares trade to the moon,” he says.

Moe’s own stock had a tough day, falling $2.95, or more than 18%, to $13.15. That was just one example of plenty of “sympathy” crashes Friday, as just about everything with the faintest whiff of social networking collapsed.

Zynga, which got its start in life offering videogames on Facebook, saw its shares drop $1.11, or 13.4%, to $7.16. Yelp (YELP), which makes software that lets people rate restaurants and other venues via smartphone, slid $2.63, or more than 12%, to $18.64. Renren (RENN), based in Beijing and sometimes called the “Facebook of China,” fell $1.31, or 21%, to $4.93.

Pandora Media (P) may be the closest kinsman to Facebook. The online radio proprietor sells airtime ads as it lures new listeners, and as listening hours rise, its fans are exposed to an increasing number of them–just like Facebook’s users, observes Pachter. Pandora’s stock was also hammered, though less so: It fell 75 cents, or 7%, to $9.77 on Friday.

“I think it was sympathy,” Moe says of the broad decline. However, he notes, too, that technology “growth names” have been correcting over the past six weeks, with Apple (AAPL) losing $100 billion in market value in that stretch.

Where do things go from here? Both Pachter and Moe are resolute in their belief the value of Facebook will win out in the end.

“It’s our textbook definition of a Buy now,” says Pachter, noting the shares are 20% below his price target. “It will settle, everything finds its equilibrium.”

The true test may be when even more supply hits the market: In three months, insiders’ lockups will expire, and they’ll be able to sell another 268 million shares.

Deep Dive

NYSE Cumulative breadth fell sharply again last week along with stock prices: losing stocks Friday topped winners by better than 3 to 1.

Tiernan Ray can be reached at tiernan.ray@barrons.com or at blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily or www.twitter.com/barronstechblog

Search users are typically expressing a direct intent in a product or service and then an ad is displayed. This creates a scenario in which the search user is later in the buy cycle and thus more likely to execute a purchase (especially when compared to a Facebook user that has entered the site to look at vacation photos of high school acquaintances). This means—at least for most companies—that Facebook is relegated to the less profitable brand advertising space and, as a result, generates only $4/user annually (compared to Google’s $24/user).

All of this might appear to be painting a pretty grim picture for advertisers, but it’s important to understand that Facebook is a different medium with entirely unique advantages that include the:

• Ability to create a long-term relationship with a customer and thus increasing lifetime value/recurring revenue.
• Ability create an audience for PR distribution and viral content efforts.
• Opportunity deeply educate a potential customer and advance them in the buy cycle.

Here are four ways to rethink a paid Facebook campaign.

1. Restructure Your Search Paradigm

Relative to paid social, search is a clean transaction. Typically, an advertiser will have a strong understanding of the earned revenue the very day spend occurs.

Facebook advertising is a very different model than paid search, as the return on investment (ROI) could happen six months after the Like is acquired, if ever. I often recommend the following tactics to “de-search” your paid social campaigns:

• Soften Your Call-to-Actions: If we can safely assume the path to revenue needs to be longer than search, doesn’t it make sense of soften your call-to-action (CTA)? Figure out great ways to incentivize your audience. Maybe it’s offering an opportunity to win a really cool prize or maybe it’s a cause-based donation in exchange for a like. Mitigate risk to build the relationship and focus on long-term education.
• Incentivize Offers: “Like us to get updates about our products and services” just isn’t going to get the job done. Think creatively about what will specifically appeal to your target audience in terms of a sweepstakes, contest, or charitable donation. Ideally, the offering will relate tangentially (at the very least) to your product. For example, a travel aggregator might create a “plan the trip of your dream” contest where entrance is contingent upon the Like. It could then be fan voted where the winner receives the trip.
• Make Ads CTA-based: Unlike search ads, which usually are usually structured as feature/benefit/CTA, Facebook ads should revolve almost entirely around the CTA and its specific benefits. Again, assuming it’s a longer path to revenue, use future posts as the mechanism to slowly educate your potential consumer.

2. Don’t Over-Commit Media Spend

For most audiences, it’s helpful to think of Facebook as somewhere between a branding and PR play. Having an engaged audience of 10,000 users is a great way to increase long-term engagement and control the sentiment revolving around a brand, but put social spending in its place: a great tool, but not one for building short-term revenue.

For most companies, I wouldn’t recommend pulling +EV (Plus Expected Value) search budget. Instead, peel off some of that branding/PR budget and apply to paid social campaigns.

3. Track Follow-up Marketing

Acquiring a social following is great, but making the decision to continue the investment is dependent upon your pilot results. Use campaign URL tracking to determine the level of traffic and conversions that follow. Additionally, look for additional PR signals that may create ancillary benefits in other marketing channels (see: incoming links from evangelists).

After you’ve completed your pilot test and have acquired 2,000 likes, try 60 days of content dissemination to measure CTR, time on site, and conversions. This can then be used to project and extrapolate ROI on future campaigns.

4. Make Sure Your Company is a Good Fit

If you sell a $39.99 need-based one-off, Facebook might never be the wisest route.

However, if you are selling a service or product that requires recurring revenue (e.g., any consumer staple) in which the lifetime value of a customer will be measured over years, Facebook becomes a significantly more logical play. For services that require constant messaging in order to stay “top-of-mind,” having a massive following becomes extremely advantageous, especially when considering that all follow up messaging will be free/low cost.

Remember

Having 10,000 Facebook Likes is a fantastic audience through which to disseminate content to help lubricate viral sharing. It’s also a transparent and central place to engage customers, build brand, listen to feedback, and earn trust. Just be weary of any company that presents social as a quick path to revenue.

SES Toronto 2012 is June 11-13. Register before May 11 and save up to $300!

“The attractiveness of these properties is entirely due to their strong
performance and the hard work of their associates”

Terms of the transaction, which is expected to close within the next 30
days, were not disclosed. In conjunction with the transaction, AIM
announced that all Freedom employees at these publications in Texas will
continue in their respective jobs and positions with the new company.

“The attractiveness of these properties is entirely due to their strong
performance and the hard work of their associates,” said Freedom CEO
Mitch Stern. “The sale furthers our goal of providing value to our
shareholders while at the same time increasing the financial strength of
Freedom.”

“The papers will be in good hands. The leadership of AIM Media Texas has
an intimate understanding of the Texas media landscape and is acutely
aware of the key role newspapers play in the lives of the communities
they serve,” said Mark McEachen, Freedom EVP, COO and CFO. “They share
our view that a newspaper must be strong in its dedication to localism
by providing accurate and timely information and by serving as an active
steward of the values of the community.”

“Freedom Communications is one of the most respected and admired
publishing organizations in the United States,” said Jeremy L.
Halbreich, Chairman and CEO of AIM and the former Chairman and CEO of
Sun-Times Media LLC, former Founder, Chairman, President and CEO of
American Consolidated Media, and former President and General Manager of
The Dallas Morning News. “I have had the pleasure and good fortune of
knowing many of the family members, Board members and senior executives
at Freedom and so we are very flattered to have this opportunity to
become directly involved with these important, high-quality, local
journalism organizations,” he added.

About Freedom Communications

Freedom Communications, headquartered in Irvine, Calif., is a national
privately owned information and entertainment company of print
publications and interactive businesses. The Company’s print portfolio
includes approximately 100 publications, including 24 daily newspapers,
weekly newspapers, plus ancillary magazines and other specialty
publications. The Company’s news, information and entertainment websites
and mobile applications complement its print properties. For more
information, visit www.freedom.com.

About AIM Media Texas, LLC

AIM Media Texas is an acquisition entity formed by Halbreich for the
purpose of purchasing the print and online publishing assets in Texas
from Freedom Communications. The new operating company’s headquarters
will be in McAllen, Tex., and it will be managed by AIM Media Texas
Management of Dallas, Tex. where Halbreich serves as Chairman and CEO
and William R. (“Rick”) Starks serves as President and COO.

Launched in 1994, Geocities offered a way for people to build websites and tell the world about themselves with postings and photos. Users could also buy and sell things through online stores. Pages built to feature different subjects formed virtual communities. Yahoo bought it in 1999, at the height of the dot-com boom, for about $3 billion and shut it down a decade later. Geocities was among the early services that let people form online communities. Yahoo shut down GeoCities in 2009.

— Classmates.com

The website created to connect former schoolmates with one another launched in 1995, possibly before its time. It filed to go public in 2007 when it had about 50 million users, but withdrew the IPO that December, citing “market conditions.” Classmates.com still exists today, but is overshadowed by Facebook. It’s owned by United Online Inc., which is also home to online florists such as FTD and Interflora.

— SixDegrees

Started by Andrew Weinreich in 1997, SixDegrees was “the first online business that attempted to identify and map a set of real relationships between real people using their real names,” writes author David Kirkpatrick in “The Facebook Effect.” Though it attracted millions of users, the site failed to catch on and shut down in 2000. Weinreich later told Kirkpatrick that “We were early. Timing is everything.”

— LiveJournal

Launched in 1999, LiveJournal offered — and still offers — a rudimentary form of social networking. Users write online journals and share them with friends or the general public. The site doesn’t require people to use their real names, and with short status update snippets more popular today, seems more akin to blogging than to social networking. It’s owned by Moscow-based SUP Media and remains popular in Russia.

— Friendster

Launched by Jonathan Abrams in 2002, Friendster was many people’s first introduction to a social network. It showed a lot of promise, and by the fall of 2003 had nearly 2 million users and deep-pocketed investors such as Peter Thiel, who later became one of the first people to invest in Facebook. “By enabling people to connect seamlessly in a global network of social relationships, Friendster stands at the very core of what the Internet is all about,” Thiel told The Associated Press in 2003. The site faded as MySpace and then Facebook rose. Malaysian tycoon Vincent Tan bought the site in 2009 for an undisclosed sum. Today, Friendster operates as an online gaming platform.

— Tribe.net

Founded in 2003 by Mark Pincus, now the CEO of online game company Zynga Inc., and two other entrepreneurs, Tribe was created to let people form online communities around shared interests. Today, it’s used largely by aficionados of alternative lifestyles, with groups ranging from a vegetarian and vegan recipe exchange to “beauty secrets for divas.”