Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

G is for Google

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 607 posts

Re: G is for Google

#342

Post by ignoramous »

rbinv wrote: post #35

From the abc.xyz source code: Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things. Alphabet will also include our X lab, which incubates new efforts like Wing, our drone delivery effort http://www.hooli.xyz/" target="_blank" class="hidden-link">.

.xyz domains are selling at 90% discount, in case anyone is interested.

Re: G is for Google

#344

Post by adventured »

return0 wrote: post #211
nolok wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most certainly not the only reason why and possibly not even the most important, but the EU has started to load up on the anti monopoly against Google recently, with talks about breaking it up in Europe (similar to the Microsoft case in the US some years ago, although it didn't go through and in this case it would only split in EU). http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/27/european-p... > The European parlia…

But isnt this consolidation instead of separation? Or are they creating this entity so that they will keep Google intact even if they are ordered to separate?

This makes it easier to spin off a Google EU corporation, owned by Alphabet, built specifically to manage the intricacies of EU law. Google EU would just be another subsidiary, that perhaps licenses its technology from Alphabet or Google US.

Re: G is for Google

#345

Post by healsjnr1 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #133

Wow, they are doing letters? Really? Letters? Hey is Eric Schmidt still in the building somewhere? Ask him how well Planets worked out for Sun Microsystems. Interesting strategy, hard to second guess from the outside of course. Sun's motivation was to figure out whether the other parts of the company could stand on their own[1], it also makes it less fiscally complicated to discharge an entire group into the void. Th…

On the other hand, Semco is an example where this kind of thing worked really well. Their model of empowering employees, allowing innovation and splitting the company into a large number of micro-businesses had dramatic impact and turned the company around.

Maybe the differences is that they did this to encourage diversification and innovation, not to manage it.

https://hbr.org/1989/09/managing-without-managers

Re: G is for Google

#347

Post by icebraining »

ThomPete wrote: post #255

This is potentially a very clever move when you put this into the perspective with one of googles major issues of being too dominant. If I was a conspiracy nut I would say this way it's harder for ex. the EU or any other political entity to claim they have any dominant positions as such.

It's not. The parts of Google that caused concern to the EC (Search, Shopping and Android) are still under the same company.
Post reply on HN