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

Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 66 posts

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#51

Post by kuschku »

dragonwriter wrote: post #47
kuschku wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After BMW just bought the last remains of Nokia (including the smart-driving subsidy of Nokia that produced 3D scans of all european streets), I don’t think so. Also Google is, for a carmaker, tiny. VW, for example, is over twice as large as Google.

> Also Google is, for a carmaker, tiny. VW, for example, is over twice as large as Google. By what measure? Market cap, Google is one of the biggest companies in the world, (#2 behind Apple, last I heard) in the neighborhood of $450 billion. VW Group is around $100 billion. Google's cash on hand is on the rough order of magnitude of VW's market cap .

Google has less assets, half of the profit and half of the revenue of VW.

Google has a higher valuation due to an investment bubble, not due to actual economics.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#52

Post by stephengillie »

jonlucc wrote: post #28
kyrra wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Alphabet is a holding company of sorts. I don't think we'll be seeing "Alphabet self driving cars". Google's efforts on self driving cars will probably continue to be branded under Google or will get its own branding name.

But wouldn't Alphabet's cars be called something else?

To which holding company named "Alphabet" are you referring? Google's or BMW's?

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#53

Post by denzil_correa »

umeshunni wrote: post #26
WalterBright wrote: post #19

I don't think single common English words should be trademark-able. Remember when Zilog tried to trademark the letter Z? Didn't Intel try to trademark a number?

Intel tried to trademark their processor model number (80386, 80486) to prevent AMD from using them. The trademark was denied and they switched to using names (Pentium instead of 80586) since then

I have heard this many times but I couldn't find a source for it. Do you have one?

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#54

Post by fecak »

edpichler wrote: post #41
fecak wrote: post #3

Timely considering PG's post earlier in the week http://paulgraham.com/name.html

Regarding of company domain names, I respectably disagree with Paul,and I agree with Ev http://evhead.com/2011/06/five-reasons-domains-are-less-impo... Maybe I'm wrong, and it's most easy to "my mind" accept Ev idea.

In this case, the argument is easily made that a domain name is even less important because the company in question is Google itself.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#55

Post by dragonwriter »

kuschku wrote: post #51
dragonwriter wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also Google is, for a carmaker, tiny. VW, for example, is over twice as large as Google. By what measure? Market cap, Google is one of the biggest companies in the world, (#2 behind Apple, last I heard) in the neighborhood of $450 billion. VW Group is around $100 billion. Google's cash on hand is on the rough order of magnitude of VW's market cap .

Google has less assets, half of the profit and half of the revenue of VW. Google has a higher valuation due to an investment bubble, not due to actual economics.

> Google has less assets, half of the profit and half of the revenue of VW.

Most recent quarterly numbers are more like Google has 1/3 of the revenue of VW but 85% of the profits.

> Google has a higher valuation due to an investment bubble, not due to actual economics.

Even if it was due to an investment bubble rather than, say, rational expectations of stronger long-term growth based on market characteristics, well, investment bubbles are as much "actual economics" as anything else.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#56

Post by kuschku »

dragonwriter wrote: post #55
kuschku wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has less assets, half of the profit and half of the revenue of VW. Google has a higher valuation due to an investment bubble, not due to actual economics.

> Google has less assets, half of the profit and half of the revenue of VW. Most recent quarterly numbers are more like Google has 1/3 of the revenue of VW but 85% of the profits . > Google has a higher valuation due to an investment bubble, not due to actual economics. Even if it was due to an investment bubble rather than, say, rational expectations of stronger long-term growth based on market characteristics, well…

Advertising in general is a grossly overvalued business.

VW will still build cars, engines and small-scale power plants in a century.

Web advertising is already becoming an issue now, with more and more people moving to mobile, vendors pre-installing adblockers and even ad agencies starting to doubt the effectiveness of easily overlooked Google ads.

And still, VW, a single carmaker in a single company, is larger than the overvalued internet giant of Google that controls advertising in all but a handful of countries.

Google is a tiny player in the rest of the world economy.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#57

Post by xiaoma »

dragonwriter wrote: post #16

Runs into in what way? Sure, BMW owns alphabet.com -- Alphabet, Inc., uses abc.xyz, and probably doesn't care about alphabet.com. They aren't a consumer-facing entity, all the consumer facing entities are presumably going to be subsidiaries with their own names and identities. And, sure, BMW has a trademark on Alphabet in particular domains. Again, Alphabet, Inc., is a parent entity, its quite likely the subsidiaries…

If they could just get enough google juice, the domain name wouldn't matter so much.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#58

Post by haberman »

seanalltogether wrote: post #35
rco8786 wrote: post #8

Seems like a non-issue. They did no research ahead of time regarding alphabet.com/@alphabet handles... this would indicate that they are not that concerned about the visibility/branding of the holding company, which stands to reason. It's not like they didn't think about these things when they were naming, they just don't care.

Exactly, holding companies do not need to worry about their marketing. http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/

Wow, that web page is amazing. It's straight out of the 90s but it also has a Geico ad on it, which I cannot fathom why they would possibly need or want that.

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#59

Post by wahsd »

haberman wrote: post #58
seanalltogether wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, holding companies do not need to worry about their marketing. http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/

Wow, that web page is amazing. It's straight out of the 90s but it also has a Geico ad on it, which I cannot fathom why they would possibly need or want that.

Geico is a BH owned company

Re: Google Creates Alphabet, but Runs into BMW

#60

Post by WalterBright »

sp332 wrote: post #21
WalterBright wrote: post #19

I don't think single common English words should be trademark-able. Remember when Zilog tried to trademark the letter Z? Didn't Intel try to trademark a number?

Yes, and UPS has trademarked brown (and T-mobile has purple). Remember that trademarks are limited to certain categories. If you're not competing with UPS, you can use brown etc.

I know how trademark works (I have a registered tm myself), but am suggesting that it change. To my mind trademarking 'brown' is so thoroughly uncreative. A trademark should be more than a common English word.
Post reply on HN