@MooglesInMyFace: A lot of Google's services just burn through money. You think Gmail is hosted for free? Or Android's developed by volunteers alone? And let's not forget Docs, Calendar, Reader, Wave, Voice, and of course their massive search servers that store every page their bot has indexed in memory.
The one money-maker they do have, though, is advertising. And apparently, it's a whopper. Which makes sense. Google gets tons of money each year from advertisers who enjoy their targeted, intelligent ads. Meanwhile, Google runs other services that boost their name and brand for pennies on the dollar of what they're ads bring in.
Good business isn't about minimizing losses, but maximizing gains. So long as they can keep up their superior ad targeting systems, they can burn through as much money as they have. And frequently do. #googlestock
@OCEntertainment: It's actually quite a powerful business strategy. By making your biggest products cash losers and your biggest money makers merely integrated into the product, if a product dies, it's a slight loss in profit backed up by a massive reduction in loss. Essentially if someone like Microsoft actually does kill a free service of Google's they'll almost be doing them a favour.
If MS really did want to get a leg up rather than trying to drive Google into the ground, they'd be attempting to bridge the gap with Google and offering paid for time in their apps/sites - maybe even focus on great products rather than trying to take down your competitors. Then again, that'd be crazy. #googlestock
@sortius: Huh?? I don't really understand your logic...
"By making your biggest products cash losers and your biggest money makers merely integrated into the product"
So they DO make money from their "cash losers" then??
"Essentially if someone like Microsoft actually does kill a free service of Google's they'll almost be doing them a favour."
Then how about their "biggest money makers merely integrated into the product" thing? It got killed too right?
The thing is, if some of Google's popular features die, most likely they're suffering bad rep like Yahoo and it'll severely affect they stock. #googlestock
yeah, but if the website(youtube) itself isn't bringing in any money at all, and they just take a loss on it, how is that good business? Even if other parts of google can pick up the slack for youtube it doesn't change the fact that youtube is a money pit.
just my opinion. I don't know how any of this stuff works haha. #googlestock
@MooglesInMyFace: If you fail to see the logic, then the only thing you're missing is the scale.
Let's say for my day job, I get paid $500/hour. Hey, I can dream can't I? Well, that amounts to $20k a week, or little over a million a year. On that kind of money, I can afford to pay for a nice house, all utilities, college tuition for the kids I probably have and still have some left over to sink into my dream DeLorean (If I'm gonna dream, I'm gonna make it rock). Sinking a few hundred to a thousand a week into that thing is hardly hurting my salary. It's a money pit, but it's one I can afford.
As another real world example, for the longest time, Sony was selling the Playstation 3 at a loss per unit. As in, every time you bought a PlayStation 3, Sony lost money, since it cost more to make them they were charging for it. Yet, they made enough profit on games and peripherals to more than make up for it. Nintendo has banked on this strategy for years, selling cheaper than average systems, and yanking money out of your nose through cheap plastic peripherals.
A single product can take a loss, even consistently, if the revenue streams of the company as a whole make up for it. Even if YouTube is losing money, until it threatens Google's huge ad revenue, it's existence is an asset....like as a place to put ads. ;-) #googlestock
@OCEntertainment: Actually Nintendo as Never banked on that strategy... ever. Every Nintendo console ever sold has been sold at a profit, because unlike Sony or Microsoft who can fall back on their revenues from other divisions, Nintendo only makes games.
Thus, even at launch every Wii unit sold made Nintendo money. And then Nintendo made even more money from all the games and addons.
@TheLostVikings R.O.A.C.H.: You'll forgive me. I didn't intend to imply that Nintendo sells console units at a loss. But, as you say, they're a game company. Their larger revenue streams come from games and peripherals. My guess is that the profit margins for many games and certainly a lot of plastic peripherals is a higher percentage than the console itself. This allows Nintendo to invest money in research into things that lead to things like the Wii's motion controls. And whatever other projects that failed before the Wiimote came into being.
The point is to not view any one product as an isolated revenue stream that must sustain itself. #googlestock
Cash flow is one thing, but throw in overhead, labor, and materials and I be willing to bet Google and Microsoft are closer, in terms of profitability. #googlestock
@Michai: I dont agree. If MSFT didnt pay dividends they would be closer to 30-40 billions in reserve. You cant compare a performance to a investment stock. Compare google to apple. They dont issue dividends. #googlestock
@switchblade saints: !! You work for Time Warner Cable!? ...Wow. First, OMG! Ponies is a lawyer, then GitEmSteveDave is a farmer, and now you're a lackey for TWC. Who knew? o.o
@Hiphopopotamus:
......
I thought that star MEANT something...
You were always so insightful.....
Your SN is fucking awesome!!......
Your avatar so distinctive.......
Please tell me that was sarcasm, otherwise my view of you will be tainted by the fact you enjoyed UPN.
"Hiphopopotamus? Yeah, he's cool, but he kinda watches UPN."
"Eeewwww"
"I know."
Do you suppose AOL will change their name back to Quantum Link just to get in touch with the days when they were on the cutting edge and everyone liked them?
I almost feel sorry for AOL, much like I almost feel sorry for Microsoft. Almost.
Please know that AOL and Time Warner still care for each other a great deal. And always will. And we both love you very much. it's just that, well, we've grown apart and feel it will better for us, and for you too, and we think you'll come to realize that in time, if we go our separate ways.
At least to start out, we figure you'll enjoy various media produced by Time Warner during the week. Then, on weekends, you can surf the various online resources of AOL. Holidays will be split 50/50. We'll see how it goes.
The important thing is we'll make this work, no matter what. And don't for a minute think this had anything to do with you! Time Warner and AOL both love you very very much, and even though we'll no longer be together, we'll always be here for you.
@badhatharry: I apparently have their messenger installed on my computer, a fact I was not really aware of till I was at SteveDaves Jersey cam one day and started it up to talk to him. I dont even recall my ID, I will have to ask him.
10/20/09
10/16/09
10/16/09
That site has to just be a bottomless burn pit for dollars. #googlestock
10/16/09
The one money-maker they do have, though, is advertising. And apparently, it's a whopper. Which makes sense. Google gets tons of money each year from advertisers who enjoy their targeted, intelligent ads. Meanwhile, Google runs other services that boost their name and brand for pennies on the dollar of what they're ads bring in.
Good business isn't about minimizing losses, but maximizing gains. So long as they can keep up their superior ad targeting systems, they can burn through as much money as they have. And frequently do. #googlestock
10/16/09
If MS really did want to get a leg up rather than trying to drive Google into the ground, they'd be attempting to bridge the gap with Google and offering paid for time in their apps/sites - maybe even focus on great products rather than trying to take down your competitors. Then again, that'd be crazy. #googlestock
10/16/09
"By making your biggest products cash losers and your biggest money makers merely integrated into the product"
So they DO make money from their "cash losers" then??
"Essentially if someone like Microsoft actually does kill a free service of Google's they'll almost be doing them a favour."
Then how about their "biggest money makers merely integrated into the product" thing? It got killed too right?
The thing is, if some of Google's popular features die, most likely they're suffering bad rep like Yahoo and it'll severely affect they stock. #googlestock
10/16/09
yeah, but if the website(youtube) itself isn't bringing in any money at all, and they just take a loss on it, how is that good business? Even if other parts of google can pick up the slack for youtube it doesn't change the fact that youtube is a money pit.
just my opinion. I don't know how any of this stuff works haha. #googlestock
10/16/09
Let's say for my day job, I get paid $500/hour. Hey, I can dream can't I? Well, that amounts to $20k a week, or little over a million a year. On that kind of money, I can afford to pay for a nice house, all utilities, college tuition for the kids I probably have and still have some left over to sink into my dream DeLorean (If I'm gonna dream, I'm gonna make it rock). Sinking a few hundred to a thousand a week into that thing is hardly hurting my salary. It's a money pit, but it's one I can afford.
As another real world example, for the longest time, Sony was selling the Playstation 3 at a loss per unit. As in, every time you bought a PlayStation 3, Sony lost money, since it cost more to make them they were charging for it. Yet, they made enough profit on games and peripherals to more than make up for it. Nintendo has banked on this strategy for years, selling cheaper than average systems, and yanking money out of your nose through cheap plastic peripherals.
A single product can take a loss, even consistently, if the revenue streams of the company as a whole make up for it. Even if YouTube is losing money, until it threatens Google's huge ad revenue, it's existence is an asset....like as a place to put ads. ;-) #googlestock
10/17/09
Thus, even at launch every Wii unit sold made Nintendo money. And then Nintendo made even more money from all the games and addons.
10/17/09
The point is to not view any one product as an isolated revenue stream that must sustain itself. #googlestock
10/16/09
10/16/09
10/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/17/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/17/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
......
I thought that star MEANT something...
You were always so insightful.....
Your SN is fucking awesome!!......
Your avatar so distinctive.......
Please tell me that was sarcasm, otherwise my view of you will be tainted by the fact you enjoyed UPN.
"Hiphopopotamus? Yeah, he's cool, but he kinda watches UPN."
"Eeewwww"
"I know."
08/17/09
@ReynaldoRiv: Classic Pfeiffer
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
08/16/09
05/28/09
I almost feel sorry for AOL, much like I almost feel sorry for Microsoft. Almost.
05/28/09
Don't worry, AOL. I'm sure TimeWarner will come back for you. Hang in there, buddy.
05/28/09
05/28/09
At least to start out, we figure you'll enjoy various media produced by Time Warner during the week. Then, on weekends, you can surf the various online resources of AOL. Holidays will be split 50/50. We'll see how it goes.
The important thing is we'll make this work, no matter what. And don't for a minute think this had anything to do with you! Time Warner and AOL both love you very very much, and even though we'll no longer be together, we'll always be here for you.
05/28/09
05/28/09