3 ms·

The Risks sections are always like that. Any advertisements for stocks must have disclaimers about a wide range of possible risks, and that despite promising hi

The Risks sections are always like that. Any advertisements for stocks must have disclaimers about a wide range of possible risks, and that despite promising historical data you could lose your entire investment. Otherwise they could face expensive lawsuits when future shareholders claim that they were misled and not informed of these risks. For example from Facebook's S-1: "Growth in use of Facebook through our mobile products, where we do not currently display ads, as a substitute for use on personal computers may negatively affect our revenue and financial results.", "We expect our rates of growth will decline in the future." Google's S-1: "We expect our growth rates to decline and anticipate downward pressure on our operating margin in the future.", "We are susceptible to index spammers who could harm the integrity of our web search results.", "New technologies could block our ads, which would harm our business."

hawkice 10y ago
I cannot disagree with your attitude more. This company is saying they have an existing threat to their ongoing operations that _will_ be fatal, that they are unsure will ever be solved. This is fundamentally different than saying ad blockers could impact Google's business. In a way, their honesty is unexceptional because they are required by law to be honest about their risks. But the level of risk is not usual.
- hueving 10y ago
  Wide spread ad blocking would be fatal or nearly fatal to Google. The loss of the vast majority of their income and the resulting contraction that comes with that would probably tear apart the company.
  - rudolf0 10y ago
    Near-universal ad blocking (across all kinds of devices) would be fatal to so many different businesses and business models. Revenue primarily derived via ads seems kind of unsustainable at this point. And the same may even eventually be true of TV commercials.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

hawkice 10y ago

I cannot disagree with your attitude more. This company is saying they have an existing threat to their ongoing operations that _will_ be fatal, that they are unsure will ever be solved. This is fundamentally different than saying ad blockers could impact Google's business. In a way, their honesty is unexceptional because they are required by law to be honest about their risks. But the level of risk is not usual.

hueving 10y ago
Wide spread ad blocking would be fatal or nearly fatal to Google. The loss of the vast majority of their income and the resulting contraction that comes with that would probably tear apart the company.
- rudolf0 10y ago
  Near-universal ad blocking (across all kinds of devices) would be fatal to so many different businesses and business models. Revenue primarily derived via ads seems kind of unsustainable at this point. And the same may even eventually be true of TV commercials.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]