5 ms·

Genuine question: Has Google ever achieved financial success with a moonshot project? Google Glass seems to have come closest to becoming an actual product, bu

by whack 10y ago

Genuine question: Has Google ever achieved financial success with a moonshot project? Google Glass seems to have come closest to becoming an actual product, but it eventually crashed and burned as well. The self-driving car was a great technological success, but I really wonder how Google plans to monetize it. Years ago, when Google was the only major company doing self-driving-cars, there was a lot of buzz and potential. But they didn't seem to capitalize on that in any way. Now that Tesla and every other major car company has achieved near-parity, I really wonder what Google's end-game is for self-driving cars. In general, a lot of these moonshot projects sound so zany, that I wonder if the division will ever recoup its investment.

Retric 10y ago
In terms of internal projects gmail, and local maps comes to mind. If your going to call everything that did not work a moonshot then by definition no. However, it's only a failure when they give up so self driving cars are rather undecided at this point, and theses projects help recruiting which has non obvious benefit.
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  The important question is whether something was designated a "moonshot" before it succeeded or failed, thus giving us an unbiased sample.
  - zaroth 10y ago
    I think moonshot, by definition, means 15+ year timeframe to full realization. Google is a very young company, they just haven't had piles of cash to invest in moonshots for long enough for us to have seen the results. X was founded just 6 years ago, Alphabet was founded just last year! To be asking 6 years in where are all the moonshot successes already? I think this demonstrates exactly how problematic and pervasive short-term thinking is. The question to ask is in 50 years, how many different $10B+ revenue streams will Alphabet have? If we really think this R&D isn't going to pay off, at the scale Alphabet operates, that's almost like losing faith in humanity.
    - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
      I didn't say moonshots were a bad thing. I just stated the basic standard for collecting a sample of something in a halfway unbiased way.
- whack 10y ago
  By moonshots, I'm referring specifically to projects that came out of the "Other Bets" division. That division specifically invests in projects that are "out there." From what I hear, realistic products like gmail and maps came out of the 20% time and other product-divisions, not the "Other Bets" division.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - kgwgk 10y ago
    Considering that the Other Bets division (and Alphabet itself) was created one year ago, maybe it's too early to evaluate what has it produced.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
corobo 10y ago
I believe Android was (technically at least) a moonshot Page writes: “Having exceeded even the crazy ambitious goals we dreamed of for Android—and with a really strong leadership team in place—Andy’s decided it’s time to hand over the reins and start a new chapter at Google. Andy, more moonshots please!” [1] The "more moonshots" implies that Android was itself a moonshot. Whether it was declared one at the time Android Inc was purchased I don't know! As for financial success, in a recent lawsuit with Oracle it was disclosed Android had a profit of $22 billion [2] if I'm reading into it right (admittedly very quick research, not at all reliable!) [1] https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/13/andy-rubins-next-moonshot-could-happen-at-googles-project-x/ https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/13/andy-rubins-next-moonshot-... [2] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-21/google-s-android-generates-31-billion-revenue-oracle-says-ijor8hvt http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-21/google-s-a...
- amelius 10y ago
  I think the term "moonshot" is reserved for exploring new technical frontiers. Android is "just" another OS.
  - eli 10y ago
    Easy to say that now. They started developing it before the iPhone came out, right?
    - burkaman 10y ago
      Yeah, but Andy Rubin and Android were a separate company that Google bought. They sort of acquired someone else's moonshot.
      - amelius 10y ago
        Also, there was Symbian OS, and probably a bunch of others. So not even someone else's moonshot. Imho, Android was more about exploring a new business strategy for Google.
amelius 10y ago
> Genuine question: Has Google ever achieved financial success with a moonshot project? Just shows once again how risky it is to run a startup in SV, putting your eggs in one basket. Lots of otherwise very intelligent people think they can be smarter than Google.
stevetursi 10y ago
From a different nytimes Article this week: 'Arguably the biggest success, Google Brain, is the one people know the least about. It was an artificial intelligence effort that was spun back into core Google in 2012 and is now embedded in products like voice search and the Google Photos app, in which users can search their albums for images like “dogs” or “mountains.”' http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/technology/they-promised-us-jet-packs-they-promised-the-bosses-profit.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/technology/they-promised-u...
diydsp 10y ago
I don't know about your personal definition of success... but R&D like this is excellent PR. It helps the buzz keep going, attracts smart people, keeps the stock up. It also intimidates other companies and can be used strategically to mislead them and keep them on their toes.
flylib 10y ago
would be careful to say "near-parity", google is still ahead of everyone in level 4 autonomous cars at the moment, not only that the gap may be larger then the other car companies lead you to believe.
- virgilp 10y ago
  This. I mean, Apple is investing into cars, changing the original goal from "car" to "self-driving car"... and we are seriously questioning whether google's effort was a good idea? WTF, people?

by whack 10y ago

Retric 10y ago

In terms of internal projects gmail, and local maps comes to mind. If your going to call everything that did not work a moonshot then by definition no. However, it's only a failure when they give up so self driving cars are rather undecided at this point, and theses projects help recruiting which has non obvious benefit.

eli_gottlieb 10y ago
The important question is whether something was designated a "moonshot" before it succeeded or failed, thus giving us an unbiased sample.
- zaroth 10y ago
  I think moonshot, by definition, means 15+ year timeframe to full realization. Google is a very young company, they just haven't had piles of cash to invest in moonshots for long enough for us to have seen the results. X was founded just 6 years ago, Alphabet was founded just last year! To be asking 6 years in where are all the moonshot successes already? I think this demonstrates exactly how problematic and pervasive short-term thinking is. The question to ask is in 50 years, how many different $10B+ revenue streams will Alphabet have? If we really think this R&D isn't going to pay off, at the scale Alphabet operates, that's almost like losing faith in humanity.
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    I didn't say moonshots were a bad thing. I just stated the basic standard for collecting a sample of something in a halfway unbiased way.
whack 10y ago
By moonshots, I'm referring specifically to projects that came out of the "Other Bets" division. That division specifically invests in projects that are "out there." From what I hear, realistic products like gmail and maps came out of the 20% time and other product-divisions, not the "Other Bets" division.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- kgwgk 10y ago
  Considering that the Other Bets division (and Alphabet itself) was created one year ago, maybe it's too early to evaluate what has it produced.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

corobo 10y ago

I believe Android was (technically at least) a moonshot Page writes: “Having exceeded even the crazy ambitious goals we dreamed of for Android—and with a really strong leadership team in place—Andy’s decided it’s time to hand over the reins and start a new chapter at Google. Andy, more moonshots please!” [1] The "more moonshots" implies that Android was itself a moonshot. Whether it was declared one at the time Android Inc was purchased I don't know! As for financial success, in a recent lawsuit with Oracle it was disclosed Android had a profit of $22 billion [2] if I'm reading into it right (admittedly very quick research, not at all reliable!) [1] https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/13/andy-rubins-next-moonshot-could-happen-at-googles-project-x/ https://techcrunch.com/2013/03/13/andy-rubins-next-moonshot-... [2] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-21/google-s-android-generates-31-billion-revenue-oracle-says-ijor8hvt http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-21/google-s-a...

amelius 10y ago
I think the term "moonshot" is reserved for exploring new technical frontiers. Android is "just" another OS.
- eli 10y ago
  Easy to say that now. They started developing it before the iPhone came out, right?
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Yeah, but Andy Rubin and Android were a separate company that Google bought. They sort of acquired someone else's moonshot.
    - amelius 10y ago
      Also, there was Symbian OS, and probably a bunch of others. So not even someone else's moonshot. Imho, Android was more about exploring a new business strategy for Google.

amelius 10y ago

> Genuine question: Has Google ever achieved financial success with a moonshot project? Just shows once again how risky it is to run a startup in SV, putting your eggs in one basket. Lots of otherwise very intelligent people think they can be smarter than Google.

stevetursi 10y ago

From a different nytimes Article this week: 'Arguably the biggest success, Google Brain, is the one people know the least about. It was an artificial intelligence effort that was spun back into core Google in 2012 and is now embedded in products like voice search and the Google Photos app, in which users can search their albums for images like “dogs” or “mountains.”' http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/technology/they-promised-us-jet-packs-they-promised-the-bosses-profit.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/technology/they-promised-u...

diydsp 10y ago

I don't know about your personal definition of success... but R&D like this is excellent PR. It helps the buzz keep going, attracts smart people, keeps the stock up. It also intimidates other companies and can be used strategically to mislead them and keep them on their toes.

flylib 10y ago

would be careful to say "near-parity", google is still ahead of everyone in level 4 autonomous cars at the moment, not only that the gap may be larger then the other car companies lead you to believe.

virgilp 10y ago
This. I mean, Apple is investing into cars, changing the original goal from "car" to "self-driving car"... and we are seriously questioning whether google's effort was a good idea? WTF, people?