4 ms·
Isn't 96% of Google profits from search ads only? They 've done a million ventures since then, still remain ad-funded.
by return0 11y ago
Isn't 96% of Google profits from search ads only? They 've done a million ventures since then, still remain ad-funded.
- josh2600 11y agoCurrent sources of value != future sources of value. The price of Google's stock is based on forward-looking prospects, not on current metrics.
- return0 11y agoi m pretty sure its based on expected profits, or it would have flopped given the performance of all these prospects.
- fredkbloggs 11y agoActually, the price of Google's stock is based on expectations of future demand for Google's stock. It has little or nothing to do with the expectations of profits or the ability of the shareholders to receive them. This is true of all listed companies, and the more liquid their shares, the more true it is.
- fredkbloggs 11y agoYes. Because the Google part isn't being spun out to the shareholders but remaining a part of the conglomerate, this does nothing for the shareholders. The sea change would be if new-Google were a separate listed company returning its earnings to its shareholders. Instead it's a separate private company returning its earnings to Larry and Sergei to blow on whatever BS they want... just like it was yesterday. About the only thing this changes is that ex-Google is now explicitly acknowledging to the public markets what everyone already knew: it's a conglomerate, only unlike other conglomerates, it has only a single viable business. Yawn.
- return0 11y agospot on!
- rancur 11y ago> its shareholders they did nothing to create the algorithm, what right do they have to whine?
- fredkbloggs 11y agoEver hear of work for hire? If you want all the rewards for yourself, you don't sell shares in your company.
- fixermark 11y agoThere's a pair of stock tickers that disagree with your assessment of the value of selling shares in that company. It seems to have worked out pretty well for everyone involved.