Google Announces Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2023 Results [pdf]

Post by solardev » Tue, Jan 30, 2024, 11:57 PM UTC

mustacheemperor wrote: post #114

disillusioned wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waymo _might_ be the sole survivor here... they are ABSOLUTELY trying their damndest with it. It's remarkable to not go a single day without seeing a driverless Waymo doing its thing. (I live in Central Phoenix, they're _everywhere_.) The core concept is being proven pretty well, in markets with good weather and good roads at least... whether they can achieve some sort of critical mass that allows them to recoup any…

I really hope Waymo succeeds, or at the very least survives in its current markets. It is so much more comfortable, convenient, and safe than traditional ride share. I switched to more or less only using Waymo for ride-share in SF after I got into the beta last year, and almost without exception every Uber or Lyft ride I have had to take since then for timing, availability, or route reasons has been some kind of deba…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 12:00 AM UTC

ojbyrne wrote: post #66

username135 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more than just SWE's employed at google. Custodial, food service, administration, operations, HR, etc...

A lot of those are going to be contractors employed by agencies.

Post by fasthands9 » Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 12:04 AM UTC

SeanAnderson wrote: post #132

hibikir wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite possible for the engineers to work really hard in ways that even directly harm the company, either directly, or by increasing the political costs of making a better decision. My favorite here is Bridgewater and their HR/Evaluation/Alignment system. There's books written about it. Developing it and running it took a high percentage of workers and contractors. Its implementation had all kinds of negative eff…

I'm aware of their alignment system from the book Principles, but I'm curious why/how you came to the conclusion it was a negative? Pandemic and larger-than-life CEO stepping down both seem like the major outliers in the dynamic you described. Bridgewater was very, very successful for quite some time with that policy in place.

Post by cityguy33 » Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 12:06 AM UTC

matwood wrote: post #24

atorodius wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm there it says Revenue, excluding traffic acquisition costs: $72.32 billion vs. $70.97 billion expected ($63.12 billion in Q4 2022) Adjusted earnings per share: $1.64 vs. $1.59 expected ($1.05 in Q4 2022) Cloud revenue: $9.19 billion vs. $8.95 billion expected ($7.32 billion in Q4 2022) Ad revenue: $65.5 billion vs. $65.8 billion expected ($59.04 billion in Q4 2022) I hope that 0.3 is not the reason for that slip h…

Google missing on ad revenue is like Apple missing on iPhone revenue. It's even worse for Google because it's a larger part of their business. Is the miss a blip or a signal of a slowing ad market or are LLMs eating into their business? Hard to know, but that's the concern.

Post by brokencode » Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 12:07 AM UTC

eitally wrote: post #115

QuercusMax wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my org at the Goog, we didn't have any layoffs, but we also aren't expecting any new headcount any time soon. Projects that need more staff are expected to cannibalize it from other projects under the same VP. I feel like this is actually a good way of doing things, and wish Google did this more broadly. Just think if everyone who would have been laid off was instead transferred to a project that needs their skill…

The problem with this (and I was also in an org that didn't get any headcount -- for several years) is that those non-growing teams often ultimately just wither and die, whether it's through internal transfer, attrition or layoff. Google doesn't really reward managers for their managerial skill, and there's nothing that says "managerial incompetence" at Google more than having the same size team for years on end.