Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Google Pays Video Morons
Google on Monday proved that they are not only hiring eggheads but also paying morons.
Yes, the search geeks are sharing ad revenue with the guys who filmed the YouTube hit "The Diet Coke & Mentos Experiment," according to a report. OK, I take that back. These guys aren't total morons. And they're getting paid. I just watched the "Extreme Diet Coke & Mentos Experiment," which is spectacular. It was better than the Bellagio.
"One thing is sure: Stupid pet tricks and people acting goofy on camera have never been as lucrative a business," writes Greg Sandoval.
Yes, the search geeks are sharing ad revenue with the guys who filmed the YouTube hit "The Diet Coke & Mentos Experiment," according to a report. OK, I take that back. These guys aren't total morons. And they're getting paid. I just watched the "Extreme Diet Coke & Mentos Experiment," which is spectacular. It was better than the Bellagio.
"One thing is sure: Stupid pet tricks and people acting goofy on camera have never been as lucrative a business," writes Greg Sandoval.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Analyst: MSFT-YHOO?
Merrill Lynch analyst Justin Post is playing matchmaker for Yahoo and Microsoft, tossing some logs on the fire, lighting the candles, and playing Marvin Gay's "Let's Get it On."
He thinks the Internet has-beens should shack up with Internet wannabe Microsoft so they can face gangbusters Google together. Makes sense. What with Microsoft's yet-to-be-proven AdCenter and Yahoo's still unproven Panama ad platform--the two are entrenched losers to Google. If you're not first, you've last. And Google is putting some distance on with serial blockbuster numbers.
“A Microsoft-Yahoo combination would be in a better position, in our view, to compete against Google,” Mr. Post wrote in a research note Monday.
He thinks the Internet has-beens should shack up with Internet wannabe Microsoft so they can face gangbusters Google together. Makes sense. What with Microsoft's yet-to-be-proven AdCenter and Yahoo's still unproven Panama ad platform--the two are entrenched losers to Google. If you're not first, you've last. And Google is putting some distance on with serial blockbuster numbers.
“A Microsoft-Yahoo combination would be in a better position, in our view, to compete against Google,” Mr. Post wrote in a research note Monday.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Ali G's Ice Cream Gloves Pitch
I can't get enough of Ali G's "Ice Cream Glove" pitch.
There's a part in it where he's multiplying the number of Internet searches on ice cream and the number on gloves to get the value of his product. It sounds as absurd as some of the multiples people use to value Internet companies.
He explains his pitch to two VCs:
"Me did an Internet search for ice cream."
"Me did an Internet search for gloves."
"What did me get?"
"That is such a big number me couldn't fit it that way ."
(he shows the number running vertically on a white board because it's too long to run horizontally)
One of the VCs:
"This may be the worst idea I've ever heard."
Where, oh where, does he find these guys?
There's a part in it where he's multiplying the number of Internet searches on ice cream and the number on gloves to get the value of his product. It sounds as absurd as some of the multiples people use to value Internet companies.
He explains his pitch to two VCs:
"Me did an Internet search for ice cream."
"Me did an Internet search for gloves."
"What did me get?"
"That is such a big number me couldn't fit it that way ."
(he shows the number running vertically on a white board because it's too long to run horizontally)
One of the VCs:
"This may be the worst idea I've ever heard."
Where, oh where, does he find these guys?
Friday, October 20, 2006
Apple iPod Patents: Wi-Fi, iPhone, XM?
It's plain to see now why Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs shows no fear of Microsoft's upcoming wireless Zune digital media player and service.
Patent filings reveal he's entrenched in plans that could include a Wi-Fi device and wireless downloading of songs from an e-commerce store. The filing was explicit enough to note that the patent would allow a device to pick up songs from thin air, send a sample of them wirelessly to a server database, and then download the associated song, video or other media type. Full story here.
Why so many blogs appeared to get off track and cover radio and XM entirely, I just don't get. It seems pretty clear from the filing that it suggests much more than that. Even the diagram would suggets much more than that. So what gives with the bloggers? It does seem there's an XM part, just that this doesn't seem like the most important part.
XM radio nearly confirmed it. A representative there said that she'd seen mention of the filing in her company internal communications. She declined to comment further, saying that it was not her department. The people whose department it was--two in corporate communications--avoided me all day even though a secretary told me they were both in and nearby. Lovely. So there's news there. There is some sort of XM story to follow up.
Patent filings reveal he's entrenched in plans that could include a Wi-Fi device and wireless downloading of songs from an e-commerce store. The filing was explicit enough to note that the patent would allow a device to pick up songs from thin air, send a sample of them wirelessly to a server database, and then download the associated song, video or other media type. Full story here.
Why so many blogs appeared to get off track and cover radio and XM entirely, I just don't get. It seems pretty clear from the filing that it suggests much more than that. Even the diagram would suggets much more than that. So what gives with the bloggers? It does seem there's an XM part, just that this doesn't seem like the most important part.
XM radio nearly confirmed it. A representative there said that she'd seen mention of the filing in her company internal communications. She declined to comment further, saying that it was not her department. The people whose department it was--two in corporate communications--avoided me all day even though a secretary told me they were both in and nearby. Lovely. So there's news there. There is some sort of XM story to follow up.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Google Gobbles Ad Revenue
It was plainly evident that Google was going to have a blockbuster quarter from all the Street signs.
This story tells at least a part of what went into the numbers.
But gains going in were notable for the following:
This story tells at least a part of what went into the numbers.
But gains going in were notable for the following:
- Ad networks pushing 15 percent more ads Google's way.
- Click fraud declines.
- Gains in sponsored clicks
- Increased search volume
- More used search engine (50 perent of searches, Nielsen//NetRatings says).
The analyst that cited gains in ad networks noted it would be revenue gained at the expense of rival Yahoo.
“This quarter, ad networks are pushing 15 percent more ads to Google at the expense of Yahoo and others,” Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry wrote in a research note Thursday.
I heard commentators on Sirius (Bloomberg or CNBC) saying that Yahoo was essentially talking old game. That Google had it so in the bag and was so dialed into what it was doing and had no negative worries. Where as Yahoo CEO Terry Semel was citing advertising slowdowns from autos and classifieds.
This was the quarter that Google really blasted ahead. It doesn't seem Yahoo has got much chance now to be in the same game.
Analysts have said that Google is going to hit these $500 price targets and that acquisitions could become a catalyst. And now I've seen a price target of $600.
It spent stock for YouTube, so expect more acquisitions.
If Yahoo doesn't get Facebook at any price they're clowns.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Crave: Wannabe Gadget Blog
Couldn't help notice how Dan Farber tossed this mention of the new Crave blog as another reason why CNET, ZD, and the whole network of corporate bile blogging is king of blogs.
Crave actually has an opposite effect. It's like seeing a fat old guy on a MySpace page in Urban Outfitter gear. Imitation indicates desperation. It almost feels like something MSFT would do or has done.
Truth be told, blogs, social networks--they're having CNET for lunch. And it's not just CNET on the menu. It's also ZDNet (down 30 percent in page views in a year) and other tech news publishers, according to comScore.
Pair that with the fact that blogs have outgrown CNET in page views. That's disturbing no matter how you paint it. Or how about this: tech.yahoo.com came out of nowhere, according to Hitwise, and (not even a decent effort) is toasting CNET. I was stunned by the numbers.
Say what you will about comScore, but the numbes don't lie.
If the CNET/ZDNet empire can do some tired news and blogs who's to say that NewsCorp, Yahoo, or others can't decide to move in and take away high CPM nerd readers and enter your turf. Tech.yahoo certainly did it with a pretty weak effort. And blogs are doing it in spades. The revolution is on.
Crave actually has an opposite effect. It's like seeing a fat old guy on a MySpace page in Urban Outfitter gear. Imitation indicates desperation. It almost feels like something MSFT would do or has done.
Truth be told, blogs, social networks--they're having CNET for lunch. And it's not just CNET on the menu. It's also ZDNet (down 30 percent in page views in a year) and other tech news publishers, according to comScore.
Pair that with the fact that blogs have outgrown CNET in page views. That's disturbing no matter how you paint it. Or how about this: tech.yahoo.com came out of nowhere, according to Hitwise, and (not even a decent effort) is toasting CNET. I was stunned by the numbers.
Say what you will about comScore, but the numbes don't lie.
If the CNET/ZDNet empire can do some tired news and blogs who's to say that NewsCorp, Yahoo, or others can't decide to move in and take away high CPM nerd readers and enter your turf. Tech.yahoo certainly did it with a pretty weak effort. And blogs are doing it in spades. The revolution is on.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Option(s) Anxiety and CNET
We all get option anxiety now and then--just pull up to a vending machine and watch it set in. But the options anxiety plaguing Silicon Valley nowadays is not the pleasant and sweet kind.
A source today told me that there are now 144 formal investigations inside companies looking into their practices of granting employee stock options. He said that number was only about 10 percent of the actual cases of companies out there with problems in the way they either backdated or favorably priced shares. It doesn't take much poking around to find this information in proxies, and maybe it's becoming apparent to companies that it's only a matter of time before somebody notices.
One business school professor told me today that companies come forward to try to get on good terms with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission--to let them know that they're cooperating.
This was a nicely done piece (login required) on CNET General Counsel Sharon Le Duy by an enterprising reporter at The Recorder. I hope we see more of this depth of reporting. The surface reports on these options pricings is not telling the full picture. It's illustrative to see what kinds of favorable prices were given.
Thie practice of backdating is not illegal as long as it was properly accounted for and filed on.
And maybe some of these pricing arrangements were not all that crooked. A source today told me that the media is on a "witch hunt" in the way that it is going after favorable options grants pricing. The source said that most of the time the stock isn't even worth anything--with and early stage company--and so it was not even worth making a fuss over. He indicated that it was stifling to business in general this attitude. I think that's the same line of thinking that has issues with Sarbanes-Oxley. That's it's stifling innovation. That it's forcing companies to give up the public markets in the U.S. Makes sense.
Options are rewards for innovators, after all. I guess I'd be happy if my options were favorably priced and backdated. Oh, the investors ...
A source today told me that there are now 144 formal investigations inside companies looking into their practices of granting employee stock options. He said that number was only about 10 percent of the actual cases of companies out there with problems in the way they either backdated or favorably priced shares. It doesn't take much poking around to find this information in proxies, and maybe it's becoming apparent to companies that it's only a matter of time before somebody notices.
One business school professor told me today that companies come forward to try to get on good terms with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission--to let them know that they're cooperating.
This was a nicely done piece (login required) on CNET General Counsel Sharon Le Duy by an enterprising reporter at The Recorder. I hope we see more of this depth of reporting. The surface reports on these options pricings is not telling the full picture. It's illustrative to see what kinds of favorable prices were given.
Thie practice of backdating is not illegal as long as it was properly accounted for and filed on.
And maybe some of these pricing arrangements were not all that crooked. A source today told me that the media is on a "witch hunt" in the way that it is going after favorable options grants pricing. The source said that most of the time the stock isn't even worth anything--with and early stage company--and so it was not even worth making a fuss over. He indicated that it was stifling to business in general this attitude. I think that's the same line of thinking that has issues with Sarbanes-Oxley. That's it's stifling innovation. That it's forcing companies to give up the public markets in the U.S. Makes sense.
Options are rewards for innovators, after all. I guess I'd be happy if my options were favorably priced and backdated. Oh, the investors ...
Friday, October 13, 2006
CNET's Worst Day Ever
CNET Networks had one awful bad day Wednesday. It was the worst in company history (aside from buying mySimon for $700 million).
CEO Shelby Bonnie resigned amid acknowledgement that there were "deficiencies" in his part in how the company handled stock option pricing. That same day CNET GC Sharon Le Duy, SVP Heather McGaughey of Human Resources, and former CFO Doug Woodrum also agreed to get the boot (resigned) for their part in favorable pricing of options.
CNET shoved in Neil Ashe to be CEO. Bonnie, tarnished, stays as a director. Bonnie still holds ton of stock--and majority vote?
But this part seemed to just slide by:
The committee report also said that recently resigned executives and the directors who received improperly priced options have agreed to have those options repriced at fair market value.
So let me get this straight. They got busted with their hands in the register, but it's OK because they've agreed to put back the money?
The options scandal is just the beginning. There's more bad news that day. The company also lowered it's sales guidance for next quarter and full year.
Analyst were none too pleased. A bunch of notes were issued. Some pointed to the lowered revenue guidance and CNET's volatile area of revenue, dependent on technology industry sales. If the tech market is in decline, guess who has no ad budget to fill CNET's ad inventory?
Jefferies & Co. pointed to some dire traffic numbers. Citing comScore number, analyst Youssef Squali said in a research note that CNET's year-to-year traffic had dumped 50 percent. "CNET.com is down 54 percent, Gamespot is down 21 percent, and ZDNet is down 30 percent," Squali wrote.
Yikes! That's a problem. To be fair, CNET has done major changes to its web platform in the past that messed up the tracking. So this could be the case.
But if not, what's stealing away all of red ball's traffic? Tech blogs? Have all the general news and business sites figured out CNET News.com's game? Has CNET finally lost an edge in reviews because of places like the New York Times doing it smarter?
After all the bad news hit CNET, a number of analysts said it might be ripe for acquisition by a big media company looking for an instant web strategy. I'll buy that.
CEO Shelby Bonnie resigned amid acknowledgement that there were "deficiencies" in his part in how the company handled stock option pricing. That same day CNET GC Sharon Le Duy, SVP Heather McGaughey of Human Resources, and former CFO Doug Woodrum also agreed to get the boot (resigned) for their part in favorable pricing of options.
CNET shoved in Neil Ashe to be CEO. Bonnie, tarnished, stays as a director. Bonnie still holds ton of stock--and majority vote?
But this part seemed to just slide by:
The committee report also said that recently resigned executives and the directors who received improperly priced options have agreed to have those options repriced at fair market value.
So let me get this straight. They got busted with their hands in the register, but it's OK because they've agreed to put back the money?
The options scandal is just the beginning. There's more bad news that day. The company also lowered it's sales guidance for next quarter and full year.
Analyst were none too pleased. A bunch of notes were issued. Some pointed to the lowered revenue guidance and CNET's volatile area of revenue, dependent on technology industry sales. If the tech market is in decline, guess who has no ad budget to fill CNET's ad inventory?
Jefferies & Co. pointed to some dire traffic numbers. Citing comScore number, analyst Youssef Squali said in a research note that CNET's year-to-year traffic had dumped 50 percent. "CNET.com is down 54 percent, Gamespot is down 21 percent, and ZDNet is down 30 percent," Squali wrote.
Yikes! That's a problem. To be fair, CNET has done major changes to its web platform in the past that messed up the tracking. So this could be the case.
But if not, what's stealing away all of red ball's traffic? Tech blogs? Have all the general news and business sites figured out CNET News.com's game? Has CNET finally lost an edge in reviews because of places like the New York Times doing it smarter?
After all the bad news hit CNET, a number of analysts said it might be ripe for acquisition by a big media company looking for an instant web strategy. I'll buy that.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Google-YouTube Media Frothfest Comes True
So it is. I'm humbled by the rumor-turned-fact.
Google agreed to acquire Internet mega hit video site YouTube for $1.65 billion Monday after close of markets. TechCrunch kicked it all off Friday in what seemed highly speculative at the time. I guess it helps to have friends at Wilson Sonsini to dish dirt, eh?
So I wonder who spilled it? Was it GC David Drummond? Check out his bio for clues. Does this qualify as a leak? Anyway, what do I know. My bets are a legal type spilled this given Google Legal's pedigree and that of a savvy blogger in particular. (OK, so I'm a little bitter and envious.)
Bum tip: Maybe Google could get Sonsini to advise on how to handle some leaks here ...
One wise commentator on CNBC today pointed out that the gain in stock price between Thursday (when he claimed the TV show knew of a rumor) and Monday market increased Google's market cap by $6 billion, essentially allowing them to buy YouTube for free.
It gets better. Analyst find it's possible that this could be a catalyst to drive GOOG stock up to the $500 price target set by some. Not next week, guys. That gives me a flashback to a 20 percent AMZN stock jump the day Internet analyst Henry Blodget issued a report forecasting a $400 price target in twelve months.
Here:
Amazon up 46 points; report "clarified"
The bookseller's soars as high as 301 after a bullish analyst report. He still says the stock will hit 400--but not in one day.
By Dan Mitchell and Scott Martin Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: December 16, 1998, 12:55 PM PST
update A Wall Street analyst is explaining the bullish report he issued this morning that sent shares of online bookseller Amazon.com soaring more than 46 points by the closing bell.
CIBC Oppenheimer analyst Henry Blodget had released a report forecasting that Amazon's stock would reach 400 in the next 12 months. Traders piled on ...
OK, so 2006 is not all that different from '98. Thus I draw the comparison. And perhaps because of the similarities of now to then, I should have seen that TechCrunch's dirt on Google-YouTube was not all that outrageous. Especially given the heady period of speculative growth that it appears we have returned to. How else do you explain this?
Anyway, hat-tip on the Sonsini goods.
Google agreed to acquire Internet mega hit video site YouTube for $1.65 billion Monday after close of markets. TechCrunch kicked it all off Friday in what seemed highly speculative at the time. I guess it helps to have friends at Wilson Sonsini to dish dirt, eh?
So I wonder who spilled it? Was it GC David Drummond? Check out his bio for clues. Does this qualify as a leak? Anyway, what do I know. My bets are a legal type spilled this given Google Legal's pedigree and that of a savvy blogger in particular. (OK, so I'm a little bitter and envious.)
Bum tip: Maybe Google could get Sonsini to advise on how to handle some leaks here ...
One wise commentator on CNBC today pointed out that the gain in stock price between Thursday (when he claimed the TV show knew of a rumor) and Monday market increased Google's market cap by $6 billion, essentially allowing them to buy YouTube for free.
It gets better. Analyst find it's possible that this could be a catalyst to drive GOOG stock up to the $500 price target set by some. Not next week, guys. That gives me a flashback to a 20 percent AMZN stock jump the day Internet analyst Henry Blodget issued a report forecasting a $400 price target in twelve months.
Here:
Amazon up 46 points; report "clarified"
The bookseller's soars as high as 301 after a bullish analyst report. He still says the stock will hit 400--but not in one day.
By Dan Mitchell and Scott Martin Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: December 16, 1998, 12:55 PM PST
update A Wall Street analyst is explaining the bullish report he issued this morning that sent shares of online bookseller Amazon.com soaring more than 46 points by the closing bell.
CIBC Oppenheimer analyst Henry Blodget had released a report forecasting that Amazon's stock would reach 400 in the next 12 months. Traders piled on ...
OK, so 2006 is not all that different from '98. Thus I draw the comparison. And perhaps because of the similarities of now to then, I should have seen that TechCrunch's dirt on Google-YouTube was not all that outrageous. Especially given the heady period of speculative growth that it appears we have returned to. How else do you explain this?
Anyway, hat-tip on the Sonsini goods.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Sip-and-Click E-commerce
Drunk online shopping. The latest bad habit online. Oh, geez.
I haven't really been keeping tabs on the NYT technology section, with the exception of some crack reporting on HP and a few others, but when I see stuff like this, I just wonder ...
I haven't really been keeping tabs on the NYT technology section, with the exception of some crack reporting on HP and a few others, but when I see stuff like this, I just wonder ...
Google-YouTube Media-Chases-Blog Frothfest
TechCrunch set the rumor mill for a good Google-YouTube spin yesterday. Even the WSJ got Googly on this. OK, so a number of pubs and cable channels acknowledged the chance. A couple things here (besides the fact that this kind of reporting is irksome froth):
One: TechCrunch got acknowledged. By even the Journal?
Two: While I think that is somewhat cool that a blog was given some recognition, it's still rumor and doesn't mean much until more is known. Therefore, this has been ongoing for some time and could continue in that fashion, so it seem somewhat meaningless to report advanced negotiation stages.
Separately, Google buying YouTube doesn't seem like a good idea if except for just trying to keep it from Yahoo. The better matchups for YouTube seem like a studio with access to legal video. That would seem to help cool concerns over copyright violations.
One: TechCrunch got acknowledged. By even the Journal?
Two: While I think that is somewhat cool that a blog was given some recognition, it's still rumor and doesn't mean much until more is known. Therefore, this has been ongoing for some time and could continue in that fashion, so it seem somewhat meaningless to report advanced negotiation stages.
Separately, Google buying YouTube doesn't seem like a good idea if except for just trying to keep it from Yahoo. The better matchups for YouTube seem like a studio with access to legal video. That would seem to help cool concerns over copyright violations.
Have Google Options Lost Luster? Yes.
From Red Herring story:
How else do you explain fat cash bonuses for execs?
Google is instituting a cash incentive plan to encourage senior executives to meet financial goals.
It’s a “program designed to motivate participants to achieve the company’s financial and other performance objectives and to reward them for their achievements when those objectives are met,” Google wrote in documents filed Thursday with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The maximum bonuses to be awarded, assuming objectives are met, would be $3 million. Google plans to pay bonuses annually in February.
Word. Options have lost luster at Google. And for many mature dot-coms. Is the lack of golden handcuffs in the market creating more free agents? I think so. Is that driving up wages to retain experience? Yep.
How else do you explain fat cash bonuses for execs?
Google is instituting a cash incentive plan to encourage senior executives to meet financial goals.
It’s a “program designed to motivate participants to achieve the company’s financial and other performance objectives and to reward them for their achievements when those objectives are met,” Google wrote in documents filed Thursday with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The maximum bonuses to be awarded, assuming objectives are met, would be $3 million. Google plans to pay bonuses annually in February.
Word. Options have lost luster at Google. And for many mature dot-coms. Is the lack of golden handcuffs in the market creating more free agents? I think so. Is that driving up wages to retain experience? Yep.
