Facebook may have missed revenue projections by $500 million

According to new analysis, the report suggesting Facebook’s revenue doubled to $1.6 billion for the first half of 2011 is actually bad news.

Earlier this week, we learned that Facebook reportedly doubled its revenue to $1.6 billion for the first half of 2011. Was this really the good news it was made out to be? PrivCo, an analyst firm for privately-held companies, doesn’t think so. In fact, the group says Facebook missed its own forecasts by about 25 percent, or nearly $500 million.

Microsoft MCTS Certification, MCITP Certification and over 2000+
Exams with Life Time Access Membership at http://www.actualkey.com

In December 2010, Facebook announced that it had raised $1.5 billion at a valuation of approximately $50 billion, but that it had no immediate plans for the funds and would simply continue to build and expand its operations. The transaction consisted of two parts: in January 2011, Goldman Sachs completed an oversubscribed offering to its non-US clients in a fund that invested $1 billion in Facebook Class A common stock, while in December 2010, Digital Sky Technologies, The Goldman Sachs Group, and funds managed by Goldman Sachs, invested $500 million in Facebook Class A common stock at the same valuation.

PrivCo CEO Sam Hamadeh tells me that the devil is in the details. In the prospectus for the Goldman Sachs placement to its private clients, Facebook had projected first half year sales in 2011 of more than $2 billion and full year revenue of $4 billion. Furthermore, these numbers were based solely on ad revenue.

Hamadeh admits he never saw a copy of the prospectus, but he says he spoke to multiple people who did and could verify the numbers. In fact, he believes that the yearly revenue number was actually estimated to be higher $4.7 billion if you add what the company expected to make from Facebook Credits (sales of virtual goods and other content from Facebook apps and games), for which Facebook takes a 30 percent. Either way, this isn’t good news for Facebook.

“When it sold stock via Goldman Sachs to investors in January at a $50 billion valuation, it provided internal ‘conservative projections’ in investment documents circulated of ‘over $4 billion in revenue for 2011,’” Hamadeh told me. “At revenue of under $1.6 billion for the 1st half of 2011 (actually close to $1.5 according to our sources), revenue will barely exceed $3.2 billion for 2011. Facebook has seriously missed its own revenue forecasts of nearly $2 billion for 1st half 2011 by nearly $500 million, or 25 percent. (If this were a public company such as Google just announcing such results, its stock would be dropping dramatically today, perhaps by a third overnight.)”

“Connect the dots and Facebook’s undergoing a loss of momentum, possibly even a decline (it’s happened before to MySpace, and before that to Friendster), and there’s a disconnect between underlying fundamentals and media hype,” Hamadeh added. “Facebook’s ‘$100 billion IPO’ and ‘being bigger than Google’ etc. is not a given, to say the least.”

Facebook’s valuation has been all over the place in the months following the investment at $50 billion. Some look at the growth and see great prospects. Others see a dip in the last few months and think Facebook is doomed. The truth is we can only make predictions on the little data we have. Facebook is going public next year, possibly as soon as Q1 2012. This will open up the financial data floodgates, and then we’ll finally be able to figure out how far the social networking giant will be able to go.

Measuring the success of Ed Tech: Not all about test scores

Sometimes, technology gets thrown at struggling schools as a panacea for a variety of ills with predictably bad results. How should we be measuring those results, though, in the schools that are doing it right?

The New York Times ran a feature on Saturday called “In Classroom of Future, Stagnant Scores”. The article is part of a series called “Grading the Digital School” and asked some tough questions about whether technology in schools can actually improve student achievement. Most significantly, it pointed to the lack of hard data around the quantifiable success of investing in technology-rich schools. While we have a responsibility to ensure that technology is adding value in schools, I’m inclined to believe that the lack of supporting data is the result of poor measures rather than poor results.

Microsoft MCTS Certification, MCITP Certification and over 2000+
Exams with Life Time Access Membership at http://www.actualkey.com

As noted in the article,

Since 2005, scores in reading and math have stagnated in Kyrene [the Arizona school district featured as an example of a technology-rich environment], even as statewide scores have risen.

To be sure, test scores can go up or down for many reasons. But to many education experts, something is not adding up — here and across the country. In a nutshell: schools are spending billions on technology, even as they cut budgets and lay off teachers, with little proof that this approach is improving basic learning.

Let me start by saying that I’ve seen too many technology implementations in schools that add no real educational value, but take a nice dent out of taxpayer wallets. There are plenty of ways to go about making a school “technology-rich” that actually take away from the real business of learning. When rollouts are half-hearted, teachers and parents don’t completely embrace the approach, students and teachers lack accountability, and teachers aren’t provided with the right training and coaching, then schools end up buying a lot of expensive toys. eSchool News recently highlighted schools in New Mexico that are saddled with hefty repair bills and failing, aging, abused computers from their 1:1 efforts.

I am not in the give-everyone-computers-and-watch-them-succeed camp.

However, I wouldn’t be in the business of Ed Tech if I didn’t think that the potential existed for kids to learn in new, engaging ways that prepared them for real-world challenges and managed to better differentiate instruction so that every student could be better served in our public schools. What’s happening in a district like Kyrene where everything seems to be happening the way educational technologists believe it should? Kyrene has solid community investment, good teacher buy-in, and progressive techniques. Why aren’t standardized test scores following?

On counterpoint in the article sounded fairly familiar:

Karen Cator, director of the office of educational technology in the United States Department of Education, said standardized test scores were an inadequate measure of the value of technology in schools. Ms. Cator, a former executive at Apple Computer, said that better measurement tools were needed but, in the meantime, schools knew what students needed.

It would be nice to think that schools know what kids need, but we also need to find ways to measure the more intangible skills that students acquire using technology in relevant and (I believe) powerful ways. We see technology breaking down barriers to collaboration, improving writing and criticism, providing software that differentiates instruction and gives real-time feedback to teachers on student strengths and weaknesses, and allowing teachers to guide students through rich and varied resources. Standardized tests, all too often, measure students’ abilities to take tests.

Some of the best standardized tests get at students’ critical reasoning skills and their ability to tease out abstract concepts from real-world problems. Even these, though, may not be aligned with the way students are learning, particularly in more constructivist settings where technology enables a different kind of creativity. And even in states with tests widely acknowledged as “good”, most students will see short-term bumps when schools teach to the test.

Real learning, the sort that many hope will happen in technology-rich environments, is rare when curricula are closely aligned with test materials. Don’t get me wrong – Alignment is the name of the game and tests should assess what students are learning. Too frequently, though, schools tweak and rework their curricula based on minute analyses of yearly test items. Those schools that delve deeply into subjects may find their scores for the year distinctly lacking, even if their students are richer for the deep dive. Imagine, for example, a school-wide, year-long focus on statistics and data analysis, where students use spreadsheets, scientific probes, online surveys and other tools to really explore the world around them. Invariably, scores relating to measurement, statistics, expository writing, and reporting will improve overall. However, there won’t be time that year to teach 27 other standards in English and math, no matter how many important skills and concepts students take with them.

The tests will also not measure the ability of students to manage projects independently or search the web for research materials, both of which would have been key outcomes of the project-oriented learning I described above.

Yes, we need better tests. And we need data about the real value of tech in the classroom. But more than that, we need research into pedagogy that supports the use of tech in the classroom. We need students to focus on developing portfolios rather than racking up test scores. We need students to know how to tackle a project when they encounter one (and not just Google “statistics” but really manage resources and develop and implement a plan). And we need teachers to not just have a day of professional development before school starts on how to have kids use Google Docs; they need ongoing coaching from experts in the field to ensure that all of these technology investments are adding real value, even if the tests left over from NCLB don’t have the chops to assess that value.

The 10 best IT certifications

Guest post from TechRepublic’s 10 Things blog: IT pros tend to have strong opinions when debating the value of professional certification — and views become even more polarized when it comes down to a discussion of which certs are meaningful. TechRepublic’s Erik Eckel put together a list of the accreditations he believes currently hold value [...]

Guest post from TechRepublic’s 10 Things blog: IT pros tend to have strong opinions when debating the value of professional certification — and views become even more polarized when it comes down to a discussion of which certs are meaningful. TechRepublic’s Erik Eckel put together a list of the accreditations he believes currently hold value for IT pros.

Microsoft MCTS Certification, MCITP Certification and over 2000+
Exams with Life Time Access Membership at http://www.actualkey.com

IT certifications boast numerous benefits. They bolster resumes, encourage higher salaries, and assist in job retention. But which IT certifications are best?

Technology professionals generate much debate over just that question. Many claim vendor-specific programs best measure a candidate’s skills, while others propose vendor-independent exams are the only worthy way of measuring real-world expertise. Still other observers believe the highest-level accreditations — Microsoft’s MCSE or new Architect Series certification, Cisco’s CCIE, etc. — are the only credentials that truly hold value.

Myself, I don’t fully subscribe to any of those mindsets. The best IT certification for you, after all, is likely to be different from that for another technology professional with different education, skills, and goals working at a different company in a different industry. For that reason, when pursuing any professional accreditation, you should give much thought and care to your education, experience, skills, goals, and desired career path.

Once a career road map is in place, selecting a potential certification path becomes much easier. And that’s where this list of the industry’s 10 best IT certifications comes into play. While this list may not include the 10 best accreditations for you, it does catalog 10 IT certifications that possess significant value for a wide range of technology professionals.




#1: MCITP
The new-generation Microsoft Certified IT Professional credential, or MCITP for short, is likely to become the next big Microsoft certification. Available for a variety of fields of expertise — including database developer, database administrator, enterprise messaging administrator, and server administrator — an MCITP validates a professional’s proven job-role capabilities. Candidates must pass several Microsoft exams that track directly to their job role before earning the new designation.

As with Microsoft’s other new-generation accreditations, the MCITP certification will retire when Microsoft suspends mainstream support for the platforms targeted within the MCITP exams. By matching the new certification to popular job roles, as has been done to some extent with CompTIA’s Server+ (server administrator), Project+ (project manager), and A+ (desktop support) certifications, Microsoft has created a new certification that’s certain to prove timely, relevant, and valuable.

#2: MCTS
The new-generation Microsoft Certified Technology Specialist (MCTS) helps IT staff validate skills in installing, maintaining, and troubleshooting a specific Microsoft technology. The MCTS certifications are designed to communicate the skills and expertise a holder possesses on a specific platform.

For example, candidates won’t earn an MCTS on SQL Server 2008. Instead, they’ll earn an MCTS covering SQL Server business intelligence (MCTS: SQL Server 2008 Business Intelligence), database creation (MCTS: SQL Server 2008, Database Development), or SQL server administration (MCTS: SQL Server 2008, Implementation and Maintenance).

These new certifications require passing multiple, tightly targeted exams that focus on specific responsibilities on specific platforms. MCTS designations will expire when Microsoft suspends mainstream support for the corresponding platform. These changes, as with other new-generation Microsoft certifications, add value to the accreditation.

#3: Security+
Security continues to be a critical topic. That’s not going to change. In fact, its importance is only going to grow. One of the quickest ways to lose shareholder value, client confidence, and sales is to suffer a data breach. And no self-respecting technology professional wants to be responsible for such a breach.

CompTIA’s Security+ accreditation provides a respected, vendor-neutral foundation for industry staff (with at least two years of experience) seeking to demonstrate proficiency with security fundamentals. While the Security+ accreditation consists of just a single exam, it could be argued that any IT employee charged with managing client data or other sensitive information should, at a minimum, possess this accreditation. The importance of ensuring staff are properly educated as to systems security, network infrastructure, access control, auditing, and organizational security principles is simply too important to take for granted.

#4: MCPD
There’s more to information technology than just administration, support, and networking. Someone must create and maintain the applications and programs that power organizations. That’s where the new-generation Microsoft Certified Professional Developer (MCPD) credential comes into play.

The MCPD accreditation measures a developer’s ability to build and maintain software solutions using Visual Studio 2008 and Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5. Split into three certification paths (Windows Developer 3.5, ASP.NET Developer 3.5, and Enterprise Applications Developer 3.5), the credential targets IT professionals tasked with designing, optimizing, and operating those Microsoft technologies to fulfill business needs.

A redesigned certification aimed at better-measuring real-world skills and expertise, the MCPD will prove important for developers and programmers. Besides requiring candidates to pass several exams, the MCPD certification will retire when Microsoft suspends mainstream support for the corresponding platform. The change is designed to ensure the MCPD certification remains relevant, which is certain to further increase its value.

#5: CCNA
The Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert (CCIE) accreditation captures most of the networking company’s certification glory. But the Cisco Certified Network Associate (CCNA) might prove more realistic within many organizations.

In a world in which Microsoft and Linux administrators are also often expected to be networking experts, many companies don’t have the budgets necessary to train (or employ) a CCIE. But even small and midsize corporations can benefit from having their technology professionals earn basic proficiency administering Cisco equipment, as demonstrated by earning a CCNA accreditation.

As smaller companies become increasingly dependent upon remote access technologies, basic Cisco systems skills are bound to become more important. Although many smaller organizations will never have the complexity or workload necessary to keep a CCIE busy, Cisco’s CCNA is a strong accreditation for technology professionals with a few years’ experience seeking to grow and improve their networking skills.

#6: A+
Technology professionals with solid hardware and support skills are becoming tougher to find. There’s not much glory in digging elbow-deep into a desktop box or troubleshooting Windows boot errors. But those skills are essential to keeping companies running.

Adding CompTIA’s A+ certification to a resume tells hiring managers and department heads that you have proven support expertise. Whether an organization requires desktop installation, problem diagnosis, preventive maintenance, or computer or network error troubleshooting, many organizations have found A+-certified technicians to be more productive than their noncertified counterparts.

Changes to the A+ certification, which requires passing multiple exams, are aimed at keeping the popular credential relevant. Basic prerequisite requirements are now followed by testing that covers specific fields of expertise (such as IT, remote support, or depot technician). The accreditation is aimed at those working in desktop support, on help desks, and in the field, and while many of these staffers are new to the industry, the importance of an A+ certification should not be overlooked.

#7: PMP
Some accreditations gain value by targeting specific skills and expertise. The Project Management Professional (PMP) certification is a great example.

The Project Management Institute (PMI), a nonprofit organization that serves as a leading membership association for project management practitioners, maintains the PMP exam. The certification measures a candidate’s project management expertise by validating skills and knowledge required to plan, execute, budget, and lead a technology project. Eligible candidates must have five years of project management experience or three years of project management experience and 35 hours of related education.

As organizations battle tough economic conditions, having proven project scheduling, budgeting, and management skills will only grow in importance. The PMI’s PMP credential is a perfect conduit for demonstrating that expertise on a resume.

#8: MCSE/MCSA
Even years after their introduction, Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) and Microsoft Certified Systems Administrator (MCSA) credentials remain valuable. But it’s important to avoid interpreting these accreditations as meaning the holders are all-knowing gurus, as that’s usually untrue.

In my mind, the MCSE and MCSA hold value because they demonstrate the holder’s capacity to complete a long and comprehensive education, training, and certification program requiring intensive study. Further, these certifications validate a wide range of relevant expertise (from client and server administration to security issues) on specific, widely used platforms.

Also important is the fact that these certifications tend to indicate holders have been working within the technology field for a long time. There’s no substitute for actual hands-on experience. Many MCSEs and MCSAs hold their certifications on Windows 2000 or Windows Server 2003 platforms, meaning they’ve been working within the industry for many years. While these certifications will be replaced by Microsoft’s new-generation credentials, they remain an important measure of foundational skills on Windows platforms.

#9: CISSP
As mentioned with the Security+ accreditation earlier, security is only going to grow in importance. Whatever an organization’s mission, product, or service, security is paramount.

(ISC)², which administers the Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) accreditation, has done well building a respected, vendor-neutral security certification. Designed for industry pros with at least five years of full-time experience, and accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the CISSP is internationally recognized for validating a candidate’s expertise with operations and network and physical security, as well as their ability to manage risk and understand legal compliance responsibilities and other security-related elements.

#10: Linux+
While pursuing my first Microsoft certification 10 years ago, I remember debating the importance of Linux with several telecommunications technicians. They mocked the investment I was making in learning Microsoft technologies. These techs were confident Linux was going to displace Windows.

Well, didn’t happen. Linux continues to make inroads, though. The open source alternative is an important platform. Those professionals who have Linux expertise and want to formalize that skill set will do well adding CompTIA’s Linux+ certification to their resumes.

The vendor-neutral exam, which validates basic Linux client and server skills, is designed for professionals with at least six to 12 months of hands-on Linux experience. In addition to being vendor-neutral, the exam is also distribution neutral (meaning the skills it covers work well whether a candidate is administering Red Hat, SUSE, or Ubuntu systems).

Let the debate begin
Technology professionals almost always have strong reactions when debating certification’s value. Listing the top 10 certifications leaves room, of course, for only 10 credentials. That means many favorite and popular designations, such as HIPAA and Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) certifications, have been necessarily omitted. Other important accreditations, including those for VoIP providers and from PC manufacturers, Red Hat, and even Apple, have also been left out here.