Home » Internet Business » Google Finance: Yawn (Updated: Wow)

Google Finance: Yawn (Updated: Wow)

So Google finally launched the much-ballyhooed Google Finance.  Two months ago, before the bloom fell off the Google rose, this move would have been greeted with the near-universal conviction that Yahoo! Finance et al had minutes to live.  Now, the reaction seems appropriately reasonable and subdued: “Nice concept, now show us how you’re going to do it better.”

The answer to this question, unfortunately, is not evident on the site.  The Google Finance beta landing page couldn’t be less revolutionary: Market quotes and business news.  Some writers tell of stock charts with embedded explanations of price-moving events, but if so, these are nowhere in evidence.  In fact, the beta page is so spartan that, upon viewing it, a curious Yahoo! Finance user could be forgiven for wondering if his or her browser failed to load properly.  Even Google fanatics will probably scratch their heads and think, “Years in the making, and this is the best they could do?”

Which isn’t to say that, eventually, Google won’t figure out some cool gizmos that put Yahoo! et al to shame.  If they do, this will be good for Yahoo! users, as Yahoo! will be forced to implement them.  Whether the gizmos entice Yahoo! users to switch sites, however–and reprogram their stock portfolios, news screens, and other customized features in the process–is another question.  Based on the current beta, the answer for most Yahoo! users would probably be “no.”

Bottom line, it will likely be far more difficult for Google to steal share in personal finance than it was in search.  And given Google’s enormous revenue base, anything less than total market domination in personal finance would barely register on the revenue scale.  So it’s not surprising that, having seen this latest beta, investors aren’t falling all over themselves to get back on the Google bandwagon.


After reading the first few comments here, I tried the beta again, this time typing in a couple of stock symbols.  Verdict?  Very cool charts.  Let us hope that Yahoo! has learned its lesson from the search wars and realizes that it has the equivalent of a few minutes to fix this before the finance industry switches to Google.  The beta entry page still has miles to go, as does the section’s user-friendliness, but the company pages are good and the charts are great.

Terry?  David?  Jerry?  You folks listening?  Get your chart people on this immediately, or your richest, most valuable finance user base (Wall Street) will vaporize, even if the average My Yahoo user doesn’t.

Sergey?  Larry?  Eric?  You folks listening?  Time to take the tiny step of adding some helpful text to your new pages.  How about welcoming the new user, helping them out a bit?  If you’re going to care enough to brief the media and bloggers about your new products, how about briefing your users?  This wouldn’t be selling out.


That little “blog post” feature in Google Finance is a traffic firehose.  Here I am, bashing away (initially), and suddenly the traffic starts gushing in from the Google Finance Google page.  Business bloggers are going to love this.


Reader “Ben,” a Wall Street analyst, weighs in with several positive thoughts about the beta, along with an explanation about why he and his colleagues are about to switch.  If folks in the Yahoo! Finance department aren’t buzzing around figuring out how soon they can duplicate all this, they’d better start buzzing.  One glance at some of the charts, blog-links, etc., and you both cheer for the consumer-benefits of capitalism and wonder how on earth Yahoo!’s team could be so asleep at the switch.  It’s not as though they haven’t had 6-12 months of warning.

Share on
Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on linkedin

46 thoughts on “Google Finance: Yawn (Updated: Wow)”

  1. Type a stock ticker in and search it. You will get those “stock charts with embedded explanations of price-moving events.” It’s not on the landing pad, but it’s on the individual ticker page in all its Flash glory. Very neat.

    I found this blog entry through Google’s stock ticker (GOOG). There’s a “BLOG POST” section. Again, interesting.

  2. That’s the lamest ‘finance’ site I’ve ever seen. I actually did think my browser loaded the wrong page, which maybe it did. I have no idea why the above link would ever be used by anybody.

  3. Unlike GMail, Google Maps, and um… GMail and Google Maps, this new Google product not only lacks originality and innovations, it is far inferior to all of the other offerings by folks like Yahoo, WSJ, Bloomberg and many, many others.

    As a product, it’s basically useless. It will almost certainly fail as a product unless they tell us, “just kidding, here’s the real one” very soon.

    This product failing amounts to a few million dollars down the drain (probably $40 million in the current the “what is a budget?” Google go-go days, but no matter).

    There is something much bigger at stake here though. By creating and also-ran, me-too product that is almost undoubtedly going to fall on its face, GOOG is destroying what is currently the most critical part of their brand: the Google Mystique. The belief that they’ve hired the smartest people in the world and evertyhing they do is going to be super-human. That THIS is going to be the company that takes the annoyance out of everything you do on the web and makes everything perfect because of their super-brain-powers.

    GFinance basically says, “yes, we’re just another group of web page hackers, just like all of the rest of them”. Where is the “secret sauce” here? GMail had the 1GB of storage thing, and the interface was slicker than anything else we’d seen. Google Maps were way cooler than anything out there too. Where is the magic in GFinance?

    The negative effect this product has on GOOG will go far beyond the product itself flopping. It is the first step in them transforming one of the most killer brands that’s come together in a decade.

    Rather than citing the usual NSCP analogy to describe GOOG and their position vis a vie MSFT, today’s news has another spector haunting them: pre-Steve Jobs AAPL. The spector of a one-hit-wonder company slowly slipping into mediocrity, churning out crappy products with the expectation that people will buy them “because they love Apple”.

    You don’t have to throw your old computer away and learn a whole new system to switch away from GOOG. You just type in a new URL. Brand disintegration on the Internet happens in “Internet time”.


  4. While I agree that this will be a hard market for Google to break into – I think you’ve missed everything that makes this a worthwhile release. As noted in the previous comment: Use the thing – don’t stop at the front page.

    Google excels at presentation of data – and they nailed it with the stock history graph. I work at a financial institution, and to say this has causes a buzz would be a dramatic understatement. This kind of data is hard to manage, and the guys around here are already moving to google for quick answers, and they’ve been using it for 4 hours…

  5. Google doesn’t “get” finance. I mean come on they have a quote for the NYSE index on the front page. How irrelevent is that? There is some hope for the site, at least it’s not one big ad like many, and it does have a nice presentation. They need to bring someone in that knows markets and knows finance to get the content right.

  6. Did the writer of this article not look further than the front page? This is a great product and isn’t a flop at all, many Yahoo users are now saying they will switch. The “super-human” capability of what Google’s programmers have, has been brought to a user friendly level, why make finance MORE complicated. The features in this Financial program that Google has released far out weighs it’s competition; some services it is offering is often paid content in other companies. The tie-in with Google Groups and other Google services make this product beyond what is viewed as a simple finance section, it helps bring it’s less popular services to life. Besides many of you are looking at this in a total negative way, don’t bash the product before you’ve taken it for a full on test drive. The whole concept of Google is basically a one stop shop for all things that are information…why would an average Google user switch over to Yahoo just to view finance, it’s not going to happen, that would defy the whole concept…I used to use Yahoo finance because that’s where Google pointed me…

  7. many Yahoo users are now saying they will switch

    Where exactly are they saying this ?

    As other people pointed out this site is far inferior to other services. The fact that the majority of links on a stock page are *external* is alone enough to prevent people from switching from Yahoo. This is a good prototype .. perhaps a beta with a lot of usability quirks.

  8. I very much have to disagree with part one of Henry’s posting as well as the first few comments above. I am an analyst at a large I-bank and as you can imagine Yahoo Finance is a very valuable resource that we primarily use for quick, general reference. Well after using Google Finance for just a few minutes (and please, type in a company name and see where it takes you before concretizing your opinion on the site), my colleagues/friends that I have spoken with both here and at other firms are definitely switching over.

    And here’s why:
    – Clean, simple interface that is extremely easy to navigate
    – In general, all relevant info is right on the page in front of you (as opposed to on Yahoo where its on sub pages that you need to link to)
    – Excellent combination of AJAX and Google’s search tech for the really cool annotated historical stock price graph
    – Direct links to tons of relevant additional information (ex. investor relations and other pages from the company, recent news stories, comparable companies, management details, etc.)
    – Blog postings! This is a very interesting touch that connects the user to other simple users – absent the filter of big media. This personalizes the information available at your fingertips.

    Even with all the great features available on Google Finance, the most unique differentiator between this site and Yahoo Finance is that Google’s site is merely a content AGGREGATOR (like Google News), and not a content PRODUCER. It is really in this capacity that the new finance site is right inline with everything else Google throws out to us users.

    Now I am not saying this site is perfect – in fact, it still lacks some of the useful data breakouts that Yahoo provides – but it is an excellent first step, one that is clearly unique from, and an improvement over, Yahoo’s and other free offerings.

  9. As a follow-up to my first note, I would say that I mostly agree with Ben. Again, the presentation is top caliber, as expected. The annotated graphs don’t offend me, but are they really that useful? Maybe. They are certainly “cool”.

    Problem is, I expected far more. This is one small step forward in some ways and a few back in others. I imagine Google will at least bring other features up to par with the competition. But, will they make the site an order or two of magnitude better than the competition (other than a clean, usable interface)?

    There is one fly in the ointment with respect to the interface. I imagine Yahoo makes good money on its finance pages. Can Coogle with this interface? There may be some challenges in this regard.

    No matter what happens with Google, I see Yahoo maybe cleaning up its finance pages a bit in response. A win for consumers.

  10. It’s obvious that a few of you just hate Google or are shorting the stock. This new finance site is far easiers to use than Yahoo or the dianosaur MSN Money site. Youe get real-time quotes and a graph with new items attached as they occured on the price graph. THis will save about 10 hours of research per month of graph analysis. This alone is better than the best pay sites such as E-Trade and Ameritrade. I agree that the site needs some tweeks, but just like all of the other Google products, it saves trendous time and provides the most current and pertinent data in a USABLE format! I’ll be using the site quite a bit!

  11. Posted by: Tru Man : “> many Yahoo users are now saying they will switch
    Where exactly are they saying this ?”

    Uhm, read the post above yours?

  12. I like the history chart slider. But Yahoo’s interface is smoother and has a better overview (clickable links).

    Can anyone epxlain poor little me how Google is going to make (substantial) money from this?

  13. Henry,

    It is not so much a matter of sleeping whatYahoo did. I think they were WAITING. It is always easier to take something and make it better, and get the original players suprised. It has been done with reverse engineering of technology ever since the japaners invented … well… the japanese word for reverse engineering.

    I agree with SI in his post on the top of this page. This is not a big deal, no matter how much I’d want the Google guys to be successful in these efforts. Let’s watch the game.

    Where is Sigma, he would have a terrific comment, I bet!

  14. Sorry to be repetitive here, but I think there is a point we are overlooking that must be stressed again.

    Google’s service is qualitatively different than Yahoo’s in so far as it is purely a content AGGREGATOR and not a content PRODUCER. This is a huge differentiator and speaks volumes to the philosophy and business approach of the two companies. What Google is attempting to do here is intuitively useful – there is a tremendous amount of info out there, but searching through and using it is a messy, cumbersome, and difficult exercise. Google is, once again, merely making the info that is already out there accessible and useable to the audience. There is not one piece of proprietary content on the site. I would imagine a further upgrade to this site will utilize their movable content blocks approach (see Google homepage, Google News, etc. where users customize the info and layout of the page to suit their unique needs).

    As for monetization strategies, I believe the jury is still out… The obvious business model is to extend advertisements onto these pages, and they may just to that. Yet on the other hand, like with some of their other services (news, homepage, etc.), they have yet to show us how they plan to make money, and for that matter, even IF they plan on making money off of them. Remember, Google allows their employees to use 20% of their time to work on projects of interest (that’s a hell of a lot of innovative potential coming out of the company that might not always lead directly to core revenue growth). Regardless of whether all these projects are ultimately monetize-able just might not matter all that much to the Google guys. It would not shock me if their strategy is to let their talented employees create these services and then use them merely to attract more and more people into Google’s world – where they ultimately generate strong revenue though their superior search positioning.

  15. I understand the distinction Ben’s making between aggregation and production, but I’m not sure it matters much. Yahoo! Finance’s content production is minimal but additive, and I doubt that most users even focus on who produces the content, let alone care.

    According to Battelle, Google Finance will have human editors moderating chat forums, which is a step closer to production than the Yahoo! chat boards. And Google’s careful selection and presentation of content was presumably designed and organized by human editors, so there is an element of “production” there, too. All of which is to say that I don’t think it’s a profound difference if Yahoo! pays Ben Stein, Jeremy Siegel, and Suze Orman to write a few columns and Google doesn’t. (Although, all else being equal, I’d rather have the columns…)

  16. What caught my eye was those graphs. The rest of it needs some work, but the graphs have that same “neato” look and feel that makes Google Maps so powerful.

    I have a feeling that Google will pad the rest of the site with tons of content, then with ads to pay the bills. Yahoo! Finance should indeed watch out.

  17. Just tried pulling up the press release for a company that reported after the bell. Looks like GOOG is delayed at least 20-25 minutes so far. That’s disappointing.

  18. Wow, really. I like the extended info (when hovering with the mouse) on, for example, the executive team.

    This is promising!

    Good work Google guys. Now figure out a way to make money off of it.

  19. It has happen, after desperate news about Mars goog delivered something substantial: goog finance. It is bad news for yahoo business, but I will keep loyalty just of convenience AS an USER (switching cost zero!) I still have puts on yhoo. It is bad news for goog:
    1. They are unable to deliver something new in their core business model, they have chosen worst possible way of diworsification: to eat the same pizza on the others turf and three elephants YHOO, MSN and GOOG will start to break china in the shop. No way to charge for any premium content by anybody of them. No way to use advertising (only dumpiest posters from yhoo) can sustain it.
    2. All latest moves maybe showing GRAND idea for expansion of business and business model at goog: we will take something from everybody substantial enough and will come to the great business: word processor from MSN and content business from YHOO. I can not remember any company who benefited from price war lately, customers (USERS) definitely but not companies, will goog be able to compete with everybody and deliver anticipated growth? I seriously doubt it.
    3. The biggest problem of goog – they have too much money for their ability to invest wisely, all their latest moves are not for building core business (fight the click fraud) and market place but for distraction and heating competition in existing markets. Margins will be squeezed further: content business is not for free: you have to buy good content, you have to invest in content people and monetisation will not come overnight: all this means that all this additional expenses will eat from profits from core business now. Have analysts with BUY anticipated all of this: increasing CAPEX (not only funny things, but serious like storage cost), options expense and now content business start up cost?


  20. This may not be a gmail-type launch, but there is absolutely no stickiness to getting stock information at Yahoo Finance. Where there is no cost to switching, there is very little reason why a slightly better service won’t win share. Even if Google only succeeds in redirecting people who type tickers into the main search box, there is a firehose of traffic for them to monetize.

    The real question is when they will use their analytical and presentation skills to mine the SEC Edgar database in all sorts of fascinating and revealing ways!

  21. Kumar,

    You may be convinced enough to switch, but look at it from another side -the business side. The core issue still remains whether you start clicking on ads like crazy and buy from these advertisers. In case you aren’t going to, there is no real gain for Google having stolen you from Yahoo. In fact, your usage of their service is more fo a drain to their network.

  22. I am sorry, but I totally disagree with Neal’s last point. Regardless of Google’s ability to make money off of these services right now, there is definitely still a point for them to steal users away from Yahoo. The more people become accustomed to using Google for everything while at the same time using Yahoo and other sites less, the more dominant they are ultimately as an advertising company. As of now, they only truly leverage their advertising capabilities in respect to search, and frankly, that probably will remain their bread and butter (as it should!) for as long as they are a company (not to mention the fact that people using Yahoo Finance probably use Yahoo for some percentage of their search functionality, at very least if they need to do a search while on Yahoo itself…). But that fact does not prevent Google from extending their advertising model beyond simple web searches to other areas. Capturing and keeping eyes is the key to the advertising business, and taking viewers away from Yahoo and transferring them to Google pages can do nothing but help that effort on all fronts.

  23. The thing that strikes me about the chart slider is that it searches out news articles years old while google news lets news more than two months old fall off the face of the earth.

  24. ndame,

    I guess I could have figured that out too.

    But think… contrast what you said (about taking away traffic from Yahoo) to the additional costs Google makes for servicing these switching geniuses.

    I think there is a trad-off here, unless Google can truly monetize this.

    You should also not forget that Yahoo and MSN are going to act on this in an all-out effort. Thus, the question should be, “What earth-shattering is Google going to do that will cause everyone to switch from yahoo and the others.”

    The small number of people who are vocal about switching to Google do not stand for a scientific ratio or even educated estimate. They are simply being focal. Those who are not switching maybe don’t have the desire to advertise that.

    I am really hoping that Google will monetize this finance section. I like their charts and overview, and until Yahoo will change that I may go to Google now and then for some research. The interface, however, is much better on the yahoo landing page and the financial data pages. Given my own usage pattern, I’d say I will use Yahoo for 95% of my personal research and try or utilize Google 5%.

    I Have to disclose something. I NEVER CLICK and I NEVER BUY ONLINE. I am a worthless user for Google and Yahoo. (Hope they won’t track my IP and kick my butt now.)

  25. Ben, there is no need to be sorry! 😉

    True, stealing away “eyeballs” is one thing. Stealing away users is a second thing.

    Still, unless Google monetizes these beta services (no matter how fancy or screwed up) they will add up to the expenses (as Sufiy above described).

    Google’s model is thus based on steal now, and figure out a monetizing strategy later. But then I wonder what they have been doing all along. It is all about money, because that sustains the service.

  26. Some thoughts on GFinance:

    1. If you can’t track transaction based portfolios (or even portfolios) you might as well forget converting a majority of Yahoo! Finance users. I track anywhere from 300-500 stocks and unless you have a way for me to move easily from Yahoo to Google, I am NOT going to do it.

    I think it’s pretty obvious that Google will allow it to happen, and they will tie it in with your GMail ID. (Just like Yahoo! requires an ID as well)

    2. The stock charts with linked stories is AWESOME. It’s a shame that it only goes back about 10 months or so.

    3. Fundamental data only goes back to 2000. Must be their contract with Reuters. If they are going after the institutional market they will have to go back MUCH further than that.

    4. An Excel add-in would be nice. A lot of key data providers offer this.

    5. There was talk of obtaining private company data — where are they going to find some of this? How far back will it go? I don’t think Reuters can provide them this data AFAIK

  27. Hmm… there seems to be a problem with their quote feed. Take a look at FDS. Yahoo shows a close of $43 and change, Google shows $10.12.

    There was no stock split that I am aware of.

  28. Some Obvious Google Gaffes:

    1. Bank type financial institutions do not have revenue figures on the income statement. Maybe the product managers are still trying to figure out how to calculate revenue for a financial services firm. (C, BAC, WFC)

    Try: Revenue = Net Interest Income + Total Non Interest Income – Provision for Loan Losses. Not as on some other nonprofessional finance sites which is Interest Income + Non-Interest Income.

    2. Fix your own statement of cash flows (GOOG). There apparently are no cash flows from investing, how convenient for Google, since this is the section of the cash flow statement that is under such scrutiny.

    In addition, there are numerous small quibles on the financial statements. 1) provide more detail: some statements have essentially “Revenue – COGS – OpEx = Net Income.” The breakdown of fuel and purchased power on utility statements would be nice as would a more appropriate classification of unusual expenses (again GOOGs own statement has mis-classified expenses).

    The “Market Summary” on the front page is pretty bare bones and shows a lack of insight into financial markets. I would go for: S&P, Dow, Nasdaq, 10 yr treasury, crude, gold, (a conforming mortgage rate perhaps?) as a basic market summary. An enhanced market summary would be nice as well, showing index levels around the globe for stocks, bonds, commodities and currencies. A “one page” look at the world.

    How about some ratios people use in the real world? EV/EBITDA or unlevered FCF, EV/EBT for financial institutions, EBITDA margin, EBITDA / interest expense, D/E, historical ratios for everything are some simple ideas.

    M&A activity from press releases?

    Anyway lots to do, hope they get around to it.

  29. I’ll stick with Bloomberg, thanks, pathetic as it is. This is a real eyeopener. I expected Google to become a Bloomberg killer, but what I get instead is Marissaware. Live and learn.

  30. Less than impressed. I will say the user interface is something Yahoo could take a queue from. Yahoo Finance is head and shoulders above this. I realize it’s a beta but what is the fuss about?

    Btw, for the heavy duty technicians, Yahoo has up to one hundred years of dowloadable options, price and volume data for each index and stock. No other site has this for free.

    The market correction hasn’t even started and Google has taken a $150 dollar hair cut. Still going to $170-190 AT A MINIMUM. As long rates rise in a secular move off of forty year lows, PE ratios will compress on the entire market as has happened every secular rate cycle in one hundred and fifty years of data on the NYSE. People forget Intel was trading at a 9 PE in 1990. It was earnings expansion that drove the 90s not earnings. Earnings growth was greater in the 70s than the 90s and we ended the decade with a market PE of 9 after starting it at the highest valuations in the twentieth century that also coincided with bottoming in low long term rates just like we saw in 2003. Sound familiar? Earnings estimates also do NOT take into account any type of earnings recession which we will get at a minimum. An economic recession will slam earnings even more if we see that happen. Company technical and fundamental analysis takes a back seat to market cycles which dictate valuations and desire bid up speculative stocks.

    Regardless of Google’s superior or inferior business plan, this stock will be avoided like H5N1 until we reset the market and attempt the next bull market.

    I posted that before the tank and posted a quick rise after the tank which took us up 40ish points. It’s easy enough but people focus on the company. It doesn’t have sh*t to do with Google. It’s the cycle.

  31. B,

    You may be quite right about that. But if that’s the case, what is the real intrinsic value of, for example, Berkshire Hathaway.

    I think cycles were a good historical reference, but the world has changed, the economy has changed. Even people have changed. I do not think any stock is going to be held against a cycle of recession, depression, ascention ow whatever -sion.

    The fundamentals, like Jeremy is refering to, are more of a modern metric. The cycle can only have any impact on an industry or an index (or indices such as the DJ/S&P etc.) or Blue Chip versus High Tech, bio versus pharma etc. The individual stocks will most likely not be hit by any cycle of any form.

    my 2 cents.

  32. Neal,
    I’ve studied markets and cycles for ages. I’ve studied cycles all the way back to 1854. The earliest data I have is the 1890s to do analysis on. The one thing I am quite certain of is markets never change and human behavior never changes. I’ve built models that are back tested through 1966 and I am extremely confident we are going to have an earnings recession and a commodities crumbling with it starting before end of year. Actually, I expect we are in the last stages of a top right now. My model is still on buy but everything is crumbling and I need one more piece in place to go to 100% cash.

    As an FYI, this is the longest cycle in over 100 years without a ten percent correction in the Dow or S&P. (S&P doesn’t go back 100 years so I use the Dow before the S&P was created) This is also one of the longest bull cycles in the last 100 years. The are transitioning from a twenty+ year cycle of a bond bull that led to twenty years of PE expansion to a secular bond bear cycle which will cause PE contraction. You already see it. PE of nearly 50 on the S&P to PE of 19 now. Earnings have exploded over the last two years to the highest in history yet the market PE cannot find a way to expand. The S&P valuation versus alternative investments is higher than any time in the last twenty five years except for 1987 and 2000.

    It’s never different this time. NEVER. Even Warren Buffett has stated he expects us to be in a cycle where equity returns are 5-6%. He said it on TV on Monday. He understands these cycles quite well. He liquidated into the late 60s bubble then bought will wreckless abandon into the 1974 low which coincidently is equivalent to the 2006 model year in the cycle.

    There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then, assuming we don’t hit a brick wall with some type of deflationary housing crisis or Smoot-Hawley protectionist hawks in Congress screw up the economy, I’m super bullish on the future. But, we’ll just have to wait and see.

  33. B,

    I agree on the bull market philosophy. It is quite interesting how you have build a model based on historical cycles. I know of a few others who do the same, but often the conclusion differs (sometimes from one spectrum to the other).

    I don’t want to consume this message board with cycle talk, but since the topic is in the range of the Googleversum, we can maybe discuss some other things -relevant to their share value.

    1) I assume that -due to the cycle theory- you feel that Google is going to tank anyway, regardless what kind of cool (beta) service these fantastic braniacs develop?

    2) Or do you think Google is going to see an upside? If so, when, why, and how?

    3) If Google tanks (further), is that to be seen as a sign on the wall for all internet stocks? If so, when do you think the cycle calls for a correction (like the internet bubble burst) and when again a retraction (like we are experiencing now)?

    4) Is the cycle going to be an overall disaster, affecting all industries, or just internet, or just tech/internet?

    Just wondering.

  34. Once again GOOG is trying to re-live 1999-2004 over and over again, thinking that they will get a free pass on a new market by delivering an incremental user experience improvement on a well known model.

    It’s 2006 and people aren’t stupid anymore. They are now a huge target, and have provoked the extreme ire of some of the most valuable companies on earth.

    GOOG’s action today launched a flurry of activity in perhaps hundreds of engineering and design teams across the world that have everything to lose by GOOG’s new competition.

    Compare that to the free ride they had for years being the only search engine with a fast-loading home page.

    Inexperienced management teams like GOOGs tend to ignore human factors. They pissed off MSFT. They are motivating thousands of smart people across the world to work against them. Half of their employees are so super-rich that they don’t need to come to work anymore, and the other half have underwater options and are probably looking for a way to trade their GOOG fame for some real money.

    GOOG had a huge party in 2005. Now they have to compete with the entire world while nursing a hangover.


  35. SI, exactly my thoughts, too.

    Who had that slogan: “Don’t immitate, innovate.” I think it was Hugo Boss.

    It’s going to be interesting to watch this clash, and witness who are the titans and who the titanics.

  36. As someone who claims, in their tagline to “analyze” the Internet business, your failure to even ENTER A STOCK QUOTE before declaring the site a “yawn” is embarassing. This is my first time to your blog and may be the last.

  37. Mr. Wave theory, there may be some kind of truth in that new theory you came up with: Vista Delay is bad for Google and Apple. But to call X a killer of Y resulting in Z is sensationalist speech.

    Try to differentiate facts from wishful thinking.

    I too think that Vista will fare better when it delays and perfectionizes. But let’s be honest. No executive in his right mind will give up his company or his darlings without a huge fight. No executive I know is willing to kill his own darlings, nor allowing it to be killed.

    Let’s watch out when we call this a killer of that. Let’s also remember that Google is not written off, not at all. Google is a $100B company, whether its criticasters (ncluding myself) want to admit or not, their ascention to these hights came with a certain fact (though it be subject to further discussion in terms of inflated value). These guys ARE profitable, these guys HAVE a REAL Business case, Yahoo and MSFT have 100 billion reasons to fear Google, Google has “just” 42.5 billion reasons to fear Yahoo. YHOO, MSFT and GOOG have 52 billion reasons to fear Apple. And AAPL, YHOO and GOOG have 272 billion reasosn to fear MSFT. I would be sh*tscared. But I would not give up if I were Schmidt, Jobs, Semel. I’d show the competition who they are dealing with, and I’d make them sweat.

  38. From Marketing Vox;

    “Google’s just-launched finance site has prompted Yahoo to spruce up its market-leading Yahoo Finance with new information, multimedia, and style features, writes MediaPost, citing a Yahoo source. Yahoo plans to make stock charts more dynamic and will incorporate sound, motion and video in the site…”

Leave a Comment

Tech News Trust Today

Contact Us

1408 Blocks Valley, Sydney, 
NSW 2060, Australia

(+61) 555-1408
[email protected]