3 ms·
One thing I don’t understand is that why Google doesn’t just spin-off these entities? That is certainly better than killing thesee projects. Let the team take
by yumraj 2y ago
One thing I don’t understand is that why Google doesn’t just spin-off these entities?
That is certainly better than killing thesee projects. Let the team take it and raise external funding with Google keeping some equity and assigning rest to the team.
- vineyardmike 2y agoLicensing the tech out is pretty close. It’s not clear they ever had customers beyond Driscoll anyways.
- skybrian 2y agoDespite having one good customer, it doesn’t sound like it was a promising business? Why would they do better at finding customers on their own? Instead they licensed the technology to their main customer.
- xyst 2y agoFortune 500 companies love to vacuum up all of this IP. It’s a game of “it’s not really viable today, so shelve it and use archaic IP laws to prevent anybody else from using ‘our’ [bought] idea”
- foooorsyth 2y ago>That is certainly better than killing these projects? You sure? Google obfuscates these moonshots (Waymo, Verily) in the “Other Bets” line in their 10-K. They lose money in the aggregate and the detailed financials for each entity aren’t revealed. If a company like Waymo looked like it were on the path to profitability, Google wouldn’t hide the financials. They report the bare minimum (jumbled up with a bunch of unrelated stuff) because the numbers are grim.
- yumraj 2y agoThat’s sunk cost. Not sure, maybe I’m missing it, how does that impact spinning-off a project that Google no longer considers financially fruitful (it could still be financially viable but not at Google scale)?