Mark Cuban’s move a worrisome sign for Facebook

Dan Lyons over at ReadWrite writes about an interesting email exchange he had with Mark Cuban, who had tweeted a few weeks ago about his displeasure with Facebook. According to Cuban, Facebook was requesting payment in order for Cuban’s Mavericks team to reach a broader number of its 2 million followers at a rate of $3,000 per 1 million customers.

Facebook says the move to get brands to pay for reach is part of a broader push to cut down on spam. That explanation hasn’t made Cuban any less annoyed, and the billionaire says he is already migrating his properties — which include not only the Mavericks but many small businesses acquired through Shark Tank — onto alternative platforms like Twitter and Tumblr.

Cuban’s annoyance about Facebook makes sense: After all, if you don’t have true reach to your existing followers on Facebook, you have to wonder if it’s valuable to build community on the platform. But I still don’t think Tumblr and Twitter (and especially Myspace) are in any way comparable replacements today.

Cuban knows this (and indicates as much), which is why he isn’t eliminating his Facebook presence. A quick look at some of the small businesses Cuban acquired through the Shark Tank shows they appear to still be making use of Facebook. Realistically, only one of Cuban’s businesses, the Dallas Mavericks, has to worry about Facebook’s new reach tax, because it’s the only business likely big enough to have to pay.

While Cuban is an early mover in looking for alternatives to Facebook, it’s still a worrisome sign for the social net that brand leaders would balk so publicly at its revenue initiatives. I can see how Cuban is annoyed and how others would be rankled by Facebook limiting reach to less than earned followers. Facebook is understandably in search of a revenue model, but by forcing brands to pay to reach existing followers (rather than new followers), Facebook is likely to see others follow Cuban’s lead.

Relevant Analyst

Michael Wolf

Chief Analyst NextMarket Insights

Do you want to speak with Michael Wolf about this topic?

Learn More
You must be logged in to post a comment.
3 Comments Subscribers to comment
  1. Yeah, but there are a lot of people who don’t care about it – not all users are so active to manage their account in a right way. And pushing PR is still a good way to get “new eyes” for your brand or goods.
    But in some case I agree with you – users can always unlike pages. Even we had an experience to catch this reaction of our users. This is the time to think about more productive collaboration with customers by solving their real problems. It this case this an opportunity to get real high virality and real new followers of your brand.

  2. I think Facebook did it because wanted to stop a spam flow. If Cuban would agree to pay this small piece of $$ that would mean he agree that it’s “a kind of spam”. It would be not so good for reputation and red sign for other brands.
    In case no payments it’s like an anti-spam lobby from Facebook to big brands.

    1. Good point, Alexey. Making the payment is a tacit admission that they are essentially spamming.

      Still, Facebook users have an easy opt-out, which is simply unliking. I unlike pages all the time if they get to spammy, and I think for the most part users are good at moderating what they want to see at this point on their Facebook feed.

Explore Related Topics

Latest Research

Latest Webinars

Want to conduct your own Webinar?
Learn More

Learn about our services or Contact us: Email / 800-292-3024