My prediction for Google

[91TTZ]

As a lot of people have pointed out, Google makes great software, in particular search software. They have the best search engine, mapping software, image search software, desktop search software, etc. They've pretty much cornered the search market, and they've been giving away all of this great stuff away for free.

As a publicly traded company, everyone knows it's not in their best interest to give their products away for free. They've stuck around this long, and they've done it by being smart. They have no intention of being another dot com company that goes bust due to lack of income.

I think their long term plan is Google as a service. After nearly everyone is accustomed to using their search products, they'll make it subscription based. You can either look elsewhere for various different search utilities, or you can pay Google a small amount (maybe $1 a month) to use its high quality search software that encompasses just about everything. They'll be your one-stop shop for everything internet search related.

Any opinions on this? They'll need to generate income somehow, and I don't think the way they currently have it set up is their final plan.

 

[Kalbi]

Google will lose tremendous market share if they started charging the end user. A competitor will jump on that like I would a slutty horny white chick.

 

[intogamer]

nah I wouldn't pay for it...

 

[AccruedExpenditure]

Originally posted by: Kalbi
Google will lose tremendous market share if they started charging the end user.

Search is a commodity, start charging, lose your market share edge...

 

[FoBoT]

only if the founders lose control, will that happen. and it will happen quickly if they lose control

 

[stan394]

i think their flagship search, google.com will always remain free. they are just committing suicide if they charge. They are making money from the other areas.

 

[tfinch2]

They have thrived by not charging the end user, why would they start now?

 

[blazerazor]

I wouldnt pay for a search engine. Why I quit Copernic.

They track my searchs and splash ads around.

 

[Phoenix86]

Google is already making $ hand over fist, why change?

 

[Diasper]

why would they charge when they're already so profitable? They have no need to run that (disastrous) policy of charging people.

They make their money on keyword advertising. The more people use google the more money they make from keyword advertising as density per keyword goes up.

 

[dds14u]

Anyone see that little flash about 2015 there being a Google Grid?

I think it's a possibility, but I don't think Amazon is going to the top with them with their not so great service.

 

[Indolent]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
As a lot of people have pointed out, Google makes great software, in particular search software. They have the best search engine, mapping software, image search software, desktop search software, etc. They've pretty much cornered the search market, and they've been giving away all of this great stuff away for free.

As a publicly traded company, everyone knows it's not in their best interest to give their products away for free. They've stuck around this long, and they've done it by being smart. They have no intention of being another dot com company that goes bust due to lack of income.

I think their long term plan is Google as a service. After nearly everyone is accustomed to using their search products, they'll make it subscription based. You can either look elsewhere for various different search utilities, or you can pay Google a small amount (maybe $1 a month) to use its high quality search software that encompasses just about everything. They'll be your one-stop shop for everything internet search related.

Any opinions on this? They'll need to generate income somehow, and I don't think the way they currently have it set up is their final plan.

You left out one of their main things. Adwords or whatever they call it. That's where their money comes from.

 

[PlatinumGold]

that's like saying the phone company will start generating revenue by charging for the Yellow Pages. :roll:

try and understand a market model before you comment on it.

the phone companies for years made money by listing peoples phone numbers and charging for the business listings. they didn't make money by selling the book.

 

[zainali]

maybe you should sign up for adwords and see how much some of the advertisers pay for certain keywords.

they make their money off ads and following what people do from each IP address. would you rather havea windows xp with ads in it? i am sure it would be close to free.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
They have thrived by not charging the end user, why would they start now?

I think the IPO will eventually steer the company towards extracting every last penny from people, just as every other company seems to do.

The founders of Google certainly have a vision, but I don't think the average shareholder does. Most people just want to get rich quick, and with the IPO those people have some influence in the company. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen.

 

[Indolent]

on a side note, here's an interesting little article on google:

here.

NEW YORK - You can find this article on Forbes.com; but will it show up on Google?

The search engine firm has raised both hackles and eyebrows with what appears to many as an arbitrary clampdown. Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) is led by Eric Schmidt, who boasts the title of chief executive--and that's all we're going to say about him.

For last week, online news site CNet apparently misstepped egregiously--and all it did was, well, Google someone. The verboten action was performed by a CNet reporter seeking to illustrate a universal 21st-century experience, i.e., seeing just how much of our lives exist on the Internet.

But after undertaking that now-ubiquitous verb for "checking someone out," CNet was taken to task by Google: According to several reports, the firm has banned CNet from receiving official comments or replies for one year, after it published personal data about Schmidt--all of which could be found by searching on his own company's Web site.

So if you can't find this article via Google, keep clicking: We won't mention a thing about Yahoo! (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people ) CEO Terry Semel or Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) Chairman Bill Gates. The latter is found rather high on the Forbes World's Richest People list--but don't quote us on that.

 

[Siva]

For such a small amount of revenue from charging $1 (which one might say is reasonable) google would lose far more than that's worth in customers.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
that's like saying the phone company will start generating revenue by charging for the Yellow Pages. :roll:

try and understand a market model before you comment on it.

the phone companies for years made money by listing peoples phone numbers and charging for the business listings. they didn't make money by selling the book.

Your reply was a bit needlessly scathing. I did nothing to attack you, yet look at your reply.

The phone company makes money by handling phone calls you that you make. Give out a book giving people numbers they can call, and the call volume will go up.

Try to understand a market model (and grammar) before you comment on it.

 

[Indolent]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
that's like saying the phone company will start generating revenue by charging for the Yellow Pages. :roll:

try and understand a market model before you comment on it.

the phone companies for years made money by listing peoples phone numbers and charging for the business listings. they didn't make money by selling the book.

Your reply was a bit needlessly scathing. I did nothing to attack you, yet look at your reply.

The phone company makes money by handling phone calls you that you make. Give out a book giving people numbers they can call, and the call volume will go up.

Try to understand a market model before you comment on it.

They give me free phone books and all I have is a cell phone...they don't handle my calls.

Platinum had a more of a point that your first post did.

 

[zainali]

google is evil.

http://biz.yahoo.com/fool/050808/112352195511.html

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Indolent


They give me free phone books and all I have is a cell phone...they don't handle my calls.

Platinum had a more of a point that your first post did.

I did see his point in the first post, but he was needlessly rude about it.

Besides, everyone already knows Google's present business model- I wouldn't have bothered posting if I didn't think I could make a thought provocing point. But this is ATOT, after all, and people don't seem to be able to think more than one step ahead.

 

[MommysLittleMonster]

I doubt anyone would pay a buck to use a search engine. Google would lose money to advertisers due to their decrease in usage.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: MommysLittleMonster
I doubt anyone would pay a buck to use a search engine. Google would lose money to advertisers due to their decrease in usage.

Listen, I understand that. Try to think more than one step ahead, here. Google recently went public, and now you have the unwashed masses gaining control of the company. Combine Google's stronghold in the internet search market with public control, and I think that this is what might happen.

I know the company's mantra is "don't be evil", but I think the average shareholder said, "screw that, I want to make myself rich".

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Your reply was a bit needlessly scathing. I did nothing to attack you, yet look at your reply. The phone company makes money by handling phone calls you that you make. Give out a book giving people numbers they can call, and the call volume will go up.

There are many companies that produce yellow pages. Yellow book is a great example. You probably have seen there numerous TV ads. What do they do? They give away free phone books. How do they make money? They charge the businesses in it an exhorbant amount of money to get ad space.

Try to understand a market model (and grammar) before you comment on it.

Hmm, a scathing personal attack. Hippocrit anyone? (Spelling error made on purpose).

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: dullard

Try to understand a market model (and grammar) before you comment on it.

Hmm, a scathing personal attack. Hippocrit anyone? (Spelling error made on purpose).

When someone, anyone, tries to make a somewhat serious post on ATOT, you'll always get someone else who needlessly blasts them. My original post didn't go after anyone, why would they go after me? If he made a post pondering something, don't you think it would be rude if I made a sharp reply that basically said his question was stupid?

After his harsh comment, I simply replied in kind. I would have preferred to be civil.