Google now seems deep into the enshittification [1] process. Of all the big tech companies, they seemed the most customer-friendly, the least constrained by the need to optimize their money hose. But I guess the economic logic of tying executive compensation to short-term share price simply overwhelmed other considerations. The stock must go up, so revenues must grow, so Google must monetize everything to the maximum…
Am I naive to think that when you make $226 million in a year like Pichai that money should stop being your major driving force and that your reputation is more important? Like what else could he buy? But his reputation is taking severe hits. Maybe I just don't understand ultra rich people though. Maybe money is everything.
Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
121–130 of 271 posts
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can only comfortably say that if all of your co-investors are on board (or you have none - unlikely in Google’s case) and if you will never need to raise any additional capital for any reason. It’s very difficult to run a modern business, especially in tech, without being beholden to anyone.
All true, although in some cases you can avoid the "need to raise capital problem" by using normal business loans rather than selling ownership stake. You still need to grow to pay back the loan but you don't have the problem of new investors with their hands in the pot making demands.
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#123I liken this to a sesame seed bun manufacturer. After some experimentation, they realize that shaving roughly 10 sesame seeds from each bun means they save one cent every 100 buns. They continue to sell the buns at the normal price and consumers are none the wiser: After all, who's going to notice 10 sesame seeds missing? But the sesame seed bun manufacturer continues the experiment. They continue to remove the seeds…
That analogy doesn't hold up. Because if consumers genuinely don't notice the sesame seeds are gone, that means they never cared in the first place, and this is a better outcome for everyone. Why were farmers growing useless sesame seeds in the first place? Now they can switch to blueberries or whatever and the world is better off. It's kind of like, thank god those nasty canned olive slices finally disappeared from…
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#124Is that really still a thing? If my email app was showing me ads I'd obviously switch and/or start paying for it.
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
>We won't get anything other than this unless Google decides to do a huge round of buybacks and go private. The spice must flow because only growth makes money for the people who actually own Google. And after they go private why do you think they won't care about growth/money?
They will still care, but they have more freedom to take the longer view.
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#126Just another logical step in Google’s brand erosion. After a sufficient erosion has taken place a new CEO will be appointed to “bring back” the old Google. But by then it will be too late.
Marissa mayer?
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#127No ads, no data-scraping and I even have business support in case something doesn't work.
Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#128Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#129Re: Google appears to be scaling up the ads it shows to Gmail users
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I naive to think that when you make $226 million in a year like Pichai that money should stop being your major driving force and that your reputation is more important? Like what else could he buy? But his reputation is taking severe hits. Maybe I just don't understand ultra rich people though. Maybe money is everything.
The CEO just executes the will of the board, who in turn execute the will of shareholders (types A and B shareholders, specifically, for Alphabet) who are mostly focused on delivering maximum returns. If you look at the voting power of Alphabet shareholders, it is dominated (~60%) by Sergey Brin and Larry Page.