You need to contact Facebook directly for that. I would also assume that you need to pay them a nice little fee or have friends that work there

Best,
Nick

You need to contact Facebook directly for that. I would also assume that you need to pay them a nice little fee or have friends that work there

Best,
Nick

When the wraps came off in early November, I could NOT believe that they were a) Not going to sell subdomains such as http://mybrand.at.facebook.com b) Not going to have a layered software tool for brands, their PR and Online Media / Marketing companies to claim, manage and administrate groups of business pages c) Not split Social Ads Admin from Page Admin d) Not reveal Beacon well in advance to advertisers and privacy critics and e) Have such sloppy and useless terms and conditions added to deal with pages - http://www.facebook.com/terms_pages.php

I thought these guys were smart - but they turn out to be acting like a bunch of green college kids after all, and having set something in motion with little thought for the all-too-obvious consequences, now they’re acting like paranoid a***oles to paper over the mess they made. And it’s a fine mess, to quote Oliver Hardy…

No brand is not run by one person. Facebook have set up a mechanism where major global brands can have their name used or abused by any one person, and their legitimate fans can be disenfranchised, misled, and well-meaning brand advocates and fans can be simply dumped or left in limbo as readily as those who are acting with malicious intent - and all of this damages the credibility of facebook, and will be likely to take up a growing amount of admin time - and that’s before the lawyers get onto things. Get this one: “Facebook reserves the right, but is not obligated, to resolve any complaints, disputes, or potential disputes regarding the infringement of any third party trademarks in connection with your Facebook Page or Facebook URL in any manner it deems appropriate in its sole discretion.” Translation: “We might help you protect your IP, or we might not want to get involved. But whatever, we’re in charge, and your ability to protect your brand is powerless here, OK?”

Pardon my french, but that’s one huge f***ing mess to make, especially if you want to monetize screen (or eyeball) real estate to those brands, and if I were an investor in a company that’s meant to be worth $15bn, I’d be kicking some asses very hard, starting right at the top, because this is the kind of self-inflicted damage that can destroy any company, but which makes the position of what is widely acknowledged to be an arrogant, fast-growth, high-growth and overvalued company very, very tenuous.

The main asset of facebook is their user base, and their only source of cash at present comes from investors and advertisers. If they alienate or marginalise any of these constituencies, they destroy their business.

This could be the tipping point that signals facebook’s decline unless they get this issue dealt with transparently and rapidly - and also creatively, because they really have been very dumb, and put themselves between a rock and a hard place.

When the wraps came off in early November, I could NOT believe that they were a) Not going to sell subdomains such as http://mybrand.at.facebook.com b) Not going to have a layered software tool for brands, their PR and Online Media / Marketing companies to claim, manage and administrate groups of business pages c) Not split Social Ads Admin from Page Admin d) Not reveal Beacon well in advance to advertisers and privacy critics and e) Have such sloppy and useless terms and conditions added to deal with pages - http://www.facebook.com/terms_pages.php

I thought these guys were smart - but they turn out to be acting like a bunch of green college kids after all, and having set something in motion with little thought for the all-too-obvious consequences, now they’re acting like paranoid a***oles to paper over the mess they made. And it’s a fine mess, to quote Oliver Hardy…

No brand is not run by one person. Facebook have set up a mechanism where major global brands can have their name used or abused by any one person, and their legitimate fans can be disenfranchised, misled, and well-meaning brand advocates and fans can be simply dumped or left in limbo as readily as those who are acting with malicious intent - and all of this damages the credibility of facebook, and will be likely to take up a growing amount of admin time - and that’s before the lawyers get onto things. Get this one: “Facebook reserves the right, but is not obligated, to resolve any complaints, disputes, or potential disputes regarding the infringement of any third party trademarks in connection with your Facebook Page or Facebook URL in any manner it deems appropriate in its sole discretion.” Translation: “We might help you protect your IP, or we might not want to get involved. But whatever, we’re in charge, and your ability to protect your brand is powerless here, OK?”

Pardon my french, but that’s one huge f***ing mess to make, especially if you want to monetize screen (or eyeball) real estate to those brands, and if I were an investor in a company that’s meant to be worth $15bn, I’d be kicking some asses very hard, starting right at the top, because this is the kind of self-inflicted damage that can destroy any company, but which makes the position of what is widely acknowledged to be an arrogant, fast-growth, high-growth and overvalued company very, very tenuous.

The main asset of facebook is their user base, and their only source of cash at present comes from investors and advertisers. If they alienate or marginalise any of these constituencies, they destroy their business.

This could be the tipping point that signals facebook’s decline unless they get this issue dealt with transparently and rapidly - and also creatively, because they really have been very dumb, and put themselves between a rock and a hard place.