6 ms·

The only two of those I’m pretty sure could survive on their own is search and YouTube. Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. GCP might

The only two of those I’m pretty sure could survive on their own is search and YouTube. Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. GCP might be big enough at this point, but is still just burning ad money. GSuite/GMail is again a maybe, but can it afford the infratructure? They would at least have to cribble the free tier.

darkwater 5y ago
> Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. The 30% fee on everything Play Store seems a good enough business case to me.
- emn13 5y ago
  But it's also fragile; that fee might not turn out to be sustainable.
  - darkwater 5y ago
    How come? Also they already have a dominant position, producer licensing can go a long way. Nobody is gonna make Android suddenly irrelevant in the next 10 years.
    - emn13 5y ago
      As the epic vs. apple showdown shows, the position of gatekeeper is potentially legally tricky. Additionally, google works as a gatekeeper now because handset makers kind of need googles blessing. But android is open source, and potentially forkable. What really keeps handset makers onboard are the google services. But... if you split google, are those handset makers really going to feel as beholden to the android play store if they can get all major apps to run on an alternate store (already the case), and can get access to essentially all google apps without giving the android store any cut (after all, those aren't part of a single "google" bundle anymore then!) I suspect the 30% cut would have to go; that super-high margin is really a bit of rent-seeking behavior even today, and only sustainable due to Google's overall market position. It's so high that the case could be made that e.g. Samsung's efforts to duplicate it is merited solely as a form of negotiating leverage, rather than as an actual alternative today. Without the whole consumer lock-in and bundle deal that google provides today, androids value proposition is much, much weaker; they could simply offer additional stores with better pricing, and wait for android to come begging for scraps. Android the platform is certainly here to stay for a while, but as a business unit, assuming it were split from the rest of google? I'm less certain. I mean, I wouldn't count them out, but there are definitely competitors around that would gladly eat their lunch, and might actually succeed then too.
flyinglizard 5y ago
Android has its Play Store and could probably pick a few bucks out of each handset sold, although the long term implications of Android without its daddy around aren’t clear. GSuite is incredibly ubiquitous and has no free tier anymore (other than customers grandfathered in), and GMail can still do ads. I have no doubt they’ll be printing money, relatively speaking.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  Technically GSuite is Google Workspace, which doesn’t have a free tier, but Gmail, Google Docs, Drive and so on can still be used for free. It would be interesting to know how much of Gmail value is standalone ads, and how much is from the integration into Google overall ad platform.
iamevn 5y ago
I worked on GCP until recently. I remember celebrating (in-office) our product within GCP surpassing one million dollars of revenue per day. GCP would be fine.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  Revenue can be made easily enough, profit is harder. The latest number I saw online suggest that GCP lose more than one billion dollar per year. Edit: losing $1.2B on a revenue of just under $4B. That only work because ads are paying for the construction of datacenter and infrastructur.
  - flyinglizard 5y ago
    How are the services provided to Alphabet subsidiaries taken into account? I’d bet that the cloud bill for YouTube alone would exceed GCP revenue numbers. In other words, if GCP is spun out, and Google services keep using it (with realistic pricing) it’s going to have a revenue far exceeding $4bn.
    - goalieca 5y ago
      It’s very common practice that internal customers count as revenue for project. Especially ones that aren’t profitable.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - mrweasel 5y ago
      How many Google service actually run on GCP?
numair 5y ago
Here, let me help you out with ways to find hard data that disprove these conjectures. > Android Take a look at recent court documents about the size of the Play Store revenues. It’s a multi-billion-dollar cash cow after paying off the carriers and device makers to keep their spyware loaded. > Chrome Google single handedly kept Mozilla running for over a decade with their search deal. The deal for iOS is worth billions. Chrome will manage just fine. > GCP They don’t exactly run that thing as a charity. Anyone familiar with their pricing knows that this is a super-high-margin business. Plus, as a spin-off, it would immediately have a couple gigantic customers: Google spin-offs. > GSuite/GMail There’s only two main options for email and productivity SaaS (sorry Zoho). They’re printing money on this one too. I should disclose that I would rather see Google stay intact, so whoever kneecaps their ad business can kneecap the whole empire in one go and make the whole company and all of its shareholders suffer at the same time. Companies don’t have a right to live if they are generating negative social impact.
- mrweasel 5y ago
  It’s hard to say how a split would happen. I guess I would assume a different split, which would force Android and Chrome out of any type of ad business, meaning that Chrome could not take money from search and where Android would be forced out of any user tracking. Other than GCP, which I still think would fail, if split out in the next year or do, you make a good point.
- kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
  Indeed. And 95% of all CEOs would probably jump at the chance to run any of these companies, even if they were not money factories right now.
xuki 5y ago
Android and Chrome can get a lot of money from search companies to be the default search option. Currently Google is paying nothing for that, maybe another search company would emerge.
nicoburns 5y ago
I’d bet that Gsuite could compete is they actually invested in improving the product. After all, office is still one of Microsoft’s major money spinners.
- flyinglizard 5y ago
  I’d guess GSuite is already a cash cow, just for corporate emails and user management for SMBs.
  - goalieca 5y ago
    Gsuite isn’t a very good experience compared to office365 with its high quality native apps. I don’t the costs but I imagine Gsuite has to be a lot cheaper because of its offering.
csomar 5y ago
> Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. Seriously? The most used browser and mobile operating system in the world can't finance their operations? If that's the case, then there could be no browser. Firefox is still able to finance its operations and so does many other browsers. Google can still contribute to WebKit as an open source project. Android can start charging a fee for every mobile device (not sure if they already do that?) and cover its development expense. It'll be a saner world where you pay for the services you are using.

darkwater 5y ago

> Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. The 30% fee on everything Play Store seems a good enough business case to me.

emn13 5y ago
But it's also fragile; that fee might not turn out to be sustainable.
- darkwater 5y ago
  How come? Also they already have a dominant position, producer licensing can go a long way. Nobody is gonna make Android suddenly irrelevant in the next 10 years.
  - emn13 5y ago
    As the epic vs. apple showdown shows, the position of gatekeeper is potentially legally tricky. Additionally, google works as a gatekeeper now because handset makers kind of need googles blessing. But android is open source, and potentially forkable. What really keeps handset makers onboard are the google services. But... if you split google, are those handset makers really going to feel as beholden to the android play store if they can get all major apps to run on an alternate store (already the case), and can get access to essentially all google apps without giving the android store any cut (after all, those aren't part of a single "google" bundle anymore then!) I suspect the 30% cut would have to go; that super-high margin is really a bit of rent-seeking behavior even today, and only sustainable due to Google's overall market position. It's so high that the case could be made that e.g. Samsung's efforts to duplicate it is merited solely as a form of negotiating leverage, rather than as an actual alternative today. Without the whole consumer lock-in and bundle deal that google provides today, androids value proposition is much, much weaker; they could simply offer additional stores with better pricing, and wait for android to come begging for scraps. Android the platform is certainly here to stay for a while, but as a business unit, assuming it were split from the rest of google? I'm less certain. I mean, I wouldn't count them out, but there are definitely competitors around that would gladly eat their lunch, and might actually succeed then too.

flyinglizard 5y ago

Android has its Play Store and could probably pick a few bucks out of each handset sold, although the long term implications of Android without its daddy around aren’t clear. GSuite is incredibly ubiquitous and has no free tier anymore (other than customers grandfathered in), and GMail can still do ads. I have no doubt they’ll be printing money, relatively speaking.

mrweasel 5y ago
Technically GSuite is Google Workspace, which doesn’t have a free tier, but Gmail, Google Docs, Drive and so on can still be used for free. It would be interesting to know how much of Gmail value is standalone ads, and how much is from the integration into Google overall ad platform.

iamevn 5y ago

I worked on GCP until recently. I remember celebrating (in-office) our product within GCP surpassing one million dollars of revenue per day. GCP would be fine.

mrweasel 5y ago
Revenue can be made easily enough, profit is harder. The latest number I saw online suggest that GCP lose more than one billion dollar per year. Edit: losing $1.2B on a revenue of just under $4B. That only work because ads are paying for the construction of datacenter and infrastructur.
- flyinglizard 5y ago
  How are the services provided to Alphabet subsidiaries taken into account? I’d bet that the cloud bill for YouTube alone would exceed GCP revenue numbers. In other words, if GCP is spun out, and Google services keep using it (with realistic pricing) it’s going to have a revenue far exceeding $4bn.
  - goalieca 5y ago
    It’s very common practice that internal customers count as revenue for project. Especially ones that aren’t profitable.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - mrweasel 5y ago
    How many Google service actually run on GCP?

numair 5y ago

Here, let me help you out with ways to find hard data that disprove these conjectures. > Android Take a look at recent court documents about the size of the Play Store revenues. It’s a multi-billion-dollar cash cow after paying off the carriers and device makers to keep their spyware loaded. > Chrome Google single handedly kept Mozilla running for over a decade with their search deal. The deal for iOS is worth billions. Chrome will manage just fine. > GCP They don’t exactly run that thing as a charity. Anyone familiar with their pricing knows that this is a super-high-margin business. Plus, as a spin-off, it would immediately have a couple gigantic customers: Google spin-offs. > GSuite/GMail There’s only two main options for email and productivity SaaS (sorry Zoho). They’re printing money on this one too. I should disclose that I would rather see Google stay intact, so whoever kneecaps their ad business can kneecap the whole empire in one go and make the whole company and all of its shareholders suffer at the same time. Companies don’t have a right to live if they are generating negative social impact.

mrweasel 5y ago
It’s hard to say how a split would happen. I guess I would assume a different split, which would force Android and Chrome out of any type of ad business, meaning that Chrome could not take money from search and where Android would be forced out of any user tracking. Other than GCP, which I still think would fail, if split out in the next year or do, you make a good point.
kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
Indeed. And 95% of all CEOs would probably jump at the chance to run any of these companies, even if they were not money factories right now.

xuki 5y ago

Android and Chrome can get a lot of money from search companies to be the default search option. Currently Google is paying nothing for that, maybe another search company would emerge.

nicoburns 5y ago

I’d bet that Gsuite could compete is they actually invested in improving the product. After all, office is still one of Microsoft’s major money spinners.

flyinglizard 5y ago
I’d guess GSuite is already a cash cow, just for corporate emails and user management for SMBs.
- goalieca 5y ago
  Gsuite isn’t a very good experience compared to office365 with its high quality native apps. I don’t the costs but I imagine Gsuite has to be a lot cheaper because of its offering.

csomar 5y ago

> Android and Chrome pretty much doesn’t have a business case. Seriously? The most used browser and mobile operating system in the world can't finance their operations? If that's the case, then there could be no browser. Firefox is still able to finance its operations and so does many other browsers. Google can still contribute to WebKit as an open source project. Android can start charging a fee for every mobile device (not sure if they already do that?) and cover its development expense. It'll be a saner world where you pay for the services you are using.