Google splits into GOOG and GOOGL today

Post by eitland » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 7:12 AM UTC

nyrina wrote: post #81

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did FB pay $19B for Whatsapp in order to prevent Google from acquiring their userbase? That is, FB got into a bidding war with Google over Whatsapp?

It could certainly be a large factor in the massive price. $19B is a whole lot of money, even (especially?) for a company the size of WhatsApp

Post by gojomo » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 7:17 AM UTC

drcode wrote: post #6

wtracy wrote: post #3

Does this imply that GOOG and GOOGL shares will have prices that will move independently going forward? This should be interesting to watch.

Yes, and Google has committed to pay an extra dividend if the prices diverge too much, because laws.

Post by matthewmacleod » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 7:21 AM UTC

muyuu wrote: post #83

therealarmen wrote: post #26

This is meant do to one thing -- let the founders retain control while allowing for large stock acquisitions. It's possible Google was muscled out of the Whatsapp deal simply because they couldn't pony up the money. $20B is almost half of their cash on hand. Note that the Nest and Waze acquisitions (small in comparison) were paid for almost entirely in cash.

Why would Google be required to pay cash when Facebook wasn't?

Post by repsilat » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 7:26 AM UTC

yid wrote: post #68

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Ownership" without control gives you precisely nothing This statement implies non-voting stock is worthless. That is untrue. There are people willing to pay good money for nonvoting stock. Imagine a dual-class share company. Class B shares cannot vote. Class A shares can vote - they own 100% of the vote share. But both classes are pari passu in economic terms - if Class A gets a $1 dividend Class B must receive th…

Thank you, that was very clear. > if Class A gets a $1 dividend Class B must receive the same. Does this mean that companies cannot split into voting and non-voting stock without paying out a dividend?

Post by porlw » Thu, Apr 03, 2014, 7:30 AM UTC

clarky07 wrote: post #34

Ellipsis753 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I wouldn't say they have only a single line of business. Yes, they make pretty much all of their profits from advertising. However they no longer just do searches. They do email, file hosting etc. You name it and they probably do it. They do make money from ways other than advertising too. They have quite a few pay to use services. Like business emails or Google Drive.

and yet none of them make money except search advertising. it's almost all of their revenue on a percentage basis. edit: i do believe they make a bit of money with youtube now, but it is still advertising. they haven't successfully SOLD anything to date.