Comments on: Are These Guys Really Multimillionaires?

By: Greg Sterling

Greg Sterling — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

Hey Charlie and Pat (Marshall)? I totally disagree. Not a jump the shark moment at all and $1.65 billion is only a fraction of Google’s market cap ($124 billion) for 40-70 million uniques (depending on whom you belive), the only brand in online video, plus a Madison avenue angle that didn’t exist for Google before.

They also get huge PR value and "buzz" and a big psychological win over competitors. Of course that needs to be turned into revenue eventually.

They could screw it up of course but I think it’s going to emerge as a big deal for Google, in more ways than one.

By: Mike Boland

Mike Boland — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

Greg brings up some good points, some of which i haven’t heard yet in the media storm surrounding this event. Like many other things, this will be a wait and see situation.

By: Charles Laughlin

Charles Laughlin — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

Greg. Well, I may have been a bit glib, but paying 1.6B for PR buzz and a psychological victory over competitors doesn’t sound like a rational way to spend the shareholders’ money, at least not that much of it. Calling it a fraction of its market cap is the same as calling it monopoly money in my view.

Your argument on the volume of traffic is at least tangible and I can accept that.

By: Brad

Brad — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

It’s seems funny coz it might be true, I think these Multimillionaires should join together and finance on a big project.

By: Charles Laughlin

Charles Laughlin — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

Well, the $1.6B price is absurd IMHO, but my 5-year-old-son got a big laugh out of the dancing midget.

By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0000

I see a "jump the shark" moment here.