FB Jan 2021 305.000 call

OPR - OPR Delayed Price. Currency in USD
1.7600
-0.1800 (-9.28%)
As of 11:52AM EDT. Market open.
Stock chart is not supported by your current browser
Previous Close1.7600
Open1.8100
Bid1.7600
Ask1.9800
Strike305.00
Expire Date2021-01-15
Day's Range1.7600 - 1.8100
Contract RangeN/A
Volume7
Open Interest43
  • Biden campaign cracks down on Facebook over false ads
    Reuters Videos

    Biden campaign cracks down on Facebook over false ads

    The Biden campaign going after Facebook once again... this time for running a video ad which falsely accused the former Vice President of blackmailing Ukrainian officials to stop an investigation of his son. On Thursday the Biden campaign sent a letter to Facebook, viewed by the New York Times, arguing the ad should be taken down. While the Trump campaign has been pushing out ads with similar false accusations in recent weeks... the video in question was released by an independent political action committee, or super PAC...called 'the Committee to Defend the President.' Biden's campaign pointed out that although Facebook has a policy of allowing all political leaders platform, the ad by the super PAC was not from a politician but an organization...and so it should have been rejected. The letter came on the same day that Facebook's CEO, Mark Zuckerberg delivered a speech in Washington defending his company's approach to political ads, arguing that even falsehoods from a politician were important for public discourse. (SOUNDBITE)(ENGLISH) FACEBOOK CEO, MARK ZUCKERBERG, SAYING: "I don't think its right for a private company to censor politicians or the news in a democracy." Zuckerberg faced swift backlash to the speech- especially from Senator Elizabeth Warren who tweeted: "Once again, we're seeing Facebook throw its hands up to battling misinformation in the political discourse, because when profit comes up against protecting democracy, Facebook chooses profit." After the Biden campaign's letter- The Times reported that a Facebook executive confirmed that the ad was taken down. And if it ran again it would be submitted to fact-checking.

  • Facebook Co-Founder Heads $10 Million 'Anti-Monopoly' Fund
    Bloomberg

    Facebook Co-Founder Heads $10 Million 'Anti-Monopoly' Fund

    Oct.18 -- Chris Hughes, co-founder at Facebook, and Thomas Perriello, executive director at Open Society-US, discuss efforts to break up and regulate Facebook and other big tech firms. They speak on "Bloomberg Daybreak: Americas."

  • 5 prominent U.S. companies are most at fault for the earnings recession
    MarketWatch

    5 prominent U.S. companies are most at fault for the earnings recession

    With the S&P 500 suffering an earnings recession for the first time since 2017, a few big names deserve most of the blame.

  • Susan Rice weighs in on 'the danger' surrounding big tech
    Yahoo Finance

    Susan Rice weighs in on 'the danger' surrounding big tech

    The international reputation of large American tech firms can impact how the global community perceives the U.S., says a former top national security official under Barack Obama.

  • TheStreet.com

    [video]Zuckerberg Set to Defend Libra on Capitol Hill Next Week. Here's What to Expect

    While the hearing is focused on Facebook's Libra project, the congressional grilling could also extend to Facebook's acquisitions, antitrust concerns and posture on free speech.

  • Reuters

    U.S. social networks withhold data on spread of livestreamed Germany shooting video

    Companies including Facebook and Twitter committed in May to take "transparent, specific measures" to prevent the amplification of violent content, after the killing of 51 people in Christchurch, New Zealand was livestreamed on Facebook. Releasing the data would provide an indication of the impact of the new policies.

  • News Corp to supply headlines for Facebook's upcoming news tab
    Reuters

    News Corp to supply headlines for Facebook's upcoming news tab

    The WSJ, which first reported about the deal, said news publications Washington Post, BuzzFeed News, and Business Insider have also reached a similar deal with Facebook. The news organizations will be paid a licensing fee to supply headlines, the WSJ reported.

  • Facebook May Have More Money and Problems after 2020 Vote
    Market Realist

    Facebook May Have More Money and Problems after 2020 Vote

    Facebook critics, from Donald Trump to Democratic presidential nominee candidate Elizabeth Warren, are rushing to the platform to promote their campaigns.

  • Reuters

    UPDATE 1-JPMorgan's Dimon says Facebook's Libra currency 'will never happen'

    Facebook's Libra digital currency project is "a neat idea that will never happen," JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive Jamie Dimon said on Friday, adding to skepticism about the project that has faced criticism from policymakers and some regulators. Dimon, who made the comments at an event in Washington hosted by the Institute of International Finance, did not elaborate on why he believed Libra was a non-starter.

  • Will Twitter (TWTR) Stock Continue Its 2019 Success After Q3 Earnings?
    Zacks

    Will Twitter (TWTR) Stock Continue Its 2019 Success After Q3 Earnings?

    Twitter (TWTR) is set to report its third quarter results on Thursday, October 24 before the opening bell.

  • Lawmakers Slam Apple for ‘Censorship’ of Apps at China’s Behest
    Bloomberg

    Lawmakers Slam Apple for ‘Censorship’ of Apps at China’s Behest

    (Bloomberg) -- U.S. lawmakers from both parties slammed Apple Inc. and Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook on Friday for “censorship of apps” at the “behest of the Chinese government.”Senators Ted Cruz, Ron Wyden, Tom Cotton, Marco Rubio and Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Mike Gallagher and Tom Malinowski expressed concern about the removal of an app that let Hong Kong protesters track police movement in the city.“Apple’s decisions last week to accommodate the Chinese government by taking down HKmaps is deeply concerning,” they wrote in a letter to Cook, urging Apple to “reverse course, to demonstrate that Apple puts values above market access, and to stand with the brave men and women fighting for basic rights and dignity in Hong Kong.” Apple didn’t respond to a request for comment on Friday.Apple removed the HKmap.live app from the App Store in China and Hong Hong earlier this month, saying it violated local laws. The company also said it received “credible information” from Hong Kong authorities indicating the software was being used “maliciously” to attack police. The decision, and the reasoning, was questioned widely.Cook, in a recent memo to Apple employees, said that “national and international debates will outlive us all, and, while important, they do not govern the facts.” On Thursday, the CEO met with China’s State Administration for Market Regulation head Xiao Yaqing in Beijing to discuss consumer-rights protection, boosting investment and business development in the country, according to a statement from the Chinese regulator.The Cupertino, California-based company isn’t the only one referenced in Friday’s letter. The lawmakers mentioned recent headlines involving the National Basketball Association and Activision Blizzard Inc., a video game company that suspended a professional game player for supporting the Hong Kong protests.“Cases like these raise real concern about whether Apple and other large U.S. corporate entities will bow to growing Chinese demands rather than lose access to more than a billion Chinese consumers,” the lawmakers wrote.They also slammed Apple for removing other apps, including VPN apps that helped Chinese people get around the government’s online censorship. The letter said Apple has “censored” at least 2,200 apps in China, citing data from non-profit organization GreatFire. Apple says on its website that it removed 634 apps in the second half of last year globally due to legal violations.The letter implied that Apple made the removal decisions to maintain its huge business in China and appease the government. Greater China was Apple’s third-largest region by revenue last year, generating more than $50 billion in revenue.Apple is one of the rare tech companies that operates in China, with rivals like Google and Facebook Inc. hardly operational in the market. China’s importance to Apple means the company has to balance its own values with following local laws.In the past, the company has pulled the Skype and New York Times apps from its App Store in China. More recently, it removed a Taiwanese flag emoji for users in Hong Kong and Macau and was criticized for sending some browsing data to China’s Tencent Holdings Ltd. as part of a privacy feature.To contact the reporters on this story: Mark Gurman in San Francisco at mgurman1@bloomberg.net;Ben Brody in Washington, D.C. at btenerellabr@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Tom Giles at tgiles5@bloomberg.net, Alistair Barr, Robin AjelloFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Why China’s TikTok has been drawing scrutiny from Zuckerberg and U.S. politicians
    MarketWatch

    Why China’s TikTok has been drawing scrutiny from Zuckerberg and U.S. politicians

    Chinese-owned video-sharing app TikTok, which has exploded in popularity globally, has recently come under fire for censoring content that Beijing deems unacceptable.

  • Libra finds a Facebook friend in Congress
    Decrypt

    Libra finds a Facebook friend in Congress

    Senator Mike Rounds disparages the “ominous” tone levelled at the project by his congressional colleagues.

  • Amazon Needs a Leash
    Bloomberg

    Amazon Needs a Leash

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- The New Yorker and the Atlantic have never been known for their business coverage, so when both magazines published long articles about Amazon.com Inc. in their current issues it signaled that something is in the air. That something is antitrust.More precisely, what’s in the air is the question of what the government should do to rein in the tremendous power of the big four tech companies: Facebook Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google, Apple Inc. and Amazon.Once the province of think tanks and law reviews, this topic has become such a public concern that 48 of the 50 state attorneys general are conducting antitrust investigations, presidential hopefuls are calling for tech giants to be broken up, and general interest magazines like, well, the New Yorker and the Atlantic are asking whether the companies abuse their market power. In this particular case, the magazines are asking it about Amazon.The Atlantic article is by Franklin Foer, who has long raised concerns about Big Tech. Five years ago, for instance, he wrote a cover story for the New Republic titled “Amazon Must Be Stopped.” It focused on Amazon’s dominance over the book business.This time around, he is writing about the unbridled ambition of Amazon’s founder and chief executive officer Jeff Bezos. (The new article is “Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan.”) “Bezos’s ventures are by now so large and varied that it is difficult to truly comprehend the nature of his empire, much less the end point of his ambitions,” Foer writes. He then goes through a list. Bezos wants to conquer space with his company Blue Origin. Bezos’s ownership of the Washington Post makes him a significant media and political figure. Bezos’s brainchild, Amazon, “is the most awe-inspiring creation in the history of American business.” And so on.He also points out that while critics fear Amazon’s monopoly power, the company is loved by consumers. “A 2018 poll sponsored by Georgetown University and the Knight Foundation found that Amazon engendered greater confidence than virtually any other American institution,” he writes. I have no doubt that this is true; Amazon’s obsession with customer service instills tremendous loyalty among consumers. It’s no accident that over 100 million people now pay the company $119 a year to be Amazon Prime members. That loyalty is also one reason taking antitrust actions against Amazon would be much more difficult than going after Facebook or Google. I’ll get to some other reasons shortly.Charles Duhigg’s New Yorker article “Is Amazon Unstoppable?” is both smarter about Amazon and more pointed about its power. Duhigg captures its relentless culture, comparing it to a flywheel that never stops. He described Bezos’s efforts to ensure that Amazon never loses the feel of a scrappy startup. The phrase that came to mind as I was reading Duhigg’s article was Andy Grove’s famous dictum: “Only the paranoid survive.”Duhigg is also interested in what Amazon’s critics have to say. Amazon paid no federal taxes last year. Amazon's work culture can be difficult for women who have children. Amazon’s warehouse workers are sometimes fired after being injured on the job. Amazon doesn't effectively police the sale of counterfeit goods on its site. (In the article, Amazon’s representatives deny these allegations.)Then there’s the fact that Amazon both serves as a platform for companies wanting to sell things and sells things itself. In other words, it competes with the same companies it enables. According to Duhigg, Amazon has been known to track items that do well, and then make its own version of the same item — which it then sells at a discounted price. (Amazon denies this, too.) Margrethe Vestager, the European Union’s commissioner for competition, told Duhigg that the practice “deserves much more scrutiny.”The story’s killer anecdote, at least as it concerns antitrust, is about Birkenstock USA LP’s experience with Amazon. Although Birkenstock sold millions of dollars of shoes using the Amazon platform, it was constantly hearing customer complaints that the shoes were defective. Why? Because, according to Birkenstock, Amazon allowed counterfeits to be sold on the site. Not only would Amazon not take down the counterfeit goods, but it also wouldn’t even tell Birkenstock who was selling them.Amazon also had stocked a year’s worth of Birkenstock inventory, which terrified the company. “What if Amazon decides to start selling the shoes for 99 cents, or to give them away with Prime membership, or do a buy-one-get-one-free,” wondered Birkenstock’s chief executive officer, David Kahan. “We were powerless.”Kahan’s complaints went nowhere. So he pulled Birkenstocks off Amazon. What did Amazon do? It solicited Birkenstock retailers, offering to buy shoes directly from them. Today, if you search for Birkenstocks on Amazon you’ll be deluged with choices even though the company itself refuses to do business with Amazon. I found a pair of Arizona oiled leather sandals — listed on Birkenstock's website for $135 — marked down to $60 on Amazon. Is it the real thing, or is it a counterfeit?The hard question: What do you do about this kind of behavior? On one extreme is the Democratic presidential candidate Senator Elizabeth Warren, who believes the most appropriate solution is to break up Amazon. At the other end of the spectrum, there are still plenty of antitrust economists who believe that if a $135 sandal is being sold for $60, that’s good for consumers. They argue that the government should just stay out of the way.I’m a proponent of breaking up Facebook, mainly because I believe if you force it to disgorge two of its prized platforms, Instagram and WhatsApp, you’ll instantly create serious competitors. That could help raise the bar on privacy, data usage and other concerns. But I’m not sure that would work with Amazon.For instance, if Amazon had to separate its highly profitable cloud service, Amazon Web Services, from its retail business the power dynamic between Amazon and the companies that use its platform would remain.What’s more, it’s harder to make a classic antitrust case against Amazon than it is against Facebook and Google. According to the research firm EMarketer Inc., Amazon is expected to account for 37.7% of all online commerce in 2019. By contrast, Google controls 89% of the search market.Still, for too many retailers, Amazon has the power to control their destiny, for good or ill. As the antitrust activist Lina Khan wrote in her now-famous 2017 article in the Yale Law Journal: “History suggests that allowing a single actor to set the terms of the marketplace, largely unchecked, can pose serious hazards.” I take that assessment to mean that government intervention at Amazon is needed.To my mind, the simplest and most sensible solution is from the economist Hal Singer: Don’t allow platform companies to favor their own products over competitors’ products. Singer calls this a “nondiscrimination regime,” and models it after the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, which prevents cable distributors from favoring their own content over content from competitors. In that scenario, a company that felt it was being discriminated against by Amazon could bring a complaint to federal regulators just as cable stations can do now. This regime has worked well for the TV industry. It could work for Amazon, too.Secondly, the government should hold Amazon accountable for counterfeits. Counterfeiting is against the law, and although Amazon told Duhigg that it spends “hundreds of millions of dollars” on anti-counterfeiting efforts it’s no secret that many deceptively labeled goods are still sold on the site. (See, for instance, this recent Wall Street Journal story.) Companies like Birkenstock have a right to expect that a platform selling its products will rigorously police counterfeits — and will identify counterfeiters so manufacturers of authentic goods can take legal action.These are solvable problems. They don’t require extreme measures. What they do require is a government with the will to transform Amazon’s platform from what it is now, a vehicle that squelches competition, to one that lets competition flower.(Corrects paragraph eight to accurately describe the year in which Amazon paid no federal taxes and to more accurately describe the experiences of women with children who work for the company. Also changes language in paragraph eight to more accurately describe how effectively Amazon combats the sale of counterfeit goods on its site. Also corrects paragraphs 12 and 13 to accurately reflect pricing disparities between sandals sold on Birkenstock's website and those sold on Amazon.)To contact the author of this story: Joe Nocera at jnocera3@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Timothy L. O'Brien at tobrien46@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • TikTok Is Just Noise for Facebook Stock
    InvestorPlace

    TikTok Is Just Noise for Facebook Stock

    In the ever-evolving social media war, Facebook (NASDAQ:FB) and FB stock stand out to me as the true winners. Sure, Facebook's year-to-date haul of nearly 40% doesn't hold a candle to Snap's (NYSE:SNAP) startlingly brilliant 137% rally. And of course Twitter (NYSE:TWTR) receives free marketing from the highest office of the land.Source: Wachiwit / Shutterstock.com Yet comprehensively, no one beats out the social media network that Mark Zuckerberg built. First, we can talk about the company's 2.4 billion monthly active users. To put this figure into perspective, that's over 31% of the world's population, which stands around 7.7 billion. It's no hyperbole to say that buying Facebook stock is buying a share of the world.More critical for FB stock is the social media king's demographic distribution. Unlike other rivals like Snap, which caters to a very young audience, FB features considerably more balance. For instance, in a Pew Research Center study in 2015, 82% of internet users aged 18 to 29 also used Facebook. For internet users aged 30 to 49, this allocation only slipped to 79%.InvestorPlace - Stock Market News, Stock Advice & Trading TipsImpressively, a whopping 64% of internet users aged between 50 to 64 use Facebook. And for the 65-plus crowd, the distribution is still a remarkably high 48%. * The 7 Best Penny Stocks to Buy Thus underlines the core bullish thesis of Facebook stock: social media is all about people. And the more people you have, the more relevant your platform is. Moreover, relevancy has a direct correlation with attracting advertisers.Because of this comprehensive dominance of FB stock in the metrics that matter, it's difficult to imagine anyone rivaling it. That said, a relatively new phenomenon should give some shareholders pause. Is It TikTok for FB Stock?A few days ago, CNBC ran a report that TikTok was aggressively poaching Facebook employees. Being that I'm ridiculously old and irrelevant, my first thought was, why is Kesha stealing Facebook employees? Later, I realized that TikTok - a subsidiary of Chinese parent-company ByteDance - represented the latest phenomenon in social media.After reading about TikTok, I'm still not 100% sure what it is, so forgive this brief and potentially inaccurate summary. But from my understanding, it's an app designed for budding singers, musicians, and entertainers. Ranging from amateurs to those with real talent, these active users - called "Musers" - submit videos showcasing their skills.As Alphabet's (NASDAQ:GOOG, NASDAQ:GOOGL) YouTube platform demonstrates, real demand exists for such platforms. I've seen countless videos of amateur musicians play covers of famous songs, as well as original material. Admittedly, many of these contributors are very good.And for the lucky few who turn heads on TikTok, they can achieve both social media fame and a record deal. Thus, it's a great gig for talent agents, where potential stars come to them. For everyone else, I'm assuming at the least it's a fun way to blow off some steam.While TikTok doesn't have the North American numbers - it has about 26.5 million MAUs in the U.S. - it has 500 million MAUs altogether. Unsurprisingly, a majority of this tally comes from Asia.Plus, the biggest threat to Facebook stock is that TikTok resonates with young people - the audience Facebook bought out Instagram to capture. In fact, TikTok is the number one most-downloaded app for Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) iPhones. Overall, the company has over one billion downloads.The fact that the company is setting up shop in Mountain View, California is surely no coincidence. But should investors panic on FB stock? Stay the Course with Facebook StockAlthough the TikTok phenomenon is one to be respected, I don't think people should read too much into it. While the parent company is poaching Facebook employees, I view this more as personal opportunism: the rewards are potentially greater for cashing out on a brilliant upstart rather than a long-established name.Furthermore, the biggest weakness I see for TikTok - aside from demographic imbalance - is functional limitations. Primarily, the consumer driver here is a platform for budding professional entertainers. Surely, that appeals to many people - just watch "American Idol," for instance. But I just don't see this as a sustainable, long-term platform.With Facebook, what you do is only limited by your imagination. You can market your business, reach out to potential employers, or look for a long-lost friend. There is no underlying pressure to do anything more than what you want. That, among many other attributes, makes Facebook practical for almost everyone. And this is why you shouldn't worry about FB stock.As of this writing, Josh Enomoto did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned securities. More From InvestorPlace * 2 Toxic Pot Stocks You Should Avoid * The 7 Best Penny Stocks to Buy * 7 Bank Stocks to Avoid Now at All Costs * The 10 Best Mutual Funds for Your 401k The post TikTok Is Just Noise for Facebook Stock appeared first on InvestorPlace.

  • Top Analyst Reports for Facebook, UnitedHealth & HSBC
    Zacks

    Top Analyst Reports for Facebook, UnitedHealth & HSBC

    Top Analyst Reports for Facebook, UnitedHealth & HSBC

  • The 50 Best Stocks of All Time
    Kiplinger

    The 50 Best Stocks of All Time

    A finance professor made a startling discovery about the stock market: Over a 90-year span, 96% of all stocks collectively performed no better than risk-free 1-month Treasury bills. After analyzing the lifetime returns of 25,967 common stocks, Hendrik Bessembinder determined that just 1,092 of those stocks -- or about 4% of the total -- generated all of the $34.8 trillion in wealth created for shareholders by the stock market between July 1926 and December 2016. Even more striking, a mere 50 stocks accounted for well over one-third (39.3%) of that amount.But before we get to our profiles of the 50 best-performing stocks of all time, many of which are (or were) components of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, a word of caution. Accurately identifying the precious few "home run" stocks amid the many thousands of underachieving names is extremely difficult. It might be impossible. Your portfolio is more likely to suffer because you guessed wrong and failed to invest in the top long-term winners, says Bessembinder of Arizona State University's W. P. Carey School of Business.A better alternative to trying to find a needle in a haystack? To paraphrase Jack Bogle, the Vanguard founder and pioneer of index investing: Just buy the haystack. "The results reinforce the importance of diversification," says Bessembinder, "and low-cost index funds are an excellent way to diversify broadly."Take a look at the 50 best stocks since 1926. SEE ALSO: 101 Best Dividend Stocks for 2019 and Beyond

  • Barrons.com

    The Dow Just Dropped Because Boeing Is Still Making the Wrong Kind of Headlines

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average has dropped nearly 200 points after Reuters reported that Boeing might have misled the FAA about safety features in its 737 MAX, causing the stock to tumble.

  • Facebook Libra: ECB Official Provides a Ray of Hope
    Market Realist

    Facebook Libra: ECB Official Provides a Ray of Hope

    ECB Director Benoit Coeure said that the EU financial regulator doesn't plan to ban Libra. The European Commission doesn’t intend to ban stablecoins either.

  • Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency should be prevented: German finance minister
    Reuters

    Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency should be prevented: German finance minister

    German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz on Friday redoubled his criticism of Facebook's plans to launch its Libra cryptocurrency, and said creation of a new world currency should be prevented. Scholz, speaking with reporters at the IMF and World Bank fall meetings in Washington, cited growing concern about such "stablecoins" and the potential international risks they posed. The German official said he was "highly skeptical" about Facebook's plans, adding, "We will carefully monitor the situation with all the means at our disposal.

  • Insiders Roundup: Facebook, Vir Biotechnology
    GuruFocus.com

    Insiders Roundup: Facebook, Vir Biotechnology

    Largest insider trades of the week Continue reading...

  • Snap's (SNAP) New Dynamic Ads Target E-commerce Advertisers
    Zacks

    Snap's (SNAP) New Dynamic Ads Target E-commerce Advertisers

    Snap announces new advertising product, Dynamic Ads to boost advertisement revenues from retail, e-commerce and other direct-to-consumer (DTC) brands.

  • Facebook's (FB) Watch to Get Exclusive Shows From FOX Sports
    Zacks

    Facebook's (FB) Watch to Get Exclusive Shows From FOX Sports

    Facebook's (FB) Watch to receive sports-related digital shows and content from recent partnership with Fox Sports amid the intensifying sports streaming battle.

  • Facebook, Visa among the stocks with high ESG marks — enough to outrun the S&P 500
    MarketWatch

    Facebook, Visa among the stocks with high ESG marks — enough to outrun the S&P 500

    Companies that improve their environmental, social and governance reputations outperform the S&P 500 — big tech and financial services firms among them.