GOOG buys DoubleClick
- Thread starter a529612
- Start date
Can't wait for a solid recession to take out hot air "companies" like YouTube, Facebook and the rest of the Web 2.0 garbage until they completely fall apart. Who knows, maybe in a few years people will look back and shake heads about the billions of dollars paid for nothing but a domain name.
http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=92150&perpage=6&pagenumber=3
No mention of DoubleClick publishers huh? Everyone talks about âvalue to the advertiser!â - but if NYTimes, AOL, Fox Interactive pull out of their Dart (doubleclick)`deals, guess what? DoubleClick just became worth much less. Why would they pull out? Why wouldnât they is the question - Google is shaping up to be probably the most serious threat to the online advertising ecosystem that exists, from agencies to clients, and I wouldnât want Google having a soup to nuts window into my advertising revenue stream, from performance based key word stuff to display? Google as the ulitmate gatekeeper for ad dollars? Nope, no thanks.
I think this one has blowback written on it. they have strong earnings and the stock may lift mext week, but goog's glory days are behind it.
To me the most telling part of the deal is that Doubleclickâs investors refused google stock and demanded cash!
This suggests that those âin the knowâ at Doubleclick believe either that the deal will not reflect favorably on googleâs share price, or more likely that googleâs share price does not reflect reality. the supply/demand for goog shares is shifting.
(glad yhoo didn't buy, they must know something......the chief sales officer at yhoo, wenda millard, is a former co-founder doubleclick)
Consider how easily Google could have, say, offered $4B for the company and payed only a fraction in cash. Odds are this deal was offered and refused by Doubleclick.
$3B in cash and $0 in stock is the COMPROMISE that the two sides came to on the matter.
Publishers using doubleclick's DFP are key to Doubleclickâs value. Right now, thereâs a decent amount of chat about this on a listserv with the 100 or so top ad ops managers in the country. Many online publishers see Google as a competitor. Now, that competitor owns their ad server. Thereâs enough good competition in the ad server market to make switching a relatively easy option.
Perhaps Microsoft and Yahoo! tag teamed to make Google burn its war chest knowing that Google is desperate to diversify its revenue as Microsoft and Yahoo!âs Search technology is quickly coming up to parity and will drastically cut down on Googleâs margins going forward.
So i think Yahoo bid up YouTube knowing Google is desperate for the money losing sinkhole and Microsoft bid up DCLK.
if goog issues more shares to pay for the doubleclick acquisition, it would spell the beginning of the end for goog's lofty pps.
the real money made here is the PE firm.
disclosure: long yhoo. see my previous posts regarding yhoo in other threads.
No mention of DoubleClick publishers huh? Everyone talks about âvalue to the advertiser!â - but if NYTimes, AOL, Fox Interactive pull out of their Dart (doubleclick)`deals, guess what? DoubleClick just became worth much less. Why would they pull out? Why wouldnât they is the question - Google is shaping up to be probably the most serious threat to the online advertising ecosystem that exists, from agencies to clients, and I wouldnât want Google having a soup to nuts window into my advertising revenue stream, from performance based key word stuff to display? Google as the ulitmate gatekeeper for ad dollars? Nope, no thanks.
I think this one has blowback written on it. they have strong earnings and the stock may lift mext week, but goog's glory days are behind it.
To me the most telling part of the deal is that Doubleclickâs investors refused google stock and demanded cash!
This suggests that those âin the knowâ at Doubleclick believe either that the deal will not reflect favorably on googleâs share price, or more likely that googleâs share price does not reflect reality. the supply/demand for goog shares is shifting.
(glad yhoo didn't buy, they must know something......the chief sales officer at yhoo, wenda millard, is a former co-founder doubleclick)
Consider how easily Google could have, say, offered $4B for the company and payed only a fraction in cash. Odds are this deal was offered and refused by Doubleclick.
$3B in cash and $0 in stock is the COMPROMISE that the two sides came to on the matter.
Publishers using doubleclick's DFP are key to Doubleclickâs value. Right now, thereâs a decent amount of chat about this on a listserv with the 100 or so top ad ops managers in the country. Many online publishers see Google as a competitor. Now, that competitor owns their ad server. Thereâs enough good competition in the ad server market to make switching a relatively easy option.
Perhaps Microsoft and Yahoo! tag teamed to make Google burn its war chest knowing that Google is desperate to diversify its revenue as Microsoft and Yahoo!âs Search technology is quickly coming up to parity and will drastically cut down on Googleâs margins going forward.
So i think Yahoo bid up YouTube knowing Google is desperate for the money losing sinkhole and Microsoft bid up DCLK.
if goog issues more shares to pay for the doubleclick acquisition, it would spell the beginning of the end for goog's lofty pps.
the real money made here is the PE firm.
disclosure: long yhoo. see my previous posts regarding yhoo in other threads.
I, like many others, hate ads and I am wondering now if when going to a web page in the near future, that the page will be more filled with ads than actually content?
Will a web page become so overcome with annoying flashing ads that web pages will look like that bullshit place "South Of The Border"? and all those billboards as you get within 100 miles or so of Pedro's Place
Will a web page become so overcome with annoying flashing ads that web pages will look like that bullshit place "South Of The Border"? and all those billboards as you get within 100 miles or so of Pedro's Place
you gotta think out side of a box, what happen if goog plunk down couple of billions to back up those ads. Lets face it, only the reason holding you back from clicking on it because you think it's a scam or spam. Now if you know it's legit with real company with real money backing the ads then it's totally diff story. I predict each ads will carry a little stamp said 'this ads is approved by goog'.
ps. driving south is so boring that I can't wait to see those Pedro's ads.
ps. driving south is so boring that I can't wait to see those Pedro's ads.
I'm beginning to think the GOOG guys are flakes.
According to the wsj, they just paid 6X what a buyout firm paid in 2005.
Not 1995, 2005. Yesterday.
Either that or they have no respect for money at all, OR they know that money has no value at all.
If money has no value, then thats bad news for you.
PS , Is it me or are the goog searches getting lamer as time goes on. I think many of the hits suck large.
According to the wsj, they just paid 6X what a buyout firm paid in 2005.
Not 1995, 2005. Yesterday.
Either that or they have no respect for money at all, OR they know that money has no value at all.
If money has no value, then thats bad news for you.
PS , Is it me or are the goog searches getting lamer as time goes on. I think many of the hits suck large.