12 ms·

...because Google buying a loss making company for $12 billion+ on the basis of some notional 'value' to the business has worked out fantastically well for them

by objclxt 13y ago

...because Google buying a loss making company for $12 billion+ on the basis of some notional 'value' to the business has worked out fantastically well for them in the past (replace 'Twitter' with 'Motorola', and replace 'data' with 'patents')...

lubos 13y ago
They bought YouTube when it was basically a financial and legal trainwreck...
- johnchristopher 13y ago
  Weren't there mails exchanged between Youtube founders at the time that were going like "let us ignore those legal worries until someone big buy us, then we tell them" ? So Google didn't really get the full problem until it got its hands on it (hard to believe, maybe they bought Youtube despite that ? Can't remember).
  - raverbashing 13y ago
    I think the legal problems of YT were pretty clear even if you were outside of it.
maaku 13y ago
...replace 'Twitter' with 'YouTube' and replace 'data' with 'users'? Not sure I agree with either conclusion, but I'm not sure I understand your argument either.
batiudrami 13y ago
Google only bought Motorola a year ago - it's far too early to judge the value of that acquisition. Plus, in terms of patents it seems like the patent wars of the past few years have pretty well calmed down. A better example would be YouTube, which I think most people would consider to be a good acquisition (I think it's profitable now?). That being said, I don't see where the money is to be made on Twitter. Anecdotally, as someone outside the bay area (24, M, Western Australia), I do not know anyone (really, not one!) who has a Twitter account which they actively tweet from [1], though a few (including me) have one which is used as a Twitter feed reader. [1] As additional context for this, I know only a couple of people my age do not have Facebook, and I have plenty of friends on Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, a few on Tumblr and even a couple on G+

by objclxt 13y ago

lubos 13y ago

They bought YouTube when it was basically a financial and legal trainwreck...

johnchristopher 13y ago
Weren't there mails exchanged between Youtube founders at the time that were going like "let us ignore those legal worries until someone big buy us, then we tell them" ? So Google didn't really get the full problem until it got its hands on it (hard to believe, maybe they bought Youtube despite that ? Can't remember).
- raverbashing 13y ago
  I think the legal problems of YT were pretty clear even if you were outside of it.

maaku 13y ago

...replace 'Twitter' with 'YouTube' and replace 'data' with 'users'? Not sure I agree with either conclusion, but I'm not sure I understand your argument either.

batiudrami 13y ago

Google only bought Motorola a year ago - it's far too early to judge the value of that acquisition. Plus, in terms of patents it seems like the patent wars of the past few years have pretty well calmed down. A better example would be YouTube, which I think most people would consider to be a good acquisition (I think it's profitable now?). That being said, I don't see where the money is to be made on Twitter. Anecdotally, as someone outside the bay area (24, M, Western Australia), I do not know anyone (really, not one!) who has a Twitter account which they actively tweet from [1], though a few (including me) have one which is used as a Twitter feed reader. [1] As additional context for this, I know only a couple of people my age do not have Facebook, and I have plenty of friends on Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, a few on Tumblr and even a couple on G+