opinions
editors: josh higgins, bethany melson opinionseditor@collegiatetimes.com/ 540.231.9865
september 13, 2012 COLLEGIATETIMES
5
The Collegiate Times is an independent student-run newspaper serving the Virginia Tech community since 1903 Collegiate Times Editorial Staff Editor in Chief: Michelle Sutherland Managing Editor: Nick Cafferky Design Editors: Andrea Ledesma, Alicia Tillman Public Editor: Erin Chapman Web Editor: Chelsea Gunter News Editors: Mallory Noe-Payne, Victoria Zigadlo News Reporters: Priscilla Alvarez, Cody Owens Features Editors: Emma Goddard, Nick Smirniotopoulos Features Staff Writers: Ben Kim, Katie White, Kara Van Scoyc, Allie Sivak, Jacob Wilbanks Opinions Editors: Josh Higgins, Bethany Melson Sports Editors: Matt Jones, Zach Mariner Special Sections Editors: Cody Elliot, Gina Patterson Copy Chief: Nora McGann Copy Editors: Allison Hedrick, Kristin Gunter Collegiate Times Business Staff Business Manager: Ryan Francis Circulation Manager: Travis Neale Student Publications Photo Staff Director of Photography: Brad Klodowski
MCT CAMPUS
Facebook needs business leader
Parties limit citizens’ choices
E
W
very generation has its one revolutionary innovation that stands above the rest. That single invention alters the way society works, changing the way we think and molds the future. For our generation, that designation goes to Facebook. We all know how popular and impactful Facebook is, so I won’t bother belaboring those details. But that same sweeping popularity is what ushered the company into the public market on May 18 this year. According to a Bloomberg Businessweek article, Facebook has lost a colossal $50 billion in market value since its initial public offering four months ago. The corporation needs to stop the bleeding on Wall Street, which is why on Tuesday, CEO Mark Zuckerberg made his fi rst speech to investors since the IPO. But is that what Facebook really needs? Last year, I wrote a column about the Facebook IPO and why I was keeping my money in my pocket. I’m quite glad I did. However, I don’t think anyone foresaw the catastrophe that ensued. The Facebook IPO will be remembered as the worst in history, due to the alarming amount of money lost by the company and its investors in such a short time frame. Why did the IPO fail? It’s simple. The company was astronomically overpriced because of the seemingly boundless hype generated by the announcement of an IPO. Investors saw the hundreds of millions of users and took that as a potential for huge profits, but it just didn’t add up. To put it in perspective, Brian Hamilton, CEO of Sageworks, told Fox Business News that if the valuation methods used with Facebook’s $100 billion IPO were applied to Apple’s IPO in 1980, Apple would have been valued at an estimated $2.7 trillion. A market value of this magnitude is unheard of on Wall Street, and is honestly laughable when regarding an IPO. People put too much faith into a company that currently has a meager-at-best business plan. The money Facebook raises is from advertising and licensing, but that simply is not enough to compete with the likes of Google. In Zuckerberg’s speech, he addressed the sullen state of
Facebook’s stock by talking about the company’s future plan. The plans include a revamped mobile application that will increase revenue through more frequent usage. Whether it was his delivery or the content, I was left unimpressed and uninspired. The performance of a company profoundly affects the performance of its stock, but there is defi nitely a discrepancy. Wall Street-billionaire Mark Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks, made a statement on the Huffington Post about his purchase of Facebook stock and his subsequent losses. He said that Facebook’s management was not to blame but that he, the investor, was. He reasoned that, “No one sells me shares of stock because they expect the price of the stock to go up”, and that, “You look for the sucker. When you don’t see one, it’s you.” Regardless of the reason for Facebook’s plunge, both business and stock performance must improve. Mark Zuckerberg, although a technical genius, is not whom Facebook needs to conduct all public matters. What they need is someone who will give the company a strong personality. Someone needs to motivate potential stockholders to invest in the company. They need someone to share responsibility for the company’s performance and inspire the skeptics into giving Facebook a chance. Who this person should be is a mystery, but I do know he or she is out there. Many of the America’s most successful companies were or are controlled in tandem. Google has Larry Page and Sergery Brin, Apple had Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, and Microsoft had Bill Gates and Paul Allen, just to name a few examples. Investors across the nation, myself included, who refrained from investing in the beginning stages of Facebook’s stock, are watching the markets with itchy trigger fingers. We are all looking for the bottom of the ravine Facebook has tumbled into. We just need to be inspired and take the plunge, but Zuckerberg needs help in doing so. DAVID LEVITT -regular columnist - junior - finance major
hen the founding fathers came together in 1776 to create one of the most powerful nations in history, we can safely assume they would not have expected America to be what it is today. Despite a foundation of principles thought to revolutionize government, our government is in disarray. As time has gone on, political gridlock and division have only intensified. By far, the largest factor in our government’s inability to get anything done is the two-party system. How many times do we find ourselves asking the question, which is the lesser of the two evils in regard to our elections? Sometimes the choice may be clear-cut, but all too often even the candidate who holds the same party affiliation as you is undesirable. When the choice of candidates is narrowed to two, you are presented with the issue of both candidates having opinions that fundamentally differ from yours. Maybe you like the fiscal policies of one candidate, but prefer the social ones of the other, or vice versa. Obviously, it would be unrealistic to expect a candidate to perfectly fit your expectations, but our government is the other extreme. Even more depressing, how truly different are our two candidates? In campaigns, all we ever hear about are either the different tax plans or social issues. Sure, other issues definitely enter the political sphere, such as guns, border control and healthcare, but how often are new ideas presented? Recently, President Barak Obama proposed and passed a health care reform bill. Other than that, politicians rarely bring new ideas to the table. Brainstorming is stagnant. There are obviously huge issues we need to deal with, such as balancing the budget, controlling the border (both in regard to drugs and illegal immigrants),
civil rights, etc. And yet, even though only two years ago we once again reached the debt ceiling, and even though there is uncontrolled drug violence raging throughout our country, it seems that the two parties dance around these issues, unwavering, unwilling to make compromises and get things done.
people have never heard of these candidates. Did you know that Gary Johnson is running in this election for the Libertarian Party or Tom Hoefling from the American Independent Party? How about Jill Stein from the Green Party? Unfortunately, because our country is so rooted in the two-party system, these candidates never get any media coverage. If you find bith the Even Ron Paul, a libertarian tryDemocratic and Republican ing to run on the candidates insufficient, Republican ticket, was effectivewhere do you turn? The ly shut out by his answer is simple: We need party. The second to break the two-party issue is the winsystem." ner-take-all rule for the Electoral College. Instead George Washing ton of electoral votes directly warned his colleagues corresponding to citizen about such a system. votes, it runs on a winnerIn his farewell address, he take-all system. said, “I have already intiConsequently, if a thirdmated to you the danger party candidate wins 15 of parties in the state, with percent of the vote, the particular reference to the Democratic Party wins founding of them on geo- 45 percent of the vote, graphical discriminations. and the Republican Party Let me now take a more wins 35 percent of the comprehensive view and vote, neit her t he warn you in the most sol- Republican Party nor emn manner against the the third party gets any baneful effects of the spirit “credit” for those votes. of party, generally.” Obviously, having 16 So what is there left to popular parties would do? If you find both the spread votes too Democratic and Republican thin. candidates to be insuffiHowever, having three cient, where do you turn? to five powerful parThe answer is simple: ties would present so We need to break the two- many more options for party system. us. It is incredibly rare for It is quite clear that we a third-party candidate to need some real change in win an election. this country, and we are An independent presi- not getting it. dential candidate has never Therefore, I strongbeen elected. ly encourage you all This reality is unexplain- to explore all your ably depressing. Third- options. party candidates who deviEvery vote counts, and ate from the two-party if everyone takes the system typically have the time to investigate the kind of revolutionary ideas choices, there is a conthat could break the seem- siderable chance that a ingly endless stalemate on third-party candidate Capitol Hill. cou ld be elected So why has one never been president. elected? There are two main fac- DANNY HARTZOG tors that contribute to the lack of success of third -regular columnist -sophomore party candidates. The first issue is that many -computer engineering major
“
College Media Solutions Assistant Ad Director: Carla Craft Account Executives: Elizabeth Dam, Emily Daugherty, Taylor Moran Inside Sales Manager: Amanda Gawne Assistant Account Executives: Andrew Newton, Jordan Williams Creative Director: Danielle Bushrow Assistant Creative Services Director: Alyssa Morrison Creative Staff: Mary Dassira, Chloe Young, Cameron Vaile, Diana Bayless Voice your opinion. Readers are encouraged to send letters to the Collegiate Times. 365 Squires Student Center Blacksburg, VA, 24061 Fax: (540) 231-9151 opinionseditor@collegiatetimes. com All letters to the editor must include a name and daytime phone number. Students must include year and major. Faculty and staff must include position and department. All other submissions must include city of residence, and if applicable, relationship to Virginia Tech (i.e., alumni, parent, etc.). All letters should be in MS Word (.doc) format, if possible. Letters, commentaries and editorial cartoons do not reflect the views of the Collegiate Times. Editorials are written by the Collegiate Times editorial board, which is composed of the opinions editors, editor-in-chief and the managing editors. Letters to the editor are submissions from Collegiate Times readers. We reserve the right to edit for any reason. Anonymous letters will not be printed. Have a news tip? Call or text 200-TIPS or e-mail newstips@collegiatetimes. com Collegiate Times Newsroom 231-9865 Editor-in-Chief 231-9867 College Media Solutions Advertising 961-9860 The Collegiate Times, a division of the Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech, was established in 1903 by and for the students of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The Collegiate Times is published every Tuesday through Friday of the academic year except during exams and vacations. The Collegiate Times receives no direct funding from the university. The Collegiate Times can be found online at www.collegiatetimes.com. Except where noted, all photographs were taken by the Student Publications Photo Staff. To order a reprint of a photograph printed in the Collegiate Times, visit reprints. collegemedia.com. The first copy is free, any copy of the paper after that is 50 cents per issue. © Collegiate Times, 2012. All rights reserved. Material published in the Collegiate Times is the property thereof, and may not be reprinted without the express written consent of the Collegiate Times.