Creating Alphabet suggests they want to change this.  Or that they are just 
doing random stuff.

They may see activist investors forcing companies to split themselves up so 
every business unit maximizes return to investors or gets culled if it’s not 
profitable.  Xerox is the latest, and Icahn only had 8% ownership.  Investors 
like that are a pain in the butt to management, better to get ahead of the 
problem.  Companies with tons of cash are also susceptible to leveraged 
buyouts, where you essentially buy them with their own cash.  Alphabet may be 
to big a fish for any other fish to swallow, but it’s not unheard of for the 
little fish to eat the big fish, or make its life difficult.

It also looks like they are now serious about Google Fiber being a serious 
enterprise, not just a showcase.  I still won’t be impressed until they stop 
cherry picking and wire someplace no one would, how about Flint Michigan?  But 
perhaps that is just part of becoming profitable, you cherry pick.


From: Travis Johnson 
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 12:22 PM
To: [email protected] 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SAD day

If the search engine goes away, so does everything else they are involved in. 
None of the other "products" are profitable on their own.

Travis



On 2/2/2016 10:22 AM, Sam Kirsch wrote:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Google_products

  There's a little more to them then just a Search Engine ;)  

  I don't see how anything changes with Apple not being around either.  There's 
absolutely nothing in an Apple product that's super groundbreaking... Many 
companies had already attempted to combine a PDA and a Cell Phone long before 
the iPhone, they just did it the most mass marketable way first.  And that goes 
for just able every Apple product I can think of.  MP3 players existed.  Music 
platforms existed.  They just weren't unified and mass marketed in the same 
way... so, Apple really just copied a bunch of other guys too (and has been 
doing that since the company's inception, the mouse, the GUI, etc) NOTHING 
CHANGES ;)


  -- Samuel Kirsch, Network Support
  Plexicomm - Internet Solutions | www.plexicomm.net
  Office: 1.866.759.4678 x109 | Fax: 1.866.852.4688
  Emergency Support: 1.866.759.9713 | [email protected]



  ------ Original Message ------
  From: "Travis Johnson" <[email protected]>
  To: [email protected]
  Sent: 2/2/2016 12:22:36 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SAD day

    At least Apple makes products... products that literally changed the 
computing world, the phone world, the retail world, created apps, and the music 
world. Google created a search engine (actually copying Yahoo, Webcrawler, 
Altavista and several others at the time). They aren't a "product". They don't 
"sell" anything. They are a webpage, just like Facebook.

    Imagine your life without Google or Facebook. NOTHING CHANGES. 

    Yes, they built a better mousetrap using their intelligence and hard 
work... but they aren't "inventors". They didn't create anything new or 
groundbreaking.

    Travis


    On 2/1/2016 10:09 PM, Colin Stanners wrote:

      I'd much rather Google / Alphabet Inc. be in that position than Apple 
with their overpriced yet restricted / non-upgradable / crappy consumer 
electronics.


      Google is making themselves the curator of access to the world's 
information and communications. When you consider the value of those, it's not 
just the most valuable company in matters of money. The founders had incredible 
foresight in addition to their intelligence and hard work.


      On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Travis Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:

        
http://www.ibtimes.com/alphabet-inc-goog-surpasses-apple-inc-aapl-become-worlds-most-valuable-public-company-2289113

        "The world isn't run by weapons anymore, or energy, or money. It's run 
by little ones and zeroes, little bits of data. It's all just electrons."
        ~ Cosmo (Sneakers 1992)

        Literally, a one page website for a company that is less than 19 years 
old is now the most valuable company in the world. :(

        Travis






Reply via email to