Lenovo to buy Google's Motorola handset division

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 30, 2014, 9:12 AM UTC

corresation wrote: post #53

mediaman wrote: post #7

Huge announcement if true, and if this accounts for the entirety of the Motorola purchase that Google made. That means that in less than two years, Google shredded 85% of the $13bn paid for Motorola. At the time, the high price paid was excused for the patents, because the business itself did not generate nearly enough earnings to justify the price. Now, if it is true that the patents are part of the deal (the articl…

"That means that in less than two years, Google shredded 85% of the $13bn paid for Motorola" http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/12/22/did-motor... If this story is true, Google keeps accrued losses (you can't sell losses with a division). Add cash on hand, the sales of the STB business, and it's pretty far from $13 billion. By some accounting Google would still come out ahead. But I have trouble believing t…

Post by Tyrannosaurs » Thu, Jan 30, 2014, 9:21 AM UTC

absherwin wrote: post #184

product50 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have included cash which Motorola had when getting acquired but have conveniently ignored their short term debts (current liabilities) which they were liable to pay. A better number to look at is net working capital.

You're absolutely right that one needs to adjust for short-term liabilities since some of that cash would have gone to pay them (Longer-term liabilities would likely continue on to Lenovo). As big a question in this case is the amount of cash that will be in Motorola when Lenovo acquires it and was in their set-up box business when it was sold. Unfortunately, the comment isn't editable so I'll add more detail here. T…

Post by 72deluxe » Thu, Jan 30, 2014, 9:32 AM UTC

adventured wrote: post #83

lotso wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also a big statement on Google's ability to succeed in the hardware market, where they've never seemed to be able to gain real success despite their attempts with notebooks and phones. And Google TV. Let's not forget that huge failure. "By the summer of 2012, the majority of the televisions you see in stores will have Google TV embedded in it." -Eric Schmidt

Instead, by the Summer of 2016, the majority of living rooms will be using Chromecast or something similar running Android. Android will acquire a monopoly share in smart TV, exactly like it did in smart phones and tablets. In fact, the game is already over, the competition just doesn't realize it yet.

Post by 72deluxe » Thu, Jan 30, 2014, 9:39 AM UTC

Post by skrez » Thu, Jan 30, 2014, 9:50 AM UTC

jerf wrote: post #197

mediaman wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know Google is trying to break out of their traditional business, but it seems like they've been trying to do that for years and nearly all their revenue is still ads. Just because very smart entrepreneurs are able to capitalize on an opportunity (search) and turn it into one of the world's largest companies, doesn't mean they can arbitrarily do it again.

Has any company the size of Google ever successfully pulled of this sort of diversification? (Honest question, there may well be answers I'm not thinking of. But I do mean very large companies, I know smaller ones diversify all the time successfully (and unsuccessfully).) For context, you think about a company like Microsoft or Google "diversifying", and, you know, for them it's not enough to "merely" build a $250 mi…