Live data from Hacker News

G is for Google

googleblog.blogspot.com

531–540 of 607 posts

Re: G is for Google

#531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alphabet is only missing a startup accelerator, why wouldn't Sergey and Larry now focus on earlier stage themselves? All those ambitious things can be achieved better by a lot of startupa competing in parallel.

V is for Ventures and Capital W is for Wing X is for X Lab Y is for ...

Yo.

Re: G is for Google

#532
post #467

Just a stray observation, but now Microsoft and Google are both run by Indian born CEOs.

One seventh of the world's population is Indian born, so perhaps not so surprising...

Nope, still pretty surprising. China, Brazil, Russia are all humongous populations - dramatically fewer reps than India.

Re: G is for Google

#533
What is Alphabet? Alphabet is mostly a collection of companies. .... Alphabet is about businesses prospering through strong leaders and independence. In general, our model is to have a strong CEO who runs each business, with Sergey and me in service to them as needed. We will rigorously handle capital allocation and work to make sure each business is executing well. We'll also make sure we have a great CEO for each business, and we’ll determine their compensation.

The King and his vassals, ladies and gentlemen.

Re: G is for Google

#534

Actually reading the first few paragraphs of the form 8(K) was more illuminating than the blogpost. "Under the new operating structure, its main Google business will include search, ads, maps, apps, YouTube and Android and the related technical infrastructure (the “Google business”)" "In connection with the new operating structure and upon completion of the Alphabet Merger (as defined below), Larry Page will become t…

What they are really saying with all of this is..."We are moving all of our profitable businesses under one umbrella that will be reported separately, and putting all of our money-losing businesses under another, in hopes that investors will basically ignore the unprofitable stuff and only focus on our profitable businesses.". Apparently the moonshots are diluting results from the mainstays, and they want a higher stock price, so they are going to report them separately. I'm not sure why they have to form a whole new corporate structure for that though; they could just break out the numbers in their reports.

Re: G is for Google

#535

Wow, they are doing letters? Really? Letters? Hey is Eric Schmidt still in the building somewhere? Ask him how well Planets worked out for Sun Microsystems. Interesting strategy, hard to second guess from the outside of course. Sun's motivation was to figure out whether the other parts of the company could stand on their own[1], it also makes it less fiscally complicated to discharge an entire group into the void. Th…

At least they didn't call themselves Googlesoft or Gapple, in an attempt to define themselves in terms of their current rival-of-the-decade like Sun did.

Re: G is for Google

#536
My email is abc.deaf.xyz@gmail.com. I'm pretty sure they used my email as a source of inspiration for the name of their company. And they aren't giving me my fair share!

(Just joking. Except for my email, that part is 100% true.)

Re: G is for Google

#537
post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad to see innovation in action. This is the kind of stuff that makes the web worse - domain squatting.

> Glad to see innovation in action. Thank you! I sent in a registration for proof.com on February 3, 1996, but missed out on it by a few hours to some other dude. Never again! Just snapped up remar.xyz, networ.xyz, noteboo.xyz, payche.xyz and a few more. Went on a geometry/graphics kick and snapped up stuff like plotting.xyz and intercepts.xyz as well. I don't make the rules, I just play by them.

The rich boys are speculating on everything. I don't see anything wrong with poor boys taking a chance on an domain name? Yes--I don't like squatting, but when you have huge companies buying up huge blocks of names; I actually encourage the little guy to buy a few, and hope?

The rich boys always seem to get the best names first?

(I do wish when domains expired, the domain company wouldn't have first shot at buying the expired domain? Why are they allowed to do this? It doesn't seem fair? Maybe, I got the protocol wrong?)

Re: G is for Google

#538
post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first thing I thought of involved the regulations and other troubles that Google was facing in the EU. Those troubles seemed to summarize as "Google is too big and is taking advantage of its large market share". Alphabet looks like it'll fracture the google businesses more, which might help reduce the issues they're facing in the EU. But that's just my best guess

Well, Google is already quite fractured in the EU - it has something like 20 subsidiaries, one in most EU countries[0] ? That is also a common (mandatory?) setup, for multinational companies to have a local subsidiary in every country where they operate. I guess institutions like the EU must be handle that and focus on the activity independently of the fine details of the company structure, so that the restructuring…

>> The first thing I thought of involved the regulations and other troubles that Google was facing in the EU. Those troubles seemed to summarize as "Google is too big and is taking advantage of its large market share". Alphabet looks like it'll fracture the google businesses more, which might help reduce the issues they're facing in the EU. > Well, Google is already quite fractured in the EU - it has something like 20 subsidiaries, one in most EU countries

Seperation at the marketing end for ad services, or for purposes of tax optimisation, does not really alleviate any of the antitrust concerns. It's the services that matter. Google's main ad business and search being in the same company for example.

So the current EU subsidiaries would not have an effect on the EU investigation, but this current plan might.

Re: G is for Google

#539

Actually reading the first few paragraphs of the form 8(K) was more illuminating than the blogpost. "Under the new operating structure, its main Google business will include search, ads, maps, apps, YouTube and Android and the related technical infrastructure (the “Google business”)" "In connection with the new operating structure and upon completion of the Alphabet Merger (as defined below), Larry Page will become t…

What they are really saying with all of this is... "We are moving all of our profitable businesses under one umbrella that will be reported separately, and putting all of our money-losing businesses under another, in hopes that investors will basically ignore the unprofitable stuff and only focus on our profitable businesses." . Apparently the moonshots are diluting results from the mainstays, and they want a higher…

Or they're saying "so that the adults who supervise moneymaking won't bother the moonshot meetings at abc.xyz and spoil the fun with all their blather about next quarter's earnings".
Post reply on HN