mike's article is certainly revealing & relevant, but trying to piece together financial position from the level of detail in that article seems dubious at best. everyone else is simply re-reporting mike's analysis, not doing their own original reporting (even blodget is just parroting mike's piece).

i don't know if Facebook is “desperate” just because they're out raising capital, and a “down round” when you've already established the market position they're in isn't nearly as dire as it might sound (if that's even happening). Facebook should have no problem raising capital at SOME valuation north of $3-5B, whether or not they can meet the previous highly-motivated bar set by Microsoft.

surely SOME of the international growth is coming from the EU and other monetizable markets outside the US, so i'd say it's a bit over the top to suggest that 100+% growth in non-US markets is somehow a bad thing. maybe they haven't figured out the business model just yet, but i can't tell you the number of companies that would give their first-born child and right arm for 100% growth AFTER already having double-digit million users.

please followup on this article after you or others have been able to establish a little more detail on the financials. i'm sure we'd all like to see more broadly-researched analysis in addition to Mike's work. he's certainly done a good job diving into some meaty topics & real hard-nosed journalism; still it's a much healthier environment when you, Mike, & Kara are all out there digging instead of just 500 blogs syndicating one person's efforts.

I disagree with you labeling this “rumor-mongering.”

I don't follow Facebook at all, but this is rumor-mongering, not journalism guys.