3 ms·
Didn't Google mostly live on VC money during that period? If they did I think it is probably fair to call Google out as having always been an advertising compan
by Quothling 2y ago
Didn't Google mostly live on VC money during that period? If they did I think it is probably fair to call Google out as having always been an advertising company. I think what made Google function for a long time after 2000 was the fact that they managed to keep their advertising business and their products fairly separate. The big downfall began when people like Ben Gomes lost to Venkataraman. Venkataraman who's now infamous for ruining both Yahoo and Google Search... But Venkataraman's recent "promotion" isn't exactly something that should bring us much hope though. Not considering that he's being replaced by an actual McKinsey spreadsheet.
- drpossum 2y ago> think it is probably fair to call Google out as having always been an advertising company I don't think that's fair unless you can find something that says that was their intent (sibling posts in this thread claim there's actually evidence to the contrary). I don't see the problem with "startup trying to figure out a sustainable business" and leaving it like that. It's not like that's something unprecedented or even unusual.
- inerte 2y agoI've mentioned this before, but in the “Measure What Matters” book the author talks about investing in Google in early 1999, and the founders were indeed projecting billions of dollars in revenue, using ads. It was in their pitch deck. Now, to which extent they REALLY wanted to do this, and REALLY impacted the day to day decision, I don't know. Neither if said pitch deck had other options.