5 ms·

The article seems to assume that the company is worth it. According to TechCrunch they have more than 90000 users and process 3000 queries per day. Their FAQ sa

The article seems to assume that the company is worth it. According to TechCrunch they have more than 90000 users and process 3000 queries per day. Their FAQ says that they have 20 employees. I can see that there is some value in knowing where and when people are asking a question related to a product. And I guess this kind of service could help Google to expand in the third world where most people only use mobiles to access the internet But $50 million still is a lot of money for 20 employees, 90000 users, and about a Gigabyte of data.

sogrady 17y ago
Surely the value of the data can't be measured by its size, can it? The content must have some reading on its value, no? The $140 million Picasso canvas that woman tore a couple of weeks back is worth more than a 60 inch square of cloth and paint, right? To be honest, I have no idea whether the data itself is worth it. But I'm betting Google does, and that very specific answers to very specific questions have substantial value for them, both from an algorithmic input perspective as well as on a pure content basis. $50M worth? Probably not. But throw in the people, the user community (and remember, that 90K figure was as of October of last year), and the mechanism of getting people to answer other people's questions and I can see the math working. My concern wouldn't be the price. I'd be more worried that Google will mismanage its acquired asset, as they have with other acquisitions.
- wedesoft 17y ago
  The fact that somebody paid $140 million for a Picasso makes it expensive but not necessarily valuable ;) Nokia's CES2010 keynote video is quite interesting if you think about mobiles. Apparently they have implemented mobile applications for local businesses in India for ordering and advertising products. I still think the acquisition is about Google on mobiles.
  - sogrady 17y ago
    If someone's going to pay that, I'd say that's a fair proxy of its value. But point taken on the mobile front; I think there's definitely a case to be made there. Will try and track down the Nokia keynote.

sogrady 17y ago

Surely the value of the data can't be measured by its size, can it? The content must have some reading on its value, no? The $140 million Picasso canvas that woman tore a couple of weeks back is worth more than a 60 inch square of cloth and paint, right? To be honest, I have no idea whether the data itself is worth it. But I'm betting Google does, and that very specific answers to very specific questions have substantial value for them, both from an algorithmic input perspective as well as on a pure content basis. $50M worth? Probably not. But throw in the people, the user community (and remember, that 90K figure was as of October of last year), and the mechanism of getting people to answer other people's questions and I can see the math working. My concern wouldn't be the price. I'd be more worried that Google will mismanage its acquired asset, as they have with other acquisitions.

wedesoft 17y ago
The fact that somebody paid $140 million for a Picasso makes it expensive but not necessarily valuable ;) Nokia's CES2010 keynote video is quite interesting if you think about mobiles. Apparently they have implemented mobile applications for local businesses in India for ordering and advertising products. I still think the acquisition is about Google on mobiles.
- sogrady 17y ago
  If someone's going to pay that, I'd say that's a fair proxy of its value. But point taken on the mobile front; I think there's definitely a case to be made there. Will try and track down the Nokia keynote.