Two years ago I bought Google stock out of great optimism for the company. It was the Mecca of the Computer Science world. Everyone that could work for them wanted to. It was the greatest honor, the highest achievement, to be hired by Google and put to work on any of their myriad of projects. I figured, with all of that amazing talent, Google would surely churn out some absolutely amazing stuff over the next few years. They had already made Gmail and Google Maps (not to mention Google search itself), and I could only dream about what would be next. And yet, since then, it seems like Google has produced nothing but flops. Android hasn't really had much success. Google Chrome hasn't had much success either, relying purely on the Google name to get it's limited market share. Google Wave was a disappointment. Buzz didn't catch on... And now Google has started this fight with China, a battle they can't win - a battle they know they can't win - and are essentially slamming the door on their way out of the China market, which is probably the fastest growing internet market in the world. Why? Because they couldn't compete with Baidu, a native Chinese start-up, that managed to grab majority market share. So here I am, watching my Google stock fall another 2% today, and I can't help but wonder - what is all that talent doing over in the Googleplex? They have some of the brightest minds in the world in that office, so what's with all the bombs lately?

Quote: Original post by Straudos
...Android hasn't really had much success. Google Chrome hasn't had much success either, relying purely on the Google name to get it's limited market share...

I think you have a crappy definition of a "flop"

Chrome and Android have about 3-5% market share. Maybe they have potential, but they haven't had much impact yet.

In either case, I haven't seen Google produce anything truly innovative or revolutionary recently, which is what I expect from a company of Google's caliber. All of it's products have been "okay" at best and flops at worst.

You bought stock 2 years ago? I think you missed the lesson that you're supposed to buy low and sell high- you bought the stock when it was already really high.

Maybe it's your analysis that is incorrect? I mean in business you are not going to succeed with every single idea, you just need enough to build growth.

On that you should note:

- Chrome is gaining market share faster than any other browser has historically. (To put this into perspective it has surpassed Safari which comes with every single Mac and also runs on Windows)

- Android is a long term growth game and not a flash in the pan. Google is aiming to be the dominant player in the mobile OS market over time and and throwing down against Microsoft. Both of those companies build out effective long term strategies and would not move for a short term success if it impeded a long term goal.

- Google Apps usage has been growing and if their mobile strategy really starts to grow as they expect you will again see some great growth in this area.

Those are just a couple of points but you could literally research hundreds of long term plans that Google has put in motion in order to remain highly competitive and continue building growth opportunities.

Quote: Original post by Straudos
Two years ago I bought Google stock out of great optimism for the company. It was the Mecca of the Computer Science world. Everyone that could work for them wanted to. It was the greatest honor, the highest achievement, to be hired by Google and put to work on any of their myriad of projects.

Google is an advertising agency. Obviously, they know how to advertise themselves.

Quote: I figured, with all of that amazing talent, Google would surely churn out some absolutely amazing stuff over the next few years.

They did. The incorrect assumption is that it would result in big earning for small stockholders.

Quote: Android hasn't really had much success.

Android is a success.

Quote: Google Chrome hasn't had much success either, relying purely on the Google name to get it's limited market share.

Google has 3 browsers: Firefox, Chrome and Webkit. Together, they hold majority share in consumer market.

Quote: Because they couldn't compete with Baidu, a native Chinese start-up, that managed to grab majority market share.

Domestic market share among users. That is different from capitalization. Market share only matters in how much money it generates.

Quote: So here I am, watching my Google stock fall another 2% today, and I can't help but wonder - what is all that talent doing over in the Googleplex?

Oh, you thought Google stock is meant to earn you money?

No... IPO was for founders to raise a lot of money without losing majority share of the company, and convert the volatile stock into hard cash over expected life time of a .com start-up, which is in the range of 10 years.

Quote: They have some of the brightest minds in the world in that office, so what's with all the bombs lately?

Founders have 10+ billion each. Again, perhaps the mistake is in assuming that Google is a welfare company.

Haven't people learned yet that .com only earns money to founders?

Quote: Original post by Saruman

- Chrome is gaining market share faster than any other browser has historically. (To put this into perspective it has surpassed Safari which comes with every single Mac and also runs on Windows)

I'm not sure whether this says something about how good Chrome is (my default browser of choice) or how horrible the competition is... [grin]

Quote: Original post by Moe
I'm not sure whether this says something about how good Chrome is (my default browser of choice) or how horrible the competition is... [grin]

Chrome is WebKit, developed by Apple.

v8, the &#106avascript engine is Google.

Quote: Original post by Moe
I'm not sure whether this says something about how good Chrome is (my default browser of choice) or how horrible the competition is... [grin]

...or how heavily marketed Chrome is. Google have plastered ads for it all over their own websites, and even have advertising hoardings and newspaper ads taken out for it. After all, they are an advertising agency.

Really, the answer is staring you in the face if you look at it the right way:

Google was founded to solve a problem: Web Search. A problem that had not been approached efficiently before and had no other optimal solution. They succeeded, they created the best solution to the problem. Success, Google gets huge.

Google does it again with online advertising. An existing problem with no decent solution. Google creates optimal solution, succeeds, accolades all round.

Recently, Google begins to see the wellspring of problems with no solution drying up. Only natural in an environment that is stabilizing. Wild west days of the Internet are ending, most things have a solution.

As a result, Google gets desperate. Modifies their actions from solving problems with no solution to trying to find a better solution than existing ones. Problem is, existing ones are often already sufficient for users needs. Users thus unlikely to migrate unless change is a radical step up. In the cases of many new Google products, a radical step up from existing solutions is not possible, existing solutions already nearly optimal (Buzz/Facebook, as an example).

Google also starts creating products that have no problem to solve. Wave is a great example. What problem is Wave attempting to be a solution to? I don't know, my friends don't know. It's neat, but the problem it solves is not immediately obvious, and thus it has no purpose to the majority of Internet users except as a trinket/novelty.

Recently, Google has started solving problems again. National broadband is a massive issue. Unfortunately, broadband service is an expensive business. Unless Google can bring price of broadband down to mass market affordability, this too will be a flop.

Google's prime days were when there were big problems to solve cheaply and better than anyone else. With the new lack of these, Google is starting to fade.