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

In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

flarevine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#21

Post by jrockway »

mmahemoff wrote: post #20
jrockway wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, VP is not an engineering title at Google. And, each engineering title has a list of responsibilities that is expected from someone with that title. So it's easy to find out where acquired engineers belong. Really, all the problems that the OP lists are nonexistent at Google. The only big problem I can think of is integrating the acquired codebase into Google's.

VP is an engineering title at Google, albeit not one handed out like candy as it is in companies who charge for expertise (management consultants for example). Max Levchin acquired the title after Slide's acquisition.

"VP of Engineering" (his title at Google, according to Wikipedia) is a management title.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#22

Post by patio11 »

badclient wrote: post #13
michaelochurch wrote: post #11

Here's why acq-hiring is a disaster. Let's say FatFrog is the acquirer and BuzzFly is the acquired. BuzzFly's founders usually have earnouts ("golden handcuffs") and thus have an incentive to stay, but merging them with FatFrog's executive hierarchy is difficult and rocky. They tend to be resented, especially if there's an age difference (i.e. the BuzzFly founders are 25 and FatFrog execs are 40+). The executive merg…

Here's why your post is a disaster in terms of faulty assumptions. * Most acquired founders aren't made execs . Most end up as Product Managers or team leaders. * The weak engineers from acquired companies can't sneak into google. They must go through the typical Google interview process. use the transient "hotness" of their startup name to get a huge promotion to a VP-level role in another company * ^ Sorry but this…

Getting VP-level role at top companies is very hard and if a developer of an acquired company could score a VP-level role elsewhere after the acquisition, he could probably do so before the acquisition

The scenario is not "I was engineer #3 at a startup which was just acquired by Google. I'll take a corner office at Facebook now, please." It is "I was engineer #3 at a startup which was just acquired by Google. Hello, Mr. VC. Sure, I'll join that company you just funded as VP of Engineering."

This second one, ahem, does not strike me as supremely implausible.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#23

Post by badclient »

patio11 wrote: post #22
badclient wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why your post is a disaster in terms of faulty assumptions. * Most acquired founders aren't made execs . Most end up as Product Managers or team leaders. * The weak engineers from acquired companies can't sneak into google. They must go through the typical Google interview process. use the transient "hotness" of their startup name to get a huge promotion to a VP-level role in another company * ^ Sorry but this…

Getting VP-level role at top companies is very hard and if a developer of an acquired company could score a VP-level role elsewhere after the acquisition, he could probably do so before the acquisition The scenario is not "I was engineer #3 at a startup which was just acquired by Google. I'll take a corner office at Facebook now, please." It is "I was engineer #3 at a startup which was just acquired by Google. Hello,…

Even in that case, I am not aware of many instances where a developer being part of an acquisition helped him significantly in acquiring a VP position at a start-up.

Any start-up worth their salt is very deliberate in hiring. Now, if you don't care about where you are working and are merely chasing titles, I'd argue you can get a VP position without needing to be part of an acquisition.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#24

Post by badclient »

michaelochurch wrote: post #19
badclient wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's why your post is a disaster in terms of faulty assumptions. * Most acquired founders aren't made execs . Most end up as Product Managers or team leaders. * The weak engineers from acquired companies can't sneak into google. They must go through the typical Google interview process. use the transient "hotness" of their startup name to get a huge promotion to a VP-level role in another company * ^ Sorry but this…

Most acquired founders aren't made execs. Most end up as Product Managers or team leaders. Perhaps not in title, but no one with serious ambitions is going to give up his business without expectation of high-level clout, unless he's dumping it because he thinks it's a dog. You don't sell off your dream to end up in the middle of some rusty hierarchy. The weak engineers from acquired companies can't sneak into google.…

You don't sell off your dream to end up in the middle of some rusty hierarchy.

Actually, founders do sell off their dream to end up in the middle of some rusty hierarchy. It happens all the time. Why? You answered it yourself: they are selling their dream. The money from the exit is usually worth the "rusty hierarchy" of the acquiring company.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#25

Post by vannevar »

And yet that $1.9B is only a fraction of Google's cash reserves. And Apple's is nearly $100B. Corporations are hoarding cash at record levels. As of last January, the top 17 US corporate cash reserves amounted to nearly half a trillion dollars. It's not unreasonable to speculate that corporate hoarding is contributing to our flat economy, when you consider how that cash would be multiplied if it were turned loose. Companies are holding onto cash because they're afraid of slow growth because of high unemployment, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when they don't invest in new business and hire more people.

It also casts doubt on claims that raising corporate taxes will hurt the economy. If companies aren't spending any of the cash they already have, how will giving them more to stuff under the mattress help?

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#26

Post by Aloisius »

jrockway wrote: post #21
mmahemoff wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

VP is an engineering title at Google, albeit not one handed out like candy as it is in companies who charge for expertise (management consultants for example). Max Levchin acquired the title after Slide's acquisition.

"VP of Engineering" (his title at Google, according to Wikipedia) is a management title.

So engineering has no managers or engineers can't be managers?

In most companies, VP of Engineering is inside the Engineering department. The idea that management is its own department is rather odd.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#27

Post by shingen »

vannevar wrote: post #25

And yet that $1.9B is only a fraction of Google's cash reserves. And Apple's is nearly $100B. Corporations are hoarding cash at record levels. As of last January, the top 17 US corporate cash reserves amounted to nearly half a trillion dollars. It's not unreasonable to speculate that corporate hoarding is contributing to our flat economy, when you consider how that cash would be multiplied if it were turned loose. Co…

That headline meme sounds impressive: corporations hoarding cash.

Until you dig deeper and find out that US corporations are accumulating debt at the fastest pace in world history. Their cash is required to continue to offset the massive debt being acquired. If interest rates go up at all in the next ten years, bankruptcies will skyrocket. A lot of companies are being irresponsible with debt right now because they can issue it at hyper low rates.

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#28

Post by 00101000100101 »

samwillis wrote: post #5
ThaddeusQuay2 wrote: post #4

2011 was the year that Google gobbled up drop.io, and buried it deep in the room known as "Stuff We'll Never Use, And Neither Will Anyone Else". NOTE TO SELF: Startup Idea: Create a new drop.io, and combine it with some of the features of MegaUpload. Call it MegaDrop.

Facebook brought drop.io in October 2010

HAH!

Re: In 2011 Google Spent $1.9 Billion Acquiring 79 Companies

#29

Post by vannevar »

shingen wrote: post #27
vannevar wrote: post #25

And yet that $1.9B is only a fraction of Google's cash reserves. And Apple's is nearly $100B. Corporations are hoarding cash at record levels. As of last January, the top 17 US corporate cash reserves amounted to nearly half a trillion dollars. It's not unreasonable to speculate that corporate hoarding is contributing to our flat economy, when you consider how that cash would be multiplied if it were turned loose. Co…

That headline meme sounds impressive: corporations hoarding cash. Until you dig deeper and find out that US corporations are accumulating debt at the fastest pace in world history. Their cash is required to continue to offset the massive debt being acquired. If interest rates go up at all in the next ten years, bankruptcies will skyrocket. A lot of companies are being irresponsible with debt right now because they ca…

Is there a good source for historical data on this? The best I could find goes back to 1996, and while the amounts issued in 2006-2010 are high, they don't show the steep hockey-stick climb that we saw in the mortgage crisis, for instance.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ksi3L1y...

Post reply on HN