7 ms·
Google Earned Over $9 Billion In Revenue In Q2
- trentfowler 15y agoHoly Bejesus! Edit: I'm no stock market wizard but I would still buy Google stock tomorrow. For the foreseeable future, they're going up up up. Mark my words, they'll be pulling 10 billion a quarter before too long.
- 18pfsmt 15y agoA savvy investor would wait for the market to cool off in a bit and buy at a much lower price. We haven't seen $600/share since March, but if you see how these things operate over a duration you will see that after most spikes there is a pull back. Wait for the pull back. EDIT: Also, options expire tomorrow (3rd Friday of every month), so there is ample manipulation opportunity.You can get an idea of what's going on in the options market here: http://www.google.com/finance/option_chain?q=NASDAQ:GOOG http://www.google.com/finance/option_chain?q=NASDAQ:GOOG
- RobAtticus 15y agoI would agree with this. Google is up over $100 since G+ came out, so I think there will be some people eager to sell tomorrow to cash in on the strong uptick.
- 18pfsmt 15y agoTaking a further look: while just looking at the most popular options' strike prices, there are 10,141 put options at a strike price of $500/share, and there are 7,736 call options at a strike price of $550/share. I find looking at the spread with all the details interesting. I suspect most of the people modeling this are paid to keep it proprietary. I wish I had the talent, because it could probably start a fascinating discussion on a site like this. EDIT: put option numbers were incorrect. Time stamp is ~6:30 PM EST.
- secretasiandan 15y agoGiven the information in your post, it is a bad idea to buy GOOG. You have provided no proof that your expected growth is not already baked into the price.
- trentfowler 15y agoI just think that no matter how high the expected growth is, it's not high enough. Edit: Like the predictions made about cell phones in the 90s
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- earbitscom 15y agoA company at that size growing 32% Y-o-Y is just amazing. Go Google.
- MikeCapone 15y agoWhat's impressive is that they'er doing it mostly by giving people what they want and providing best of breed services rather than by using every opportunity to lock people in and attack their competitors with underhanded tactics (cough patent trolling).
- dangrossman 15y agoStock is up 12.18% in after-hours trading. At their size and stock price that's amazing. Boy do I wish I had a few shares now.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- juiceandjuice 15y agoSounds like Larry knew what he was doing.
- jackowayed 15y agoI can't imagine that Larry had a major impact on the revenue in his first quarter in charge.
- ignifero 15y agoBut it's not like he joined the company last quarter. If the launch of g+ indicated anything, google is speeding up.
- steveb 15y agoI wonder how much longer the big losses at Bing will be allowed to continue. The Yearly growth in Google's revenue this quarter alone is almost equal to the entire annual revenue of Microsoft's online division. Google is growing at 25-30+% while MS online grew 14% in the spring quarter. And it costs MS about two dollars to generate a dollar of revenue online.
- megablast 15y agoWell is Google is making more money, then Microsoft should be making more money as well, since people are spending more on online advertising. This is not stopping anytime soon, so why would Microsoft give up just as they are starting to make some gains (albeit by buying Yahoo search).
- arctangent 15y agoIt's possible that MS is prepared to spend money in "inefficient" ways if that means that they're preventing money going into their competitors' pockets.
- thematt 15y agoGood for them and I think the best is yet to come. I view Google's work on robotics and automated vehicles as a secret weapon. Should the future consist of semi/fully automated vehicles (a very realistic possibility) Google is going to have a warchest of patents, licenses and technology that will generate tons of cash.
- dangrossman 15y agoDoes Google really have any of that? The automated vehicle tech was entirely from the DARPA Grand Challenge / DARPA Urban Challenge teams who 'solved' the autonomous driving problem years prior. Any patents and licenses are owned by those teams and the universities they come from. From the articles I read way back when it sounded like Google was just working with those people to hook their systems up to Priuses with no mention of developing anything of their own. Maybe I missed it in other coverage.
- MikeCapone 15y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car Thank you Google for allowing me to find that page in less than a second ;)
- nazgulnarsil 15y ago"the technology is now advancing so quickly that it is in danger of outstripping existing law, some of which dates back to the era of horse-drawn carriages."[3] HA, yeah heaven forbid that tech make driving safer and more efficient without the regulators and legislators along for the ride. because, you know, they make everything better.
- megablast 15y agoYour right, companies should just be able to throw whatever they want on the road. How dare the government create rules to interfere in the safety of other people. After all, aren't we living in a post-apocalypse mad-max type world. The fact is it takes a long time to decide how safe something is, especially on the roads. I know it is fun in the US to rail against the government, and forget about the wonderful world we live in, that is incredibly safe, thanks to these regulations.
- zentechen 15y agoLooking at the slide, with my limited accounting knowledge, it seems Google has managed to decrease the total cost of expense which contributed to the increase in revenue from Q1.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Hawramani 15y agoI thought revenue was separate from expenses.
- dfranke 15y agoHere's how it works: Revenue = everything your customers pay you. Cost of revenue = expenses that scale up directly with revenue. For a manufacturing company, this would typically consist mainly of what they pay to their suppliers. In Google's case, power and bandwidth are major items. Gross profit = Revenue - cost of revenue Operating expenses = costs that aren't directly tied to revenue, such as payrolls and building leases. Operating expenses also include depreciation of capital assets, the computation of which is somewhat of a black art. Operating profit = Gross profit - operating expenses. Net profit = Operating profit +/- any profit or loss on investing activities, including interest on any money the company has borrowed or lent. (Disclaimer: IANAA)
- ww520 15y agoExcellent concise explanation.
- zentechen 15y agoYou are right. Need to change revenue to "net income".
- coolgeek 15y ago(Sorry if this comes across as pedantic, but the dissonance here is striking.) "Revenue" and "earnings" have fairly specific meanings, particularly with regard to each other. "Google earned $2.85B on revenues of $9.03B in Q2" would have been a better title, as would "Google revenues top $9B in Q2".
- zandorg 15y agoI once attended a job fair/event at my University, and the guy from HP said (to a crowd) they have PROFITS of $80 billion a year. I didn't inform him that was REVENUE, I just walked out on him.
- zmmmmm 15y agoWhat always strikes me about Google's numbers is that they seem relatively small when taken in context of how large Google seems to be in its presence and perception. People talk about Google as a tech "giant" - but compare revenue numbers: Google - $9B Apple - $24B IBM - $29B Microsoft - $16B Based on this in terms of being a "tech giant" Google would seem to be the underdog - yet they certainly aren't perceived or treated that way.
- robryan 15y agoRevenue is a bad way to compare these companies, Apple is selling $1000 iphones and $2000+ laptops, which have a fairly high production cost. Whereas the margin on a PPC click would be massive.
- zmmmmm 15y agoYes, I thought about comparing profit but actually I think revenue is more interesting because it represents to some extent the company's "weight", or spending power. Apple may spend a lot to manufacture their devices, but that spend also represents part of their huge influence in the computing landscape. It accounts for things like retail stores and massive advertising budgets which are enormously important. Sure if you only look at revenue then you over-estimate their influence but you equally under-estimate their influence if you only look at profit.
- canistr 15y agoIf you just compare to companies in the semiconductor industry or other various "behind the scenes" players, practically all of them have billions of dollars in revenue. So Google earning $9 Billion isn't as big of a deal as everyone thinks it is when you put it in context of the whole high tech industry.
- yaakov34 15y agoIt's useful to keep these numbers in perspective in all the excitement. Browse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_by_revenue http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_by_revenue and convince yourself that we're not quite living in a virtual world yet. The list is dominated by giant oil companies, with Exxon and Shell with $370 billion in annual revenues a piece (that's more than the GDP of all but around 25 nations). Manufacturing is also pretty well represented (Toyota: $240 billion in revenue in 2010). On the other hand, Apple now apparently outsells Boeing. That's pretty impressive.
- rafaelc 15y agoLook at the margins when comparing Google vs. oil companies. That paints an entirely different picture.
- yaakov34 15y agoThe picture I was looking at is weight in the economy. We - I guess I am making some assumptions about the audience here - sometimes get so caught up in the kinds of things that are important to us, that we forget that this is not the whole world. I mean, Google+ vs. Facebook is fascinating, but this is probably not the most momentous conflict that history will record for the early 21st century. And speaking of profit, apparently Exxon made $11 billion last quarter - more than the revenue number we're talking about here. Yeah, the margin is lower, but...
- tomjen3 15y agoIf the margin is lower, then you get more for investing money in Google. Margins matter.
- 6ren 15y agoBTW Apple is third by market cap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_corporations_by_market_capitalization#2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_corporations_by_market_...
- ChuckMcM 15y agoIt is interesting to compare that number to VC funds [1]. In the first half of 2011 there was 10.2B$ raised for funding startups, in the first half of 2011 Google put $5B in the bank. [1] http://nvca.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=770&Itemid=93 http://nvca.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_dow...