Google Inc. (GOOG)

All Comments on GOOG

  • commenter
    eddie64
    Oct 14 08:00 AM
    Low Volume Capitulation - Fast Money Recap (10/13/08) [view article]
    Macke's comment "the fat cats are coming up with another scam for America" is the most telling........ He is essentially telling us we have been taken, and only if we are fools will we be taken again............

    Secondly, if he knows this, then WHY DON'T WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE & WHY AREN'T THEY BEING PROSECUTED?????????     Reply
  • commenter
    Jeff Jarvis
    Oct 14 06:31 AM
    My Website
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    Bruce Timmons,
    I like how you said that: "Manufacturers should shift into a view of selling the utility of the stuff rather than the stuff itself."
    When I interviewed VC Fred Wilson for the book and asked him about a Googley car company, he thought for a second and said it was Zipcar. Right: utility over stuff itself.
    I then riffed on that with a new vision for a car company as a getting-you-places company.
    That, indeed, is a network as you describe it.

    Reply
  • commenter
    punk_ash
    Oct 14 03:30 AM
    Low Volume Capitulation - Fast Money Recap (10/13/08) [view article]
    If we add up what all the experts are saying, we will get a net result of 0 with infinite variance in what they are yapping. Reply
  • commenter
    jonbob
    Oct 13 10:34 PM
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    While reading your comments on the credit mess I was reminded of my own decision to sell my stocks and remain in cash. I did it about a year ago.

    I started receiving spam mails inviting me to be a signer upper for loans. Everybody and his brother was handing out money over the Internet and getting folks like me to get the papers signed for a fee.

    That reminded me of an old saw about a business man who sold all his stock on the eve of the great crash of '29 because his boot black touted stocks to him while polishing his shoes.

    The correlation was all too scary. Like all those folks who bought stocks in the twenties, rocketing their prices to extreme multiples, there were just too many people handing out credit and things were gettng crazy. Taking into account that credit and interest rates rule the market, my stomach knotted up and I bailed out.

    For all the complexity of the credit problem, the decision to sell stocks was based upon really simple reasoning. In the market, finance rules and finance was heading for trouble.

    Reply
  • commenter
    User 198873
    Oct 13 06:50 PM
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    why cant people see that goog is still the best co. of its kind. I think it is about to reach new highs any day now. Do not be suprised to see it go up 50 points in the next session.jerry w. Reply
  • commenter
    Talin
    Oct 13 06:01 PM
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    Good post, full of suggestions, but very dangerous idea. If America Googles-up, as suggested it should, things will deteriorate sharply. "Atoms are a drag" "Stuff stinks" and things like that are old currency in current strategic thinking in America. Faced to increased competition in world markets, the only plausible strategy that American business strategists have developed -and that nobody contradicts- is to follow the "mental", "intellectual property" road. We do the "thinking", sell the thinking, and with that we buy the "stuff" the not so clever people in the rest of the world needs to supply. That´s the general idea. Now, improving on that, the "networks" will also do the "thinking".

    To sell profitably intellectual property not attached to specific goods is not a very good business proposition. You do not get much money out of it, perhaps in a few of the successful projects, but taking the losses in the unsuccessful ones. Biotechnological companies that do not develop final products are discovering that.

    At the national level is, obviously, worse. You cannot survive selling 20 billions of car "technology" and importing 200 billions of cars. And nobody pays for Google (final consumption); as at now the income of Google in intermediate consumption (companies’ money). This difference is vital, but nobody see it.

    We have to network, invest in "technology" and make good use of it, which means creating something that (mainly) final consumers will really pay, which means they really value. And to keep the value added in America.

    Reply
  • commenter
    slick deals
    4 u
    Oct 13 05:19 PM
    My Website
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    Nice article. But may be it is more better if we say as 'Internet Economy" instead of google economy.

    Definitely web 2.0 has made significant impact to form platforms you have listed. If one thinks carefully, the DOT COM burst we had in 2000 to 2003, the over hype of internet technology, actually has become a reality in last 2 years!!

    Reply
  • commenter
    kris23
    Oct 13 03:12 PM
    My Website
    Can Anything Displace the iPhone in Consumer's Eyes? [view article]
    Good point, Apple Heavy. The iPhone has remained in the postion it has because it has no other competitors.....from Apple. What's the point on spending $500 on a new Blackberry when in the next 6 months they'll just release a newer version. It almost seems like a rat race within itself. In that sense, the appeal to the iPhone is obvious in the sense that you won't have to worry about Apple outdoing you anytime soon. Reply
  • commenter
    Brice
    Timmons
    Oct 13 02:50 PM
    My Website
    Welcome to the Google Economy [view article]
    Good analysis, but not entirely correct with regard to "stuff" being bad. The problem with manufacturing, real estate, etc. is the paradigm for viewing what is being sold. Manufacturers should shift into a view of selling the utility of the stuff rather than the stuff itself. Large networks are in a better position to extract residual value from an asset (car, computer, etc.) than individuals. Not to mention, owning stuff doesn't always guarantee you the utility that you need. A car, for example, is generally useful, but many individuals have periodic need of an SUV, truck, van, or some other vehicle that they probably decided to forgo buying when they bought a car. The car retailer that solves this problem by leasing an electric car that comes with the periodic use of an SUV, van, truck, etc. shared among a large network, will boost their sales numbers and be in a position to extract residual value from the car after the lease is up.

    Networks of pure information have the bonus of being exceptionally flexible, but there is still a hardware infrastructure underlying every scrap of code in the world. "Stuff" isn't bad, but the centralized, unwieldy networks that disseminate its true value (utility) are inefficient monsters. Franchising everything, possibly even down to manufacturing, (like the note on "linking" above) is the way to go.

    Making networks that are able to shed parts and extract residual value after the consumer gets his maximum utility from a product, that's the future of "stuff."     Reply
  • commenter
    SmartStops
    Oct 13 01:14 PM
    My Website
    How Low Can Google Go? [view article]
    Buy&Hold is not a smart investment strategy period. The advice being offered is to ensure you ALWAYS have some sort of exit protection strategy in place. Hopefully one that is smart.


    On Oct 07 01:17 PM MistaWhite wrote:

    > SmartStops: Approach the market in what way? It was valued at a reasonable
    > price in relation to their earnings growth.... It's not their fault
    > everyone freaked out and started selling everything. Heck, they threw
    > the house out with the bathtube, not just the baby. It was a better
    > valuation than Yahoo, BIDU, etc... Yes, you're correct, people should
    > utililze stops and protect thier profits, but to call their approach
    > ridiculous isn't fair. What's happening now is ridiculous. The market,
    > not their trading styles are ridiculous. Offer advice, not just negativity...     Reply
  • commenter
    SmartStops
    Oct 13 01:12 PM
    My Website
    How Low Can Google Go? [view article]
    Not hypocrisy. Its only when you look back that you know what happened. So long as you have a decent re-entry strategy in place , even something as simple as the new 20-day high (per turtle trading) , you have a much better return than Buy&Holders. Sure, the stock can rebound. But do you want probabilities on your side? Do you want to ride out corrections that are 30,40,50% ? Did you know the Dow is down 44.5% in just 1 year? People are afraid to "exit" and that's what we are trying to educate people on. Its interesting that press only publishes reports about what happens if you miss the 10 best days of the market etc. as the vote against "market timing". So you return drops 14%. But what they fail to tell you is missing the 10 worst days of the market brings up that return 24%. (that's a 1982-1998 study and we are looking for an updated one). And that doesn't factor in opportunity cost either. The question to answer - is your money working the best for you while in the market? Soon we'll be showing 5 and 10-year data on our website for historical views. but if you want to see any in meantime, feel free to email us with the requested symbols.

    On Oct 07 01:19 PM Owen wrote:

    > SmartStops,
    >
    > Just eleven hours ago, on the GE discussion thread, you were telling
    > readers that 'One can only pick the bottom in hindsight'. Now you
    > are telling people they should have picked the top on GOOG using
    > your wonderful hindsight. Can you spell Hypocrisy?     Reply
  • commenter
    Apple Heavy
    Oct 13 09:29 AM
    Can Anything Displace the iPhone in Consumer's Eyes? [view article]
    In addition to the superior design, high quality, rich functionality and ease of use, there is basically just one iPhone product (color and storage aside).
    The other manufacturers have diluted their brand with a confusing array of too many models, and the phone you buy today will be an old model tomorrow. Eg. if I were to consider a Blackberry, do I get the Bold, Storm, or Thunder, and will the one I want now still be the one I want tomorrow.
    So, in my view the Iphone's appeal is obvious.
     Reply
  • commenter
    libertarians
    obsister
    Oct 13 07:51 AM
    Was Friday's Rally Just a Hedge Fund Short Squeeze? [view article]
    this stuff won't stop until Treasury has a stake in even the solid banks and the traders have enough to clear out to dubai off of transaction fees from fear filled clients being told to dump all stock and keep the cash in mattresses.....
    sheesh, people think O wants to socialize. dudes, were are now socialized.....
    Go, Barr!!!!!     Reply
  • commenter
    Budget Man
    Oct 13 03:31 AM
    My Website
    How Low Can Google Go? [view article]
    I just picked up Google at about $325 on Friday. So many investors are worried about the near term instead of Google's long term earning potential. For many, Google is the starting point to the Internet. As they expand into other areas and find effective monetization methods their earnings will skyrocket. Reply
  • commenter
    Brewer
    Oct 13 02:09 AM
    Can Anything Displace the iPhone in Consumer's Eyes? [view article]
    iPhone has absolutely no competition. It's been out 18 months, but remember it took eleven years for anyone to copy the Mac. Now, all operating systems are derived from the early Macintosh. Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: