×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Goes Public at $85/share

michael posted more than 9 years ago | from the buckle-your-seatbelts dept.

Google 343

adpowers writes "It is official. Google will have its IPO debut at $85 per share. To quote the article, 'At that price, the low end of its recently revised range, Google raised $1.67 billion, with $1.2 billion to go to the No. 1 Internet search engine and $473 million to Google executives and investors selling their shares.' Trading begins Thursday, August 19th." Got Google?

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

343 comments

FUCKING EFF PEEE!!!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011493)

YEAH Boy!!!! I succeeded IT!!!

Re:FUCKING EFF PEEE!!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011802)

Hooray for Googel! Hooray for teh Open Sorce Communiy!

Like, where can we get this IPO? Can I like, you know, pay with my paypla-account? Or do I have to get a, like real, acount??

--
some random blog-cunt from Australia who likes to suck off, like, gooks, niggers, and, you know, such

Finally! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011495)

I am exchanging every single share of SCO I own for Google. In your face, Darl!

Re:Finally! (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011569)

Remember, you need to buy *5* shares to get into the IPO. Would SCO's market cap (assuming you owned every share) even get you to that limit?
;)

Good idea (0)

Pan T. Hose (707794) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011625)

That's a very good idea. I am personally selling all of my MSFT, YHOO and some USON right now to buy GOOG. That will be less than 30000 shares, but still I look forward to short it soon. This is a great news for every Free Software advocate like myself. I am sure this day will become a very important point in history of global economy and computer science. I am very excited.

Re:Good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011665)

That will be less than 30000 shares, but still I look forward to short it soon.


Why does it sound like it's "only 30000 shares" ?? Like it's a bad thing? I wouldn't even be close to getting the minimum FIVE shares...

Re:Good idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011765)

Please tell me your are trying to be funny or sarcastic. Please, please, please. Otherwise I have to assume you are a moron and I hate doing that.

Re:Finally! (2, Insightful)

w1r3sp33d (593084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011808)

It has been clear that every SCO headline that has bumped the stock price has been used by execs to dump stock, if anyone still has SCO stock I say sell it now while it's still at 4$ a share before the next IBM case.

Besides what is your soul worth? Personally I didn't invest in defense contractors right after 9-11 although I know some people who did (and did very well at it.) Instead I gave away money to different charities, I will never regret that.

So sell SCO, give away money to a non-profit and get a tax write off! Even if you don't want to send food abroad, or get vacinations to kids, at least you can support Mozilla! http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/donate.html [mozilla.org]

Second psoit!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011498)

fp dc inet

The whole idea is crazy!!! (-1, Offtopic)

armando_wall (714879) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011500)

I don't get it!!

Ok, just a tribute to ObviousGuy [slashdot.org] :-D

Who the fuck modded this Informative? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011536)

Who gave these people mod points?

Re:Who the fuck modded this Informative? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011556)


You have to admit it's funny, and related to a big event.

Re:Who the fuck modded this Informative? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011613)

This is definitely fucking informative. I've been trying to locate the 10000000 post on Slashdot all day today. Thanks to the author, and seriously mods, if you don't like this post, the least you can do is just ignore it. Sheesh

Happy days are here again! (5, Funny)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011503)

I for one, welcome our new non-income-generating, but VC-attracting overlords. Where do I get my Aero chair?

Wrong Auction (5, Funny)

Ieshan (409693) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011695)

Where do I get my Aero chair?

This was the stock auction. The bankruptcy auction isn't for another few months, at least.

Weren't you alive five years ago? =)

When was that? (-1, Redundant)

throughthewire (675776) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011507)

Trading Begins Thursday, August 19

Which would be, um, today.

Re:When was that? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011571)

Yes, that is correct.

decline of Slashdot (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011633)

someone gets +3 informative for telling us what day it is.

was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (2, Insightful)

w1r3sp33d (593084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011510)

If so you probably weren't in the stock market three years ago during the IPO crashes (and thus probably have a life savings yet to loose.)

I remember Cisco used to be about 85$....

Re:was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011592)

i've often wondered how the price/share gets set, especially the initial price. Hype certainly seems to be part of the equation for Google. Lets hope it doesnt go the same way as VA Linux's first day.

of course, this is the price/share directly from Google, unlike the price on when shares are exchanged between two investors, such as on the NYSE.

Re:was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (2, Informative)

AliasTheRoot (171859) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011638)

It gets set by a mixture of valuation of tangible and intangible assets, potential growth and forward earnings projections. Well that, and how much people are willing to pay.

Re:was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (-1, Troll)

dmayle (200765) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011610)

I remember Cisco used to be about 85$

And it will be again. Make sure you get in now, while there's still a profit to be made!

This ad^H^Hcomment brought to you by E*TRADE [slashdot.org]

Re:was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (4, Informative)

Hobbex (41473) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011668)

I remember Cisco used to be about 85$....

I love it when people consider the cost per stock as an indicator of whether a company is overvalued. It is people like you who create arbitrage in the market for the rest of us to exploit...

Different companies have different number of stocks you know. $85 gives Google a total value of $23 Billion (market capitalization), while Cisco is still worth around $150 billion...

Re:was any /.er fool enough to buy at 85$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011783)

It's a dutch auction you moron. Hasn't that been covered everytime one of these articles has been posted?

Ebay? (3, Funny)

Memetic (306131) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011512)

How long before these hit ebay?

Re:Ebay? (4, Funny)

w1r3sp33d (593084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011550)

Yeah in a year you will be able to get a Furby, a complete set of Magic cards, and a Google IPO ticket for under a buck.

(actual shipping charged to the buyer, negative feedback will be left, paypal only please, no international shipping, thanks for looking at my worthless crap, you are viewer number 0000000000000000001, sold as is, etc, etc, ...)

I'm more interested in... (4, Interesting)

Zugot (17501) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011516)

... how many google employees have become instant millionaires?

Re:I'm more interested in... (1)

w1r3sp33d (593084) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011647)

I don't know, how many executives do they have? The article didn't mention any employees other than them.

Lets see how they do: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=GOOG&d=t [yahoo.com]

Looks like the first bid was for 500 shares at 55$ but nobody dumped stock on that one. Should be an interesting day!

Re:I'm more interested in... (2, Interesting)

spuke4000 (587845) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011662)

As an extension of that, how many Google hotshots are going to become millionaires and then quit? I'm sure this kind of thing happened all the time in the boom. Anyone know what the resignation rate is after a big IPO?

Re:I'm more interested in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011803)

I can only imagine that in the future it would go up knowing that the bottoming out could happen as fast as it did last time.

People were living lavish lives on their stock options instead of selling them off and getting the fuck out. These people watched as their cars, their homes, and then finally their jobs were pulled from under them.

I'd sell my stocks off the second we went public and then high tail it for my ranch in TX for an August vacation while I watched my friends do work while I chased coons with my dog.

Re:I'm more interested in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011812)

Usually you can't cash out for a period after an IPO. In this case however they will be able to cash out (whether that is because of the Dutch auction or some other reason I am not sure).

Re:I'm more interested in... (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011840)

From what I've read of .com failures, the companies that make employee millionaires tend to do badly afterwards whether they stay or not. If they stay, then they've already made as much money as they're likely to from that company (with the exception of top management) and so are only there because they enjoy being there. While this is good from the point of view of producing great products, it's not so good from the point of view of producing great products before deadlines.

JWZ said that there are two kind of employees, those who want to work to make a company great, and those who want to work at a great company (paraphrased slightly because I'm too lazy to look up the exact quote). The millionaire employees who leave are likely to be in the first category, while the ones who replace them are far more likely to be in the second category.

Re:I'm more interested in... (4, Informative)

AliasTheRoot (171859) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011674)

Probably not that many, at least in cash terms - plenty will be paper millionaires. Most employee share option schemes have clauses that prevent cashing in on IPO/Acquisition.

Last place I had shares in prevented us from cashing them in until after 6 months had passed. Course there still hasn't been an exit event, so I still have a batch of worthless (for now) options sitting in a filing cabinet somewhere.

Re:I'm more interested in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011745)

2

#1: the guy who gets commission on a bunch of geeks buying a tech stock just because they like the pretty website

#2: CEO

Fifth Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011523)

First share!

Disappointing (3, Insightful)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011524)

So anticlimactic. I am actually disinfranchised by the whole ordeal. At least the price came down a bit from the overinflated suggested ipo.

Re:Disappointing (1)

myc_lykaon (645662) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011562)

I am actually disinfranchised by the whole ordeal.

How were you disenfranchised by an IPO? Enquiring minds want to know.

Re:Disappointing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011612)

Aren't you going to complain about "anticlimactic", too? Or how about "enquiring"? Oh wait, that was your FUBAR.

I'm not sure (1)

2names (531755) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011574)

why you are feeling disappointed and disenfranchised. Could you explain a bit more please?

Re:I'm not sure (3, Insightful)

AviLazar (741826) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011729)

While I think hyping ones own company is important (and required in this day and age) I believe that Google was elevated to a high status (both by themselves and the community) to such a point as to make them seem "saintly" (for lack of better words).
The initial estimates of their price created such hype and talk -finally it deflated, by a good amount (IIRC the initial estimates were up to 120 per share?).
I remember reading the articles last year, prior to Google going IPO - saying how important this would be to our economy - how Google would save the stock market with all the trading fee revenue, etc... And then came the articles that Google doesn't want to IPO - they want to remain "pure" and "uncompromised" by not having a board of directors and shareholders who would force them to become "evil." In the end, it was a great marketing strategy - playing "hard to get."
If anything, the whole ordeal tired me out and now that the time came, I feel more blah then what I should. Hmm maybe it is because its a "blah" morning for me - but I expected something more cool when I hit Google website - anything - throw the comman person (who won't spend 85/share) a bone :)
Those are my feelings - I do not expect many people to agree with me - but then, that is why these are feelings (opinions).
Thanks for listening

Re:Disappointing (1)

rarose (36450) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011580)

What are you trying to say? "disinfranchised"? Did you mean disenfranchised?

Could you vote for Google management before the IPO? No? Then what the hell did you lose?

Re:Disappointing (5, Funny)

brennan73 (94035) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011637)

"I am actually disinfranchised..."

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Incontheivable! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011684)

"Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?"
"Yes"
"Morons."

Re:Disappointing (1)

transient (232842) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011708)

I was going to rag on you for using "disenfranchised" when you don't know what it means, but since I've been beaten to it, I'll try to be helpful and show you the definition from WordNet:

disenfranchised, adj : deprived of the rights of citizenship especially the right to vote [syn: disfranchised, voteless] [ant: enfranchised]

Still a good valuation (5, Insightful)

markkellman (662190) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011529)

Google is valued at around $23B. Even though it is lower than recent estimates, it is still much higher than people were originally speculating: $10-15B.

Re:Still a good valuation (2)

Itsik (191227) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011823)

Now that Google is going public, what would prevent Microsoft from buying a massive amount of shares and basically taking over Google?

$1.2 B to go to the No. 1 Internet search engine (5, Funny)

scotay (195240) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011537)

Does that mean the search results will start to suck beacause the engine gets fat and lazy, sitting around all day smoking pot. I know I would if I had 1.2 billion dollars. Maybe they should put the engine on an allowance to keep it honest.

Scoffing Analysts (5, Interesting)

kaleco (801384) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011541)

I wonder how many of the analysts who scoffed at Google's potential value of $33bn rely on it every day to research other companies.

I, for one, would be lost without it. However, I will be interested to see how it develops now it's under external influences.

Re:Scoffing Analysts (1)

Derkec (463377) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011713)

Right... and what does having to use it everyday have to do with calculating future revenues and costs? Google does get a nice bump in its value because it is such an established powerful brand, but you still need to make money - which they do.

Re:Scoffing Analysts (1)

kaleco (801384) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011749)

Using it every day indicates a product or service which is of genuine value, unlike many of the dot-com mirages.

Google does seem to have enough irons in the fire to ensure that it carries on developing it's usefulness. The more useful it becomes, the more people use it, the more people use it, the greater the potential to generate revenue from ads or other online revenue models (such as Google Answers).

Re:Scoffing Analysts (3, Insightful)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011737)

You may be lost without it, but what revenue do they actually generate based on that? Do you click on their ads? That's great, but then where do they go from there?

Mind you, I think Google is a great tool, but they've bungled this IPO pretty badly. Whether they can continue to innovate and grow as a company is an open question that will be interesting to follow over the next few years...

Glad to see it came down. (2, Interesting)

mansa (94579) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011544)

With the gmail name and the playboy issue, it seemed like they went crazy for a few days.

At any rate, now I can get my one share [singleshare.com] framed! I like to keep all my favorite tech company's stock certificates on my computer lab wall. :)

Re:Glad to see it came down. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011611)

I like to keep all my favorite tech company's stock certificates on my computer lab wall.

That's actually a good idea. Once a company goes down -- and they all do -- you've got a nifty mousepad within reach.

Anyone? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011545)

Anyone else see the irony of linking to the Google index from finance.yahoo.com ?

No? Just me.

The goose that laid the golden egg... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011552)

I bet the investors are already clamoring to cut that sucker open to get at the gold inside.

Media missed boat on WHY share price went downward (5, Insightful)

loggia (309962) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011553)

Sometimes the media overanalyzes. If you read last night's article in the New York Times, barely anyone mentions that the simple reason the expected share price dropped is that: people did not understand/were confused by the auction process.

I think that's about it. Nothing very complicated at all...

Prove it then (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011604)

If the only reason the price went down was confusion, then today when the stock is listed and can be bought by "normal" means, then it will shoot right up to $135, right?

Re:Media missed boat on WHY share price went downw (1)

garcia (6573) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011651)

Perhaps that's what YOU believe because that's what Google wants you to believe? I think it's because Google knew that their stock was overrated and was going to cause major financial headaches for when the stock prices plummeted from their overinflated original offerings...

Re:Media missed boat on WHY share price went downw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011675)

Well, there's a little more to it than people not understanding the auction process. Google screwed the pooch on this and is screwing investors. The fundamental problem with the offering is that Google elected to go with dual classes of stock. The stock being offered to the public has 1 vote per share, while the second stock class held by insiders has 10 votes. Effectively this gives control of the company to those insiders with minority stakes. Let's put it this way, if the two founders owned only 5.1% of the company with the special class of stock between them, they would effectively vote as though they owned 51% of the company. Not very fair to stock holders, and it is highly frowned upon by wall street. So, there are a lot of suckers out trying to get a stake of Google, who will effectively not have any say in how the company is run.

Agreed (1)

mfh (56) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011679)

It works in their favour, really. They reduced the number of shares and the price lowered. If anything this will be a good buy with solid growth. They went from being a solid investment to a hot ticket, so now news articles will demonstrate the stock going up up up in the next while. Rather than reports of the stock holding at $110 or something.

Once again, Google is flexing their mental might. :-)

At almost half-price... (2, Funny)

JaJ_D (652372) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011563)

... you have to feel sorry for the employees of Google, if they take their share options now they have to choose - the flash cars _or_ the holiday home in Aspen, not both...

It must be so demoralising for them :-]

Jaj
In no way bitter.....

Some good here (4, Interesting)

grunt107 (739510) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011567)

Although to some pundits the lower price signals a weaker offering, some of this could be to GOOGs benefit.

The lower per share value was followed by a lowering of shares available. This could generate more interest in the shares, which will drive prices up (or keep them constant longer).

It does, however, mean the cap has gone down by over 25% (36B to 26B). Still bigger than my bank account, though.

The Beginning of the End? (5, Interesting)

mkachan (223539) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011584)

I fear that for Google, going fully profit and opening to investors might in the long run have a negative impact... Will big Google shareholders be able to influence what appears in the Search Engine? Maybe right now this will be impossible, but who knows what might happen in the future... And what will be the consequences of it for the users?

Maybe the problem is the following: there is a way in which Google is perceived now that is fundamentally wrong. It is treated as a "service" for Internet Users, the One and Only Search Engine, while it is just Yet Another Company.

Monopolies (especially privately-owned and profit-making ones) are never good. Will Google become as Bad(TM) as Microsoft?

Money for buyouts? (5, Interesting)

manmanic (662850) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011586)

With an already profitable business, and lots of extra money in its pocket, can we expect Google to start a buyout spree? Some targets might include Vivisimo [vivisimo.com] with their clustering technology, Girafa [girafa.com] for visualizing search, or even some of the better Web APIs [google.com] applications like Google Alert [googlealert.com] or the GoogleBrowser [touchgraph.com] , as this Wired story [wired.com] suggests.

Re:Money for buyouts? (1, Interesting)

no soup for you (607826) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011621)

On the flip side.... Microsoft could spend their hordes of cash [google.com] , and get 51% ownership for $11.781 billion. In all actuality, seems a decent price for them to flat buy google.

Re:Money for buyouts? (3, Insightful)

Atzanteol (99067) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011738)

It's funny how many people actually assume that 51% of the shares in a company are *available*. Just because you want to buy, doesn't mean the other guys want to sell.

Bit expensive, isn't it? (4, Interesting)

jimicus (737525) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011594)

After all, the company offers only one basic product (albeit in a couple of incarnations).

Microsoft are starting to consider Google as competition. And competing with Microsoft has historically been a bad move - I can see Longhorn's search facilities integrating with MSN search such that the boundary between the Internet and the PC on your desk becoming blurred. Google are pretty much at the top, and it'll be almost impossible to maintain that long-term.

So you probably wouldn't buy this share for growth. How about income? Has Google publicised what it plans on offering in dividends? Even if it did, with no past record to go on, how can you have any idea what level of income to expect?

Even if you don't buy the share for growth, it's still an expensive share. It wouldn't take much for its value (and thus the value of the investment) to plummet.

Ultimately, I think this share is a bet that the rich might be prepared (and financially able) to take, but most would be well advised to steer clear of. The dot-com bubble burst a long time ago.

Re:Bit expensive, isn't it? (5, Informative)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011697)

oh yes, it is an incredibly expensive share - current sales are about $268 million, and it's currently selling shares that value the company at $23 billion. That makes a P/E of 85, which is a teeny bit over-optimistic.

Like, most shares trade at about 15-20 times earnings.

Which means, as you own a little bit of the company, it'll take you 85 years before the company has sold as much ads as you paid, which manke syou think of those terribly overpriced tech boom stocks. Remember when Yahoo had a P/E of 133, with almost no profits? What is it today?...

Unfortunately, there's no data about Google's financials published yet, so you can only speculate on what the price will end up as - but if you base the share price on earnings, you'll get the idea that it can only go down. (which is another reason why this dutch-IPO hasn't gone down well, the professional investors think its overpriced too).

Re:Bit expensive, isn't it? (1)

hoggoth (414195) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011842)

> Like, most shares trade at about 15-20 times earnings.

Rought, Roh, Shaggy!

Re:Bit expensive, isn't it? (3, Insightful)

pubjames (468013) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011781)

competing with Microsoft has historically been a bad move

This is a bit of a meme, and I believe and incorrect one.

Sure, when the PC market was rising Microsoft did really well agressively bagging the OS and Office application markets.

However, it's not been very good moving into established markets, and for a while hasn't even been very good at bagging new, rising markets.

They said they would kill AOL. They didn't even get close. They said they would dominate the software for mobiles market. They haven't. They said they would beat Sony in the game console market, but they haven't.

Once upon a time, everyone in the industry feared Microsoft. Those days are over.

Wrong Link (3, Informative)

clinko (232501) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011596)

Why not use the google stock tool [google.com] to google's Stock...

Re:Wrong Link (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011780)

Informative ? Its just a pointer to the same page someone else pointed out about about 20 posts back. Read the link, fuckwit mods.

Don't Be Evil... Until the IPO (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011620)

at which point they'll trick the SEC into bombing a fault line in the Gulf Of Mexico, thereby creating Google Island. Afterwhich, google fanboys will pressure the US to declare the island as a sovereign state, thus giving a seat in the UN to Page and Brin. And Veto power.

At least, that's what I'd do with that kind of money. That and loose women.

Not at this price (2, Insightful)

tgv (254536) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011632)

Way overpriced. What's the traditional rule again? 20 to 30 times the annual profit (after taxes)? How are they ever going to reach, let alone sustain a 1 billion dollar profit per year?

Don't buy a cent. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011661)

First, pick up and read a copy of The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham (commentary by Jason Zweig).

1) By all fundamental measures, this stock is dramatically overpriced. (Ask yourself how a search engine -- which could likely be replaced by next years' "next new thing" -- could be worth, on a per cap market basis, as much as McDonalds.)

2) IPOs usually only make one group of people rich: the boardroom execs. Don't be suckered by the initial rise in price -- IPOs are almost always followed by a dramatic downturn.

Useless (1)

mrshowtime (562809) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011663)

I don't understand WHY Google IPO'ed. It's not exactly they needed the money. Well, at least it's not like Yahoo, which went from .42 cents a share to $42.00 a share overnight for doing NOTHING. Google is at least useful and will remain top of the search engine heap for at least a couple of years. There is always someone else who comes along that's better. Remember when HOTBOT was the hottest thing since sliced bread?

Re:Useless (2, Informative)

achurch (201270) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011792)

I don't understand WHY Google IPO'ed.

As I recall comments from the initial announcement, Google had grown enough that they had to start filing stuff with the SEC like a publicly traded company (which costs lots of money in overhead) anyway, so they decided they might as well go the whole nine yards and raise some money too. Or at least that was one hypothesis.

GStock 4 Troops! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011664)

Troops abroad have a real use for these stocks. Loved ones can send them movies or photos from home and they don't have to worry about having to delete things. If you are a troop and would like a Google Stock, or you have stock to offer, post!

still too much (1)

RU_Areo (804621) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011671)

$85 is an improvment over $135 yet still too much. It doesn't appear as though it is going to be a sustainable price, given the market at the moment. It seems as though investors stand to loose money.

$85 is awfully high (2, Insightful)

twbecker (315312) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011673)

I agree with the guy in the article who said they should have offered a much larger number of shares at a much lower price. Joe Blow is a lot more likely to throw some "play money" into Google if his say, $1000 buys him 40 or so shares rather than 12.

Smart people get rich (1)

acomj (20611) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011687)

I like this..

Google wasn't original but it did search significantly better. Created interesing products that worked well. Now the payoff.

They deserve it.

booooom (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011730)

Biggest dot com crash incoming

Scenario (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011735)

Here is what happens when an enlightened, nimble company like Google goes public:

1) The MBA are brought in.
2) MBA's fire all the original staff and programmers.
3) All developemnt and support is outsourced.
4) Business sinks
5) Business get bought by MS.

Re:Scenario (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011800)

6) ?????
7) Profit ?

Google to open between 10 AM and 12 PM EDT (3, Informative)

rfunches (800928) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011747)

NASDAQ is reporting that Google shares will begin trading sometime between 10 AM and 12 PM EDT. IMO look for an opening between 10 and 10:30 AM EDT.

Classic over-hyped bubble (3, Insightful)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011757)

mod me down, goggle fanboys, but I'm not buying into the hype. I haven't heard anything about how they're going to turn a big bundle of cash into an even bigger bundle for a return on my investment, other than piss it away one advertising experiments. It's basically Internet data-mining of public information anyway.

Give me a good solid energy or pharmaceutical company or something with a steep demand curve, naturally limited supply and customers who gotta have it (like sickly suv owners).

Run (1)

mzkhadir (693946) | more than 9 years ago | (#10011794)

I keep hearing a partial lyric from a song that goes like this

Take the money and run. Google is too risky anyway. A search engine that doesn't offer anything new.

Big whoop (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011810)

Since the traitorous treasonous bastards removed the zeitgeist page, there is nothing that you can say about them in a positive light. They are pro-Lunix fanbois who like to jerk each other off in the server room. I'm anxiously awaiting Microsoft's new MSN search because I KNOW it's going to be way better than Google. What kind of a name is Google anyway? It's a misspelling of the symbol for infiinity. But only loser geeks would have known that before Google debuted. Thank god I'm an executive and we have separate bathrooms and cafeterias from you filth. All you do is annoy this piss out of the rest of the world with your fucking worthless open sores and liberal /libertarian viewpoints. Read this and take it to heart: we don't give a fuck about you. All we care about is what's going to make us money and make us look good to our customers. WE could give jack shit about your pathetic attempts to change the world with your operating systems, free software or source code. This gig is all about money. A lot of you seem to have forgotten that. Repeat after me: computers are about money, not ccoding. Computers are about profit, not about technology. Face it, IT is no longer about geeks or technology. IT is not a science, it's a business.

who is willing to bet... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10011833)

it closes up tomorrow?

any takers?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...