This is probably the most useful thing about the report itself, in that it offers quite a different sense of perspective on who actually is a major player in the industry sector, and who isn't. This is where Facebook comes in - or rather fails to come in, since it is nowhere to be found on the list.

Now many will point to the fact that Facebook's reluctance to structure itself as a business, in the same way that Google and Myspace are for example, is simply the technical quirk which accounts for its omission from the list - and that actually in relative terms, FB is just as significant and powerful as the extent of coverage it receives in the blogosphere, for example, would imply.

This is a sound argument and one I would certainly agree with - but nonetheless I think that the report's findings are not to be dismissed, for they do illustrate a key point: that many of the web's most prominent and exciting properties, of which Facebook is only the largest, are entirely absent from the business sphere as plc companies - despite the fact that by and large this is the status that most of them are ultimately aiming for.

Valued in the report at just (!) £3.5 bn, it seems Facebook has a long way to go before the business world is convinced that it offers viable revenue models, despite it being generally received wisdom among web commentators that the network is a financial juggernaut in-the-waiting - just as soon as Zuckerberg decides the time is right to go for it.

Regardless of the hype, this data ultimately comes as a timely reminder of Facebook's as yet unproven status as a business model - within the context of its colossal status as the world's most popular social network. However, perhaps it'd be best to keep in mind that even if FB is worth is as the report estimates, or closer to the £10bn which it is estimated to be worth by Secondmarket, it is, in any case, rather a lot of cash...

Dejan Levi