The first one would know that you are talking to the second VPN. The second VPN would know that VPN1 User is talking to facebook.com. In principle, neither of them has the full picture. In practice, you may leak enough information that both of them could get the full picture.
That seems like a great technique if it is correct.
Seems obvious to me that many of the top VPN providers are operated by intelligence agencies or have ties to data brokers: they can afford to operate the services at an initial loss for the benefit of information learned later.
For example, touting that a VPN is operated outside of a country with ties to the “five eyes” doesn’t seem like a benefit, it likely means they can operate with impunity on your data.
But VPN A has to relay the request for facebook.com to VPN B, meaning that VPN A has to be aware of the user's final destination. If my interpretation of this is incorrect, then how does VPN B become aware of the request for facebook.com?
VPN A knows there was a request to VPN B, that's it. The request is encrypted on twice the client. VPN A removed it's encryption but is only left with an encrypted request to VPN B. VPN B then removes it's encryption and then forwards the request to fb.com.
VPN A only sees a request to VPN B. Because of that they don't need to know anything about the final destination or even that there is a final destination beyond VPN B.
VPN A receives a packet that says "carry this (encrypted_ payload to VPN B Gateway IP". VPN B Gateway receives that packet and decrypts the payload. The payload says "send this (encrypted) payload from VPN A customer IP to facebook.com".