While many cite that the world is much different now than it was in the 90s. Â At that time, when the dot.com rage and IPOs began crumpling, the domino effect took down telecom and many other tech firms.
Now, with VCs and angels chasing the next "big thing", the current over-exuberance in internet stocks - even private - is beginning to look like another bubble.Â
How do you explain secondary-market valuations like:
FACEBOOK: secondary-market trades value this firm at some $76 billion (more than Boeing or Ford).
TWITTER: this company is allegedly valued at $7.7 billion - without a very clear revenue model as yet.
COLOR: photo-sharing network with an untested service, recently raised $40M in an additional round of capital and is allegedly valued at $100M - with an untested service.
Without a firm's offerings meeting a solid need, it's questionable that some of the firms (not necessarily those above) will come anywhere near these stratospheric valuations. At some point, the bubble will have to break.
What do you think? Do any of these firms really meet business needs - or consumer needs - and have the leadership to pull off these kinds of expectations?
What firms are really helping with the consumerization of technology and moving business forward?
