3 ms·
Only because the value of the underlying company would plunge as well, due to loss of revenue. But it wouldn't hit zero. Google would still have other products
by twblalock 9y ago
Only because the value of the underlying company would plunge as well, due to loss of revenue. But it wouldn't hit zero. Google would still have other products than search, a lot of valuable IP and patents, real estate, etc.
- adamnemecek 9y agoI meant google as a company. Very little of Google's value is in real estate. Do they even own all of their offices?
- cableshaft 9y agoI can tell you for sure that they don't. I know people in corporate real estate that won a bid to lease corporate real estate to Google recently. But that's true of almost all offices of major corporations. Very few of them own their own buildings, except maybe a headquarters here or there. They pretty much all lease.
- twblalock 9y ago> I meant google as a company. I'm not sure what difference this makes. As you can see here, Google has billions of assets, of which $19.7 billion are buildings.
- adamnemecek 9y agoWhich is only a fraction of google and no one buys google for their real estate.
- twblalock 9y agoThat's beside the point. The stock won't go to zero because it represents a share of ownership in a company that has billions of dollars more in assets than in liabilities. Real estate is just one of the many assets. Edit: I thought I posted a link to Google's balance sheet in my parent comment, but apparently I left it out: https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/goog/financials/balance-sheet https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/goog/financials/...
- klodolph 9y agoA company’s stock hits zero easily, even when the company has assets. Add up valuable real estate and subtract liabilities. Owning the stock doesn’t put you at the front of the line when the company is liquidating.