4 ms·

This is funny but it shouldn't really be possible for it to actually work. Every time they get a payout Google has almost certainly profited more from the same

by pedrocr 15y ago

This is funny but it shouldn't really be possible for it to actually work. Every time they get a payout Google has almost certainly profited more from the same activity, assuming their margin on ads is higher than what they pay out to adsense users. So every time they make money they add more than that to the total value of Google, ensuring they could never buy 100% of it.

cypherpunks 15y ago
Your math is weak. You should go back and study.
sylvinus 15y ago
Well the revenue share from AdSense was revealed to be in the 65% range. So given a poor profitability by Google in the next few million years, it could still work.
- fakeer 15y ago
  Agree
- pedrocr 15y ago
  According to this: http://adsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/adsense-revenue-share.html http://adsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/adsense-revenue-share.ht... it's 68%. Wow, I wasn't expecting google to pay out quite so much. At those percentages it actually becomes possible. Depending on how profitable the sites and Google are at serving the content and the ads (respectively) it could work.
riffraff 15y ago
but the google earnings not necessarily become capital do they? If for example they pay out dividends for 100% of their earnings to stockholders, the value of google would stay the same, while this people would own a larger share of the company. If you rule out that payments are coming from marketing, it's basically like "if I buy stocks of my employer company one day I will own them". Unlikely, but not impossible.
- pedrocr 15y ago
  >If for example they pay out dividends for 100% of their earnings to stockholders, the value of google would stay the same, while this people would own a larger share of the company. Google doesn't pay dividends: http://investor.google.com/corporate/faq.html#dividend http://investor.google.com/corporate/faq.html#dividend If it did you are right that the earnings would not add to the total value. >If you rule out that payments are coming from marketing, it's basically like "if I buy stocks of my employer company one day I will own them". Unlikely, but not impossible. What does marketing have to do with it? If you buy stock in your employer with your salary you wouldn't always be able to eventually own it. Your contribution to the company is 100 and hopefully you are a net positive contributor and are only paid 50 for that work. The company thus increases in value by 50 through your work. So to eventually own the company you have to invest more than 50 to win the race, otherwise for every bit you buy the company increases in value by more than that. In this mock example 50 is the total of your salary so it's not possible.

by pedrocr 15y ago

cypherpunks 15y ago

Your math is weak. You should go back and study.

sylvinus 15y ago

Well the revenue share from AdSense was revealed to be in the 65% range. So given a poor profitability by Google in the next few million years, it could still work.

fakeer 15y ago
Agree
pedrocr 15y ago
According to this: http://adsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/adsense-revenue-share.html http://adsense.blogspot.com/2010/05/adsense-revenue-share.ht... it's 68%. Wow, I wasn't expecting google to pay out quite so much. At those percentages it actually becomes possible. Depending on how profitable the sites and Google are at serving the content and the ads (respectively) it could work.

riffraff 15y ago

but the google earnings not necessarily become capital do they? If for example they pay out dividends for 100% of their earnings to stockholders, the value of google would stay the same, while this people would own a larger share of the company. If you rule out that payments are coming from marketing, it's basically like "if I buy stocks of my employer company one day I will own them". Unlikely, but not impossible.

pedrocr 15y ago
>If for example they pay out dividends for 100% of their earnings to stockholders, the value of google would stay the same, while this people would own a larger share of the company. Google doesn't pay dividends: http://investor.google.com/corporate/faq.html#dividend http://investor.google.com/corporate/faq.html#dividend If it did you are right that the earnings would not add to the total value. >If you rule out that payments are coming from marketing, it's basically like "if I buy stocks of my employer company one day I will own them". Unlikely, but not impossible. What does marketing have to do with it? If you buy stock in your employer with your salary you wouldn't always be able to eventually own it. Your contribution to the company is 100 and hopefully you are a net positive contributor and are only paid 50 for that work. The company thus increases in value by 50 through your work. So to eventually own the company you have to invest more than 50 to win the race, otherwise for every bit you buy the company increases in value by more than that. In this mock example 50 is the total of your salary so it's not possible.