I don't know whether he doesn't know the real numbers, or he's deliberately being misleading, but the S5 sales aren't 40% lower than the S4 sales have been. They are about 20% lower, possibly more right now.
But that 40% lower number is from Samsung's estimate of what they thought S5 sales would be. As a result, they made too many, one reason for the massive profit decline in mobile.
And let's not forget that their Tv sales have dropped by 30% the past year as well, in a year of overall Tv sales declines.
Even the iHater troll army on c|net has moved on from Samsung. They rarely mention the company in terms of destroying Apple like they have for many years. They pretty much stick to the collective Android moniker when claiming victory. It’s all they have left really, a conglomerate of low priced OEM products that happen to run one of the many variants of Google’s cobbled together mobile thingy.
What cracks me up is all the Wall Street clowns who thought Samsung's dominance was sustainable and thus Apple was forever doomed. Anybody could see how easy it would be to disrupt Samsung. They don't control the whole stack. They don't really have an ecosystem. And not much brand loyalty either. Why buy Samsung when you can get Xiaomi or Huawei or One Plus One that's just as good? And outside China there are very good Android alternatives from LG, HTC and Motorola. And of course Apple now has larger screen phones. I'll be a lot of people went Samsung just because of the bigger screen. That advantage no longer exists.
Stop with the monopoly bullshit. Apple could NEVER be a monopoly in the mobile world. Every time some company becomes a dominant participant in a market the asshats start screaming monopoly, especially the fans of the companies being dominated. Monopoly is a term from the era of the 19th century robber barons like Carnegie and Rockefeller. In a global economy no one company can become a monopoly.
He's right though. While they bought Android before the iPhone came out, and it's hard to understand the point to it when they did first buy it, as copying the Blackberry might not have given them a lead as copying iOS did when they changed direction, Schmittt did state that they were worried that the iPhone would dominate cell sales after a time, and would particularly dominate smartphone sales, which is what they were worried about.
I agree. If Android, as iOS copy, didn't come out, the iPhone would have dominated. What we would have seen was that the iPhone would have grown as fast as possible, given that it was locked to AT&T for three years, and smartphone sales all around would have seen slower growth because no cheaper smartphones that compared would have been offered. Android expanded smartphone growth dramatically, after that almost disasterous first year of really poor products and an unfinished OS, because of less expensive smartphones.
If Verizon hadn't come out with their Droid brand, first using Motorola phones (remember those odd Ads with spaceships, meteors, etc?) Android would have had a more difficult time. I remember Android people talking about the iPhone only having a 25% marketshare here, and I used to point out that AT&T had less than a 25% marketshare, and so 25% for the iPhone was pretty outstanding, and that when it moved to other networks that percentage would grow. It's now supposedly 47.4% here, with Android down to 48.4%, pretty much a tie, given that those numbers are probably off by plus or minus one percent, or so.
Seems like that's a real possibility. Samsung is making less and less money off their Android products, and pushing Tizen harder and harder. None of the other Android-oriented manufacturers have ever made more than a pittance off of it. Larry Page has ousted Andy Rubin from running the Android program and replaced him with one of Android's biggest competitors, Sundar Pichai. Over a year later, Pichai still seems to have no clear plans for Android going forward: nothing changes for the first couple of years, then "we'll see". Well, it's getting on towards a couple of years. What's the plan for Android? Continue to merge and submerge under Chrome? Chrandroid? ChromeOS running on phones, ala FirefoxOS?
Sure, a lot of companies are still shipping a ton of Android-based gadgets, but most of them are the cheap knock-offs that don't run the Google-licensed stuff and don't make any meaningful contributions to its longevity. They eat from the trough but don't fertilize the fields. What happens to Android if/when Google decides to turn off the life support, or cut it down to something less financially painful? Android is just another Linux fork without Google pumping boatloads of cash and developer time into it. And if it's no longer providing an effective moat for Google's search CPCs, Page might decide it's time to trim the fat a bit, and make some deep cuts to the Android team.
Good questions. Hard to say what Google is going to do with Android - or whatever they are working on. Maybe they are just aimless right now.
ChromeOS is purported to be able to run Android apps sometime this year. That's what I've read.
What cracks me up is all the Wall Street clowns who thought Samsung's dominance was sustainable and thus Apple was forever doomed. Anybody could see how easy it would be to disrupt Samsung. They don't control the whole stack. They don't really have an ecosystem. And not much brand loyalty either. Why buy Samsung when you can get Xiaomi or Huawei or One Plus One that's just as good? And outside China there are very good Android alternatives from LG, HTC and Motorola. And of course Apple now has larger screen phones. I'll be a lot of people went Samsung just because of the bigger screen. That advantage no longer exists.
One thing that made Samsung so successful in mobile was that they were making some pretty good phones. Our first phones, after 9/11 were Samsung's. My wife and daughter had feature phones which had received very good reviews, and I had the first color Palmphone in the i300 from Samsung. At the time, samsung had about 7% of worldwide cellphone sales.
The other was their massive marketing budget, which dwarfs everyone else's. People who say that Ads don't affect their purchases are naivé, of course they do, often unconsciously.
Another reason is their unashamed copying of everything Apple, from the hardware, to the UI, to the packaging, down even to the blue shirts and name tags in their stores that look exactly like Apple's.
The last is their covering every market from the very bottom to the very highest.
But nothing lasts forever. They really lack innovation where it really counts, adding dubious features that don't work well, or don't work at all. In the end those who don't teuly innovate are doomed to be copied themselves, by even lower cost producers, such as Xaiomi, who is backed by the Chinese government, and so doesn't have to worry about paying off massive loans, or IP lawsuits where they now sell.
So, Android app environment could be folded into a controlled ChromeOS environment for Google and their phones. They could then let Android go and let it be whatever.
Not unusual for a founder to be replaced. Rubin may have been great for setting up shop, but it's not always founders who are good for taking things to the next level. There are different phases of maturity that need different people and personalities. Natural handoff. You may need a storming person, a forming person, and norming and performing person, so to speak.
Let's hope that Google comes out with something that's very nicely polished and locked down apps that can't be pirated so developers really care a lot more about the platform. Kind of like what Apple does. It would be great to have some really good competition. It would push Apple to fix their bugs and focus on what they have now and make it better (like fixing the junky Podcast app). Apple is becoming the 800 pound gorilla for people's dollars.
And it would give people a nice option for something other than iOS. Nothing wrong with that. We were at the mall and the Apple Store was buzzing with people and the MS store across the street was fairly empty and the employees looked bored. Windows Phone OS and mobile platform might soon be a not-viable platform, if it is not. They don't have the apps and they don't have the Google apps most importantly. The fill-in apps or official apps are purported to be not that great. So, Windows OS will probably be gone for mass market (it will probably exist only in the low-end market with Firefox OS, etc).
Google could pull it off to be a great ChromeOS with Android app platform. Maybe the company still doesn't have laser focus. Maybe its like Apple in the late 80s existing without adult supervision, so to speak.
Let Samsung have Tizen. It probably won't catch on. Samsung will struggle in the profit arena.
It will be interesting. Let's just hope Apple slows down a little and fixes what it has. Like fixing search in iOS 8, among other things.
They eat from the trough but don't fertilize the fields.
Not surprising given that most of the manufacturers using Android chose it because it was the cheapest option for getting a mobile OS with functionality similar to what Apple was offering and not out of some altruistic belief in "open" or understanding of giving back when you get something.
Quote:
What happens to Android if/when Google decides to turn off the life support, or cut it down to something less financially painful? Android is just another Linux fork without Google pumping boatloads of cash and developer time into it. And if it's no longer providing an effective moat for Google's search CPCs, Page might decide it's time to trim the fat a bit, and make some deep cuts to the Android team.
For now, Android is an important part of Google's core business (data collection and advertising) in the mobile device space. However, should some major manufacturers like Samsung jump ship and move to alternatives (like Tizen), then I could foresee them reconsidering their investment in Android.
Not surprising given that most of the manufacturers using Android chose it because it was the cheapest option for getting a mobile OS with functionality similar to what Apple was offering and not out of some altruistic belief in "open" or understanding of giving back when you get something.
For now, Android is an important part of Google's core business (data collection and advertising) in the mobile device space. However, should some major manufacturers like Samsung jump ship and move to alternatives (like Tizen), then I could foresee them reconsidering their investment in Android.
Having to pay billions to Oracle for theft should temper their desire to spend anymore.
i might be wrong, but i never recall reading details like this about a microsoft, google, nokia, motorola, htc, lg, sony, or any other companies quarterly earnings.
thanks for the info, but we all know how this site feels about samsung. you have beat this dead horse long enough. apple does have other competitors.
Not according to all estimated sales figures and activation reports. Samsung is a distant 2nd.
Detail quarterly reports on all of these companies can easily be found on any business news sites. Since most Fandroids have no reason to visit any business news sites, this article (with all its' detail) is here with them in mind. Since most of them do seem to visit AI, with bashing Apple in mind.
That would be because the most fervent of Apple fanboys can be found here as well so the two love to poke at each other (this site is often mentioned on fandroid sites as the place to go to find the Apple zealots). This site is proudly pro-apple and does not hide their bias in both what they choose to publish (and not publish) and in their style of writing. The comments section is equally the same. More me, I find it humourous to read both sides of it because it's like watching Honey-booboo fight with the cast from Duck Dynasty. It's trashy and uneducated but for some reason I cannot avert my gaze. If you have to really think about which side is which, then you are not on the outside looking in. You are the show.
Google could pull it off to be a great ChromeOS with Android app platform. Maybe the company still doesn't have laser focus. Maybe its like Apple in the late 80s existing without adult supervision, so to speak.
I wouldn't really call Jobs' leadership style "adult supervision". Closer to the reverse actually (thinking of the pirate flag days). " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> Existing without passion and direction is more how I see it.
That would be because the most fervent of Apple fanboys can be found here as well so the two love to poke at each other (this site is often mentioned on fandroid sites as the place to go to find the Apple zealots). This site is proudly pro-apple and does not hide their bias in both what they choose to publish (and not publish) and in their style of writing. The comments section is equally the same. More me, I find it humourous to read both sides of it because it's like watching Honey-booboo fight with the cast from Duck Dynasty. It's trashy and uneducated but for some reason I cannot avert my gaze. If you have to really think about which side is which, then you are not on the outside looking in. You are the show.
The Robertson's are hardly trashy or uneducated...but referring to the Droids as HoneyBooBoo seems appropriate.
I agree with you... I think we're quite far into the "who gives a shit" territory where Samsung is concerned.
Most of the posters on this site come here to support their view that Apple is the best and to vent about Samsung or some other company that has somehow slighted them or made them feel insecure. This is highly relevant because, in the eyes of Apple fans, Samsung evil and deserves to have their 'mortal' corporate enemy suffer losses. I personally don't get it but fanboys from all walks of life are just like that. AI posts more news about Samsung than Samsung fanboy sites do which I find pretty funny.
Most of the posters on this site come here to support their view that Apple is the best and to vent about Samsung or some other company that has somehow slighted them or made them feel insecure. This is highly relevant because, in the eyes of Apple fans, Samsung evil and deserves to have their 'mortal' corporate enemy suffer losses. I personally don't get it but fanboys from all walks of life are just like that. AI posts more news about Samsung than Samsung fanboy sites do which I find pretty funny.
This isn't just about Apple though when it comes to Samsung. Samsung is one of the worst companies.
They were convicted three times on price fixing, and paid out hundreds of millions each time. In fact, Apple and Samsung were going to build, and run, a memory plant together, when Samsung was convicted of memory price fixing, and had to pay a fine of $350 million. Apple withdrew from the project.
The chairman of the overall Samsung Chabrol was convicted twice, in S Korea, of bribery, but because of the power of the company there, was never required to spend time in prison, as was allowed to remain chairman.
Numerous companies have sued Samsung for stealing their IP. There are still a number of cases going on now. We're not talking about some obscure companies with dubious patents, but major competitors. Nvidia is one late example.
They were convicted in Taiwan of bribing individuals to lie about competitors.
They have lost about (I've lost count) 28 of the 31 lawsuits with Apple.
Both the EU and the U.S. Government threatened to take them to court for trying to get companies, such as Qualcomm, to change their contracts so that Samsung could illegally sue Apple for IP that Qualcomm used in chips that Apple bought.
Both the EU and the US government threatened to take them to court for improperly attempting to get Apple to pay rates for SEP patents that were ten to one hundred times what they were charging others for those patents, and violating their agreements under the SEP rules to charge everyone equally, and fairly.
They were convicted for having working conditions in their chemical plants that resulted in workers dying or becoming permanently injured.
What's even more interesting is if you look at a 1 year chart Google stock is down 13% while Apple is up 42%, Facebook is up 32% and Microsoft is up 33%. And this is the stock that not too long ago the analyst crowd on CNBC were talking up as the first trillion dollar company. Yet it lost $70B market cap in 2014. Even today with the stock market way up (and both Apple and Microsoft up around 2.5%) Google is down almost 1%. For me that's a bigger story that isn't getting much attention.
I wonder if Samsung pulls from premium phones, will see another major competitor for the iPhone pop up. I'd really appreciate that, because they tend to push Apple's limits.
I really like Android nowadays, it's grown up quite a bit and is a great alternative when wrapped in good hardware. I detest Samsung, though, so I'd be happy to see someone else respectable reap the profits from that segment.
What's even more interesting is if you look at a 1 year chart Google stock is down 13% while Apple is up 42%, Facebook is up 32% and Microsoft is up 33%. And this is the stock that not too long ago the analyst crowd on CNBC were talking up as the first trillion dollar company. Yet it lost $70B market cap in 2014. Even today with the stock market way up (and both Apple and Microsoft up around 2.5%) Google is down almost 1%. For me that's a bigger story that isn't getting much attention.
The reality is the honest investors see where things are going. And it's not Google's way. Google has been (and likely always will be) a one trick pony, advertising. Not a long term growth business.
Comments
But that 40% lower number is from Samsung's estimate of what they thought S5 sales would be. As a result, they made too many, one reason for the massive profit decline in mobile.
And let's not forget that their Tv sales have dropped by 30% the past year as well, in a year of overall Tv sales declines.
Even the iHater troll army on c|net has moved on from Samsung. They rarely mention the company in terms of destroying Apple like they have for many years. They pretty much stick to the collective Android moniker when claiming victory. It’s all they have left really, a conglomerate of low priced OEM products that happen to run one of the many variants of Google’s cobbled together mobile thingy.
He's right though. While they bought Android before the iPhone came out, and it's hard to understand the point to it when they did first buy it, as copying the Blackberry might not have given them a lead as copying iOS did when they changed direction, Schmittt did state that they were worried that the iPhone would dominate cell sales after a time, and would particularly dominate smartphone sales, which is what they were worried about.
I agree. If Android, as iOS copy, didn't come out, the iPhone would have dominated. What we would have seen was that the iPhone would have grown as fast as possible, given that it was locked to AT&T for three years, and smartphone sales all around would have seen slower growth because no cheaper smartphones that compared would have been offered. Android expanded smartphone growth dramatically, after that almost disasterous first year of really poor products and an unfinished OS, because of less expensive smartphones.
If Verizon hadn't come out with their Droid brand, first using Motorola phones (remember those odd Ads with spaceships, meteors, etc?) Android would have had a more difficult time. I remember Android people talking about the iPhone only having a 25% marketshare here, and I used to point out that AT&T had less than a 25% marketshare, and so 25% for the iPhone was pretty outstanding, and that when it moved to other networks that percentage would grow. It's now supposedly 47.4% here, with Android down to 48.4%, pretty much a tie, given that those numbers are probably off by plus or minus one percent, or so.
Are we past Peak Android? Is Android dying?
Seems like that's a real possibility. Samsung is making less and less money off their Android products, and pushing Tizen harder and harder. None of the other Android-oriented manufacturers have ever made more than a pittance off of it. Larry Page has ousted Andy Rubin from running the Android program and replaced him with one of Android's biggest competitors, Sundar Pichai. Over a year later, Pichai still seems to have no clear plans for Android going forward: nothing changes for the first couple of years, then "we'll see". Well, it's getting on towards a couple of years. What's the plan for Android? Continue to merge and submerge under Chrome? Chrandroid? ChromeOS running on phones, ala FirefoxOS?
Sure, a lot of companies are still shipping a ton of Android-based gadgets, but most of them are the cheap knock-offs that don't run the Google-licensed stuff and don't make any meaningful contributions to its longevity. They eat from the trough but don't fertilize the fields. What happens to Android if/when Google decides to turn off the life support, or cut it down to something less financially painful? Android is just another Linux fork without Google pumping boatloads of cash and developer time into it. And if it's no longer providing an effective moat for Google's search CPCs, Page might decide it's time to trim the fat a bit, and make some deep cuts to the Android team.
Good questions. Hard to say what Google is going to do with Android - or whatever they are working on. Maybe they are just aimless right now.
ChromeOS is purported to be able to run Android apps sometime this year. That's what I've read.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/chrome-os-can-now-run-android-apps-no-porting-required/
So...kind of a merge of products?
One thing that made Samsung so successful in mobile was that they were making some pretty good phones. Our first phones, after 9/11 were Samsung's. My wife and daughter had feature phones which had received very good reviews, and I had the first color Palmphone in the i300 from Samsung. At the time, samsung had about 7% of worldwide cellphone sales.
The other was their massive marketing budget, which dwarfs everyone else's. People who say that Ads don't affect their purchases are naivé, of course they do, often unconsciously.
Another reason is their unashamed copying of everything Apple, from the hardware, to the UI, to the packaging, down even to the blue shirts and name tags in their stores that look exactly like Apple's.
The last is their covering every market from the very bottom to the very highest.
But nothing lasts forever. They really lack innovation where it really counts, adding dubious features that don't work well, or don't work at all. In the end those who don't teuly innovate are doomed to be copied themselves, by even lower cost producers, such as Xaiomi, who is backed by the Chinese government, and so doesn't have to worry about paying off massive loans, or IP lawsuits where they now sell.
So, Android app environment could be folded into a controlled ChromeOS environment for Google and their phones. They could then let Android go and let it be whatever.
Not unusual for a founder to be replaced. Rubin may have been great for setting up shop, but it's not always founders who are good for taking things to the next level. There are different phases of maturity that need different people and personalities. Natural handoff. You may need a storming person, a forming person, and norming and performing person, so to speak.
Let's hope that Google comes out with something that's very nicely polished and locked down apps that can't be pirated so developers really care a lot more about the platform. Kind of like what Apple does. It would be great to have some really good competition. It would push Apple to fix their bugs and focus on what they have now and make it better (like fixing the junky Podcast app). Apple is becoming the 800 pound gorilla for people's dollars.
And it would give people a nice option for something other than iOS. Nothing wrong with that. We were at the mall and the Apple Store was buzzing with people and the MS store across the street was fairly empty and the employees looked bored. Windows Phone OS and mobile platform might soon be a not-viable platform, if it is not. They don't have the apps and they don't have the Google apps most importantly. The fill-in apps or official apps are purported to be not that great. So, Windows OS will probably be gone for mass market (it will probably exist only in the low-end market with Firefox OS, etc).
Google could pull it off to be a great ChromeOS with Android app platform. Maybe the company still doesn't have laser focus. Maybe its like Apple in the late 80s existing without adult supervision, so to speak.
Let Samsung have Tizen. It probably won't catch on. Samsung will struggle in the profit arena.
It will be interesting. Let's just hope Apple slows down a little and fixes what it has. Like fixing search in iOS 8, among other things.
They eat from the trough but don't fertilize the fields.
Not surprising given that most of the manufacturers using Android chose it because it was the cheapest option for getting a mobile OS with functionality similar to what Apple was offering and not out of some altruistic belief in "open" or understanding of giving back when you get something.
For now, Android is an important part of Google's core business (data collection and advertising) in the mobile device space. However, should some major manufacturers like Samsung jump ship and move to alternatives (like Tizen), then I could foresee them reconsidering their investment in Android.
Not surprising given that most of the manufacturers using Android chose it because it was the cheapest option for getting a mobile OS with functionality similar to what Apple was offering and not out of some altruistic belief in "open" or understanding of giving back when you get something.
For now, Android is an important part of Google's core business (data collection and advertising) in the mobile device space. However, should some major manufacturers like Samsung jump ship and move to alternatives (like Tizen), then I could foresee them reconsidering their investment in Android.
Having to pay billions to Oracle for theft should temper their desire to spend anymore.
Not according to all estimated sales figures and activation reports. Samsung is a distant 2nd.
Detail quarterly reports on all of these companies can easily be found on any business news sites. Since most Fandroids have no reason to visit any business news sites, this article (with all its' detail) is here with them in mind. Since most of them do seem to visit AI, with bashing Apple in mind.
That would be because the most fervent of Apple fanboys can be found here as well so the two love to poke at each other (this site is often mentioned on fandroid sites as the place to go to find the Apple zealots). This site is proudly pro-apple and does not hide their bias in both what they choose to publish (and not publish) and in their style of writing. The comments section is equally the same. More me, I find it humourous to read both sides of it because it's like watching Honey-booboo fight with the cast from Duck Dynasty. It's trashy and uneducated but for some reason I cannot avert my gaze. If you have to really think about which side is which, then you are not on the outside looking in. You are the show.
Google could pull it off to be a great ChromeOS with Android app platform. Maybe the company still doesn't have laser focus. Maybe its like Apple in the late 80s existing without adult supervision, so to speak.
I wouldn't really call Jobs' leadership style "adult supervision". Closer to the reverse actually (thinking of the pirate flag days).
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> Existing without passion and direction is more how I see it.
That would be because the most fervent of Apple fanboys can be found here as well so the two love to poke at each other (this site is often mentioned on fandroid sites as the place to go to find the Apple zealots). This site is proudly pro-apple and does not hide their bias in both what they choose to publish (and not publish) and in their style of writing. The comments section is equally the same. More me, I find it humourous to read both sides of it because it's like watching Honey-booboo fight with the cast from Duck Dynasty. It's trashy and uneducated but for some reason I cannot avert my gaze. If you have to really think about which side is which, then you are not on the outside looking in. You are the show.
The Robertson's are hardly trashy or uneducated...but referring to the Droids as HoneyBooBoo seems appropriate.
I agree with you... I think we're quite far into the "who gives a shit" territory where Samsung is concerned.
Most of the posters on this site come here to support their view that Apple is the best and to vent about Samsung or some other company that has somehow slighted them or made them feel insecure. This is highly relevant because, in the eyes of Apple fans, Samsung evil and deserves to have their 'mortal' corporate enemy suffer losses. I personally don't get it but fanboys from all walks of life are just like that. AI posts more news about Samsung than Samsung fanboy sites do which I find pretty funny.
And when all your profits are from copying the leader, sometimes an even hungrier bottom feeder will simply also profit by copying you.
This leaves Samsung in no man's land.
This isn't just about Apple though when it comes to Samsung. Samsung is one of the worst companies.
They were convicted three times on price fixing, and paid out hundreds of millions each time. In fact, Apple and Samsung were going to build, and run, a memory plant together, when Samsung was convicted of memory price fixing, and had to pay a fine of $350 million. Apple withdrew from the project.
The chairman of the overall Samsung Chabrol was convicted twice, in S Korea, of bribery, but because of the power of the company there, was never required to spend time in prison, as was allowed to remain chairman.
Numerous companies have sued Samsung for stealing their IP. There are still a number of cases going on now. We're not talking about some obscure companies with dubious patents, but major competitors. Nvidia is one late example.
They were convicted in Taiwan of bribing individuals to lie about competitors.
They have lost about (I've lost count) 28 of the 31 lawsuits with Apple.
Both the EU and the U.S. Government threatened to take them to court for trying to get companies, such as Qualcomm, to change their contracts so that Samsung could illegally sue Apple for IP that Qualcomm used in chips that Apple bought.
Both the EU and the US government threatened to take them to court for improperly attempting to get Apple to pay rates for SEP patents that were ten to one hundred times what they were charging others for those patents, and violating their agreements under the SEP rules to charge everyone equally, and fairly.
They were convicted for having working conditions in their chemical plants that resulted in workers dying or becoming permanently injured.
Heck, I could go on here for quite some time.
I wonder if Samsung pulls from premium phones, will see another major competitor for the iPhone pop up. I'd really appreciate that, because they tend to push Apple's limits.
I really like Android nowadays, it's grown up quite a bit and is a great alternative when wrapped in good hardware. I detest Samsung, though, so I'd be happy to see someone else respectable reap the profits from that segment.
What's even more interesting is if you look at a 1 year chart Google stock is down 13% while Apple is up 42%, Facebook is up 32% and Microsoft is up 33%. And this is the stock that not too long ago the analyst crowd on CNBC were talking up as the first trillion dollar company. Yet it lost $70B market cap in 2014. Even today with the stock market way up (and both Apple and Microsoft up around 2.5%) Google is down almost 1%. For me that's a bigger story that isn't getting much attention.
The reality is the honest investors see where things are going. And it's not Google's way. Google has been (and likely always will be) a one trick pony, advertising. Not a long term growth business.