No Facebook Phone? Okay, Facebook, show me the money.

[Brian: Readers, I'm travelling as I write this. I will update later with better/more numbers to back up my thesis.]

Yesterday's big tech news -- there is (still) no Facebook phone. I did not expect there to be, although for the sake of humanity, I was hoping that Facebook would offer a very low-cost, text-enabled "Facebook phone" that could be made available to the world for under $100. This would serve as a bridge to the rapid adoption of smartphones in the globe. Secondly, I was hoping they would have hacked away at the "free" "open source" Android OS, wiped out all of Google's tenuous links, fully integrated Facebook within and sold this around the world. I was hoping this just cause it would make covering the smartphone wars that much more fun.

Instead, they did what most of us expected.

• New and mildly improved Facebook apps.
• Move in on Groupon's territory.
• Pronouncements that it wanted to be 'integral' to the mobile web.
• Offer a (modified) Facebook Connect sign-in to mobile apps.
• Enabling superior integration of smartphones and mobile apps with Facebook Places.

Yes, yes. All good. All presumed. All boring as shit. All within Marky Mark's stated mission of transforming Facebook into the planet's social graph enabler. In other words, Web 3.0 is to become Facebook.

Pundits applauded them. Pundits noted that this would be successful. Pundits acknowledged that Facebook will rule the world. As for me, I'm not so sure. Not any longer. I believe Facebook -- or at least Zuckerberg -- is not being totally forthcoming here. Yes, Facebook is right to extend itself further and deeper on the mobile web. However, in repeatedly backing away from creating a Facebook Phone, I think it is a tacit acknowledgement by Facebook that they can't make as much money on the mobile web. Everything tries to lead us back to our PC-based Facebook page. That is where the money is -- for Facebook, at least. And, right now, they have no idea how to transition their *existing or potential* revenues from the stationary web to the mobile web. At least, not in equivalent numbers.

I've written before about how Android is critical to Google. Google must be on the mobile web. If they lose lawsuits to Oracle, to Microsoft and others, doesn't matter. Google will eat those costs, pay the treble damages and continue to provide Android free of charge to all who want it. For the future of the web is the mobile web and if Google (or anyone) does not exist there, they do not exist.

Only, the problem is, the money's not the same. Not at all (with the exception of Apple). Based on numbers Google has stated, I believe that Google makes far more -- per searcher -- on the stationary web than on the mobile web. Will this change? I doubt it. Google offers nice text ads and some display ads that play very well on the PC screen. This is not and will never be the case on the smartphone. Forget for a moment iAD, or threats from Bing or Facebook. I'm focusing here on how, if all goes right for Google, they remain the dominant search (and email and free office apps) provider on the mobile web as they do the stationary web. And they still won't make nearly as much money as they do now. 

Yes, the big future money is in the mobile web. Yes, the peak of the PC/stationary web market may be 1 billion and the smartphone/mobile web market may be 5 billion. True. But, can Google generate one-fifth as much per user on the smartphone as they do on the PC? I have my doubts. Even if we access the mobile web far more each day. I am not saying Google absolutely cannot make more off the mobile web, just that I have serious doubt. Google will somehow have to ensure they are on about 1 billion smartphones, figure out a way to make us access Google-based services multiple times a day from our smartphone, and figure out how to monetize that.

The future of the web is the mobile web. All the activity, all the money will be on the mobile web. The mobile web *is not supplemental*. Can Google earn as much or more on the mobile web as they do now? Let's see the plans, Google.

Which brings me to Facebook.

• Over 500 million users worldwide, already.
• Over 200 million users on the mobile web.
• One of the most popular apps on *any* smartphone platform.
• Controller of the social graph.
• Increasingly indispensible in our daily lives.
• A better understanding of our likes, dislikes, friendships than anyone else and soon, possibly, a better understanding of our purchases (right now, Amazon, WalMart, credit card companies and the postal service may be better here).
• Soon, maybe the most popular method of signing on to *any* mobile web service.
• The keystone to online social gaming.
• They are valued at over $30 billion. They are already pulling in close/about $2 billion in revenues.

That, my friends, makes Facebook look to the mobile web how the United States must have seemed to the world in the 1950s. Big and getting bigger.

But where is the money? More and more, as I study Facebook, it appears that they are seeking to increase our connection with Facebook. And doing this very successfully. But -- it's always coming back to the stationary web. Consider, how many advertisements do you get on your Facebook app? How often do you make virtual currency purchases on your Facebook app?

Right now, more users rely on the stationary web version (at least in terms of number of users; I do not have number of times someone goes to Facebook on the mobile web vs stationary web). So, is Facebook constantly trying to get us to connect back to its mother ship because, right now, that is where the money and the people are? Yes. But, I say, only partly yes. The other reason is because they can't figure out how to effectively monetize all they have to offer on the mobile web.

Maybe they never will. Maybe this is a huge opening for the competition.

The smartphone is the computer. You've heard me say that 1,000 times. But that does not mean that just because you are dominant on the mobile web, in some area, that you are guaranteed riches. Right now, we're not entirely sure where the money will come from. I just know this:

Soon, it will not come from the stationary web because that will be subsumed. Even if you effectively transition fully from stationary web to mobile web does not mean you are guaranteed the same (or better) revenues. 

The mobile web represents a complete shift in computing, connectivity, collaboration and access. No one's future on the mobile web is assured. Zuckerberg continues to recite all the right Silicon Valley pre-IPO lines. They are building out, growing the service, attracting talent, revenues will come.

On the mobile web, if you build it, we may come, but there's no guarantee we're going to pay for it.