Woah!! Way too premature to compare Zuckerberg and his singular 10 year old successful company to Buffett, who's been above and beyond in successfully running dozens of businesses for 50+ years. For the sports comparison, it'd be like comparing Kevin Durant to Michael Jordan (or Neymar to Pele for the European readers). Potential is there - yes. Too early to make a good comparison - yes.

I don't necessarily think the comparison with Warren Bueffett is the most interesting thing. More that Facebook is going to become a tech conglomerate with many companies, rather than an engineering company like Google or Microsoft or Amazon.

I think that lines up with a lot of things about the situation; not least that I find it impossible to imagine "Facebook the website" dominant in, say, a decade in the way it is now.

Facebook's behavior reminds me more of AOL scooping up Time Warner to survive the inevitable mainstream enlightenment and migration to the open web.

Warren Buffett has always preached valuing stocks and investing for the longer term based on what the market capital SHOULD be worth.

If Zuckerberg bought this company because he wanted it to earn him money in the long run because it is currently undervalued at 2B, then yes, I guess he is.

Edit: This disappoints me because technology shouldn't be treated like a commodity.

Betteridge.