« Do we have enough "military" equipment? | Main | A Guy Can Dream, Can't He? »

April 26, 2022



More like Beta. They, or the City, can't even get the traffic lights to go red yellow green. It's been two years since they were built. Still flashing red.


I was out there last week for a tour and the campus is beautiful. There is plenty of open space for the public (as was required by plan approvals) and a nice coffee shop where you can grab a cup and enjoy watching the wind surfers🌞


I've updated the original post after my visit today. See above.


Could we soon be seeing offers to sublet space out at the big Meta campus on the Bayfront? Should the Planning Commission be requiring that new "commercial" development be fitted out as a "hybrid" so when some crazy business model collapses, it can be turned into housing to help the "crisis"? From Tuesday's WSJ before the Meta stock shrinkage from around $350 to sub-$100:

An investment firm said in an open letter to Mark Zuckerberg on Monday that Meta Platforms Inc. should slash staff and pare back its metaverse ambitions, in a sign of rising discontent among shareholders.

Altimeter Capital Chief Executive Brad Gerstner wrote that Mr. Zuckerberg needs to take drastic steps to streamline Meta’s operations and address a steep drop in the share price.

“Like many other companies in a zero-rate world—Meta has drifted into the land of excess—too many people, too many ideas, too little urgency,” Mr. Gerstner said in the letter. “Meta needs to get its mojo back.”

Meta shares are down more than 50% in the past 18 months, slicing more than $600 billion from the company’s market value. Meta reports earnings after the bell on Wednesday.

Mr. Gerstner wrote that Meta should cut head count expenses by 20%, echoing the views of others who have recently argued that tech companies have become bloated with too many employees after years of expansion.

“It is a poorly kept secret in Silicon Valley that companies ranging from Google to Meta to Twitter to Uber could achieve similar levels of revenue with far fewer people,” he said.

Mr. Gerstner also recommended that the company dial back its investment in the metaverse, which Mr. Zuckerberg has touted as the company’s future and said would require more than $10 billion in annual investment. Mr. Gerstner recommended the company limit that investment to $5 billion annually, calling Meta’s commitment “super-sized and terrifying, even by Silicon Valley standards.”

Despite the significant investment thus far, the company is behind on its goals for the metaverse.
Just think. If a couple of floors of one of the buildings had been planned to accomodate more studio-like apartments, there could be zero-commute, super-green living right there. Total perfection from a mill-housing perspective!



I think it was in WSJ the other day, but maybe somewhere else, I saw a photo of employees at Meta in "Burlington" CA per the caption

Handle Bard

I biked out to the campus a couple times this week and it is QUIET. Then this came out Meta Platforms cut the prices of its virtual reality headsets in hopes of stirring demand for its VR hardware, as its bold bets on the metaverse have struggled to make a big splash.

Its flagship Meta Quest Pro will retail for $999, down 33% from its launch price of $1,499, and Quest 2 256 GB version for $429 from $499, Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said in a broadcast on its social media platform Instagram on Friday.

The company called out lower Quest 2 sales as the reason behind a 17% drop in fourth-quarter revenue at its Reality Labs unit, which includes VR-related offerings.


I can't say I'm surprised by the news as reported in today's WSJ who "reviewed internal reports". When I heard the Ray-Ban glasses pitch I was underwhelmed:

The Ray-Ban smart glasses launched by Meta Platforms almost two years ago have struggled to catch on with owners, many of whom appear to be using the devices infrequently, according to internal company data.

Less than 10% of the Ray-Ban Stories purchased since the product’s launch in September 2021 are used actively by purchasers, according to a company document from February reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Meta sold a total of 300,000 of the wearable devices through February, but the company only had about 27,000 monthly active users.

The device, an important part of Meta’s hardware strategy, allows users to take photos and listen to music with the frames of their glasses, among other features. It has experienced a 13% return rate, according to the document.
I wonder what that means for employee counts on the Bayfront campus?

Peter Garrison

Sounds like an invention that wasn’t very interesting or innovative, probably clumsy and one surrounded by competing technologies that people already use almost instinctively.

Like the SPIN bike experience:

Wednesday night on The Ave was crowded and happy. SPIN bikes were parked in sullen flocks by Peets and the train station.

I walked over to an animated group of high school/college kids and asked them if they used the bikes. “No,” they answered, “Too expensive and hard to pedal.”

Plus, I think most people who want to ride a bike, well, already have a bike; kinda like people who would like to listen to music or take a photo already have a phone, etc… and don’t need to put on a pair of glasses.

Where the Meta product was merely poorly positioned technologically, SPIN bikes only exist because it seems virtuous
in its very awkwardness and expense.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

About the Voice

  • The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community. Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California. On it you can read and comment on important city issues.

    Note: Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice Blog are those of the poster and not necessarily the opinion of the editorial board of the Burlingame Voice. See Terms of Use

Contributing to the Voice

  • If you would like more information on the Burlingame Voice, send an email to [email protected] with your request or question. We appreciate your interest.

    Authors may login here.

    For help posting to the Voice, see our tutorial.