Originally Posted by jragosta
Baloney. The cable companies can't really stop it - nor do they really care. If Google offers them the box for $0.50 less with a feature that phones home, the cable companies wouldn't object. If Google offers them a $1.00 discount, they'll probably even let Google put ads on the menu screens.
I don't agree. There is no way the cable companies would allow Google to put their own Ads in the box. No way at all. They might get away with tracking users preferences in shows. The cable companies do this now, and if Google gave them a fee, they might go for that, because the users wouldn't see it.
Google is better than anyone at monetizing personal information. And the value that they obtain is very high.
That is true. 97% of their sales and profits are from selling users info to advertisers, and hosting Ads. We, the users, are their products. Most people don't understand this. All of Googles' software is really designed to extract out information from those using it. In a sense, they are really automated surveys.
I think you're missing a number of possible factors:
1. Sell off all the unrelated businesses. Baby monitors, walkie-talkies, etc. Since it is not uncommon for divisions like that to be worth more separate than together (which is why many acquisitions are immediately broken up and sold in pieces), Google could realize a significant amount of money for the divisions they don't want.
2. Sell the cell phone handset business to RIM with an agreement that RIM will use only Android and BlackberryOS, avoiding other OSs. For reasons I've discussed previously, this deal would have significant value to both RIM and Google. And since the handset division isn't making any money, there's little reason to keep it.
3. Google-ize set top boxes. Adding Android is only one step. More importantly, it gives Google access to 7 hours a day (which I think is the average amount of TV time for American families) of personal data on your living room. That value is huge.-and no one does a better job of monetizing your personal information than Google. Of course, it creates a very scary scenario for society.
4. While I know it's a lot to ask from Google, a little innovation could go a long way. Let's just take their home (landline) telephone business. What if you make home phones into smartphones? The cost would be minimal - just a few cheap internals and maybe a small touchscreen. But you now have access to the internet in your kitchen, bedroom, etc. Need to look up a phone number? It's available. Search for information? Boom. Quick email? Yep. Games? Sure. Instead of dumb home phones, you now have a smart phone.
I think it's far too early to conclude that Google overpaid. IF THEY HANDLE THE ACQUISITION INTELLIGENTLY, it could turn out to be a winner. Heck, the ad revenue from set top box information alone could be worth billions.
I mentioned selling off the businesses. I also mentioned that they wouldn't get value for them. Two reasons. The first is that we are in a down market. The divisions wouldn't bring what they might normally be worth. Two is that Google overspent so much to buy Moto, that they would have to get more than market value for those businesses, and as I've now mentioned twice, it's a down market, and they won't even get what they should be worth in normal times.
You can't make an assumption that RIM would have the slightest interest in buying the cell division, so that idea is a dead duck. Maybe another Android manufacturer, or maybe not at all.
Mentioned the monitoring in my last post. google would have to pay the cable companies for the privilege, as they own that information. It might be worthwhile, but how much value for Google would there be in it after paying off the cable companies?
The last idea is interesting, but it's also something that's not likely going to happen. People are dumping their home phones for cells already, and T-mobile has no land line service at all.
Nah. Google made a mistake. Microsoft maneuvered them into this, even though they apparently were looking at Moto for some time. Considering that most of the Android OEMs are not going to be happy about this, it could have cost them.
And if Google thinks that they won a large amount of great patents, they seem to be wrong. Microsoft hasn't had sleepless nights about suing Moto for infringement of their own patents, which seem to be pretty strong, as they've now gotten five Android manufacturers to pay license fees, and are working on Samsung.
I've read an article from FOSSPatents that Moto expected Apple to sue them shortly, which is why they sued first, to get a venue they felt was friendlier to them. So it hasn't prevented Apple from suing either. I'm not so sure this is proof, rather than just a fear from Moto, but it does look likely:http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011...not-other.html
Google may have spent $12.5 billion for nothing.