Printable View
Do you think Google's wrong to try to go about expanding their venues?
There has been a recently posted article about the investors looking into a service such as CafePress, where users could go about designing there own clothing or accessories and then purchase them online, in which they would be shipped to the user.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5792396.html
I think they can try whatever they want......they have the money to waste lol.....
:P
I don't think its a bad thing at all - although I think that instead of aquiring more companies they should innovate new ideas. They are making all the right moves to take over the net'!
Better them than Microsoft eh!Quote:
Originally posted by tacoX@1 Hour Ago
I don't think its a bad thing at all - although I think that instead of aquiring more companies they should innovate new ideas. They are making all the right moves to take over the net'!
[snapback]81648[/snapback]
I found there purchase of the satelite company or whatever it was that they purchased to create Google Maps leet, I could see myself using this feature alot as well.
Sorry about that wrong forum issue :D
<3
yes, their way of delivering services is very nice, specialy when compared to the annoying way yahoo has gone. I do worry a tad about companies like Amazon and Google. They're both going the way Microsoft went (and IBM before them, and Bell before em all!).
I think google should stick with what they got, stop adding features. Just make the ones you have now even better.
This I enjoyed for a bit, I like it alot.
http://moon.google.com/
i hope you zoomed in all the way!!!! soo damn funny!
There is a rule in business and manufacturing called the 80/20 rule. sometimes its the 90/10 rule, but generaly its applicable to a whole range of issues.
For example, a lot of companies will find that 80% of their sales are with 20% of their products, or 80% of their sales are with 20% of their clients, etc. This obviously depends on the company and the type of sales, but it is quite common for this to hold true.
So google is now diversifying into other areas, where the only common thread is that they are web based services. I think over time they will find that 80% of their revenew will come from 20% of their products and they may decide to "refocus on core product lines" which a lot of companies do at some stage.
So whats your view on their stocks and stockholders?Quote:
Originally posted by MetalSkin@1 Hour Ago
i hope you zoomed in all the way!!!! soo damn funny!
There is a rule in business and manufacturing called the 80/20 rule.* sometimes its the 90/10 rule, but generaly its applicable to a whole range of issues.
For example, a lot of companies will find that 80% of their sales are with 20% of their products, or 80% of their sales are with 20% of their clients, etc.* This obviously depends on the company and the type of sales, but it is quite common for this to hold true.
So google is now diversifying into other areas, where the only common thread is that they are web based services.* I think over time they will find that 80% of their revenew will come from 20% of their products and they may decide to "refocus on core product lines" which a lot of companies do at some stage.
[snapback]83180[/snapback]
hmm havn't realy watched Google's stock so i couldn't comment. I do know though that google has done incredibly well. Yahoo was the search engine of choice a few years back (5+) and now google daks all over yahoo.
So based on the performance of advertising, I spose they want to expand ways to attract even more 'dependance' on their sites so they can maximise advertising.
I suspect that the maps will end up being a directory service, sorta a yellow pages, which they will make revenue from, tad diff to their search engine, but makes sense.
Not sure where they're gonna go with very divergent businesses. and i think eventualy it will put presure on their share price, because all risky non core business ventures will increase the risk to share price stability.
I hope so. :DQuote:
Originally posted by MetalSkin@1 Hour Ago
hmm havn't realy watched Google's stock so i couldn't comment.* I do know though that google has done incredibly well.* Yahoo was the search engine of choice a few years back (5+) and now google daks all over yahoo.
So based on the performance of advertising, I spose they want to expand ways to attract even more 'dependance' on their sites so they can maximise advertising.
I suspect that the maps will end up being a directory service, sorta a yellow pages, which they will make revenue from, tad diff to their search engine, but makes sense.
Not sure where they're gonna go with very divergent businesses.* and i think eventualy it will put presure on their share price, because all risky non core business ventures will increase the risk to share price stability.
[snapback]83228[/snapback]
What is so bad about Microsoft anyways? I feel they provide the best software and operating systems around. They helped bring this world into the next generation - and people give them shit for it?
Without them there would be nothing.
These people think they have an idea.
http://www.microsuck.com/
As do alot of others...
Heres an interesting one...
http://tftb.com/deify/IsBillGates.htm
Lol, I never realized so many people actually hated Bill Gates for bringing us Microsoft. I
knew the hate was out there for Microsoft...But damn, I'd flip if I was him.
Actualy we should applaud Bill Gates and Microsoft, also IBM and Intel.
IBM allowed other manufacters to make Motherboards, graphics cards, hard disk controlers, screens and keyboards. They allowed Intel to sell the CPU to anyone who chose to use the hardware. Also they chose Bill's DOS as the operating system to standardise on.
As a result the price of computers became cheaper and cheaper as demand picked up and competition ensued.
Without the same OS and the same CPU, this woudl not have happened. This would never have happened with Apple, because apple only allowed themselves to make the hardware, they owned the OS and actively cracked down on anyone who tried to break these rules.
If it wasn't for MS and IBM, a computer would still cost well over 5000 USD for a basic system and would mainly be used for business, we would never have really had home computing.
So a big thanks to Bill from me (lets face it, its because of him i have a job!).
i think google does't have to change anything...just leave the things they have now
