What is Digg?106 Comments
- Spanca, on 10/12/2007, -2/+79"we're gonna stay committed *laugh* to bring you some great new features *laugh* and err... *laugh* yeah we're gonna develop the community and continue to develop *laugh* some really innovative stuff *laugh*...
...nah just ***** with you, we're both going to buy Ferraris and screw around for the rest of our lives, care of Google" - sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -1/+58I'd be skipping around like a little schoolgirl if my year old company just got bought for 1.6 billion, too.
- coryp420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+44Nope, to busy admiring the $800 million in his pocket...
- ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -0/+231st
There are three co-founders.
2nd
Venture capitalists will take most of it.
3rd
Something will go to the employees.
4th
There still got very rich indeed. - dstjohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22".. founders Chad Hurley, Steve Chen, and Jawed Karim each stand to make between $100 and $200 million from the deal." - TechCrunch
- rderveloy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23"Those lucky bastards..."
Luck had nothing to do with it. They had an idea, implemented it, and saw it through to the end with good 'ole fashioned work.
Ideas are a dime a dozen, those who put up the effort to carry them through successfully are rare. - wolfzero, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Hey let's make comments about their physical appearance and/or sexual orientation! I bet that will make is cool. C'mon try it, everyone! ***** savages...
Congratulations are in order...now explain what the ***** is REALLY going to happen. - jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14They are flippin ecstatic. I would be to.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I'm RICH BIATCH!!!!!!!! {honk, honk}
http://imrichbiatch.ytmnd.com/ - ICSU, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Yeah, because an average PayPal employee earns millions...
- michaelczhang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11They don't own 50% of the company each... There's a third founder, and a good amount of the company equity was handed out when they raised enormous amounts of investment money.
Still, they pocketed a couple hundred million each probably. - EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11spacebar14: For now
- NyteStarNyne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11It's 1.6bil
Divide that by two even before all the behind the scenes bills and fees are deducted. It's Millionaires. - oMeSSiaHo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9That is 1.6 billion dollars of giddiness there. Its kinda fun to see them enjoy that.
- Brutis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10They at TGI Friday's?
couldn't splurg for something better? lol - smellinator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Not that $100 to $200 million is anything to sneeze at, but remember, it's in Google stock, which many people argue is way overinflated right now. I'm quite certain there are restrictions on the sale of it. A 25% pullback has already occurred. 50% fluctuations aren't out of the realm of possibility. And a 90% pull back wouldn't be unprecedented. (Still, $10 - $20 M ain't so bad either!)
The smartest thing these guys can do is to sell their stock (DIVERSIFY) as soon as they are able. Remember Eric Raymond and his $36 million from VA Linux stock? See http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=1999-12-10-001-05-NW-LF&tbovrmode=3 . Kind of funny now to read ESR's comments about being absurdly rich (and the riches all go away in a market crash, before you are allowed to sell!)
If you own Google stock personally, you really should read the terms of the deal. Probably a one-year hold on the stock, or something like that. There are about 4 Million shares of Google in the hands of some people who are very likely highly motivated to sell to diversify. The average daily volume of Google stock is about 5.8 Million shares. Imagine what happens to the stock, if for six hours one day a year from now, every order on Google stock is a sell order. How will that stock plummet?
The stock may become available in a quarter, or a little bit at a time. But if you own shares, you should find that out. Because that will be some serious downward pressure on the stock. - toxicredm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"We're going to invest this money back into our community...psych!"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8And then the employees
- noGoodNamesLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@spacebar14; yeah, they claim that they're keeping them separate. YouTube also said that they weren't up for sale not so long ago.
FWIW, even if they keep YouTube distinct from Google's other operations, I can't see any compelling reason for them to continue running Google Video in parallel. At best Google Video will be quietly discontinued, or merged into YouTube, and YouTube will be rebranded as "Google YouTube" or something similar.
One other thing; the Digg summary says "Say hello to the worlds newest millionaires!".... let's hope for their sake that they get more than $1m each; that's peanuts, all things considered. - grant1080, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Congrats on the acquisition, hope it all works out.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9who cares if he is gay even if he's poor?
- V3suvius, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Guess it means it's time for me to create a strongly needed webservice too.
- distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"king of search" i believe.
- Farmer77, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Terrific, now we will see 20 more Youtube wannabes spring up overnight along with Greedtube and Pornotube.
- The_Wallbanger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I can't watch YouTube videos at work. Anyone have a Google Video version of the article?
It's ironic, but I'm serious. - michaelczhang, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Another thing is, the three YouTube founders were early employees of PayPal, so this isn't exactly a rags to riches story.
I'd guess they were pretty wealthy even before this gigantic amount of cash grew out of the ground for them in about a year. - distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's capitalism for you. Owners doing what they want with their business.
Which also means you can start your own company and not sell out to blah blah blah. - distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Man, they look like they've just won the lottery. They're so giddy.
Not that I can blame them of course. I just can't believe they're still sober.
Congratulations on the mystery of how YouTube will ever survive being solved.
Introducing: GooTube - Eth4n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4At least they weren't bought by News Corp :o
- huntrm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Don't worry about an over-inflated google stock. There's a concept known as collaring, where one pays a lot of $$ to "insure" their stock option prices. For example, they can lock in their options at $425 with +/- $10 - several independent firms do this kind of activity, and it's common for them to offer up this service.
But as I stated, one must pay a lot of $$$ to get this service. - spacebar14, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Your guess is just that - a guess. And a wrong guess at that.
http://digg.com/tech_news/Google_snaps_up_YouTube_for_1_65B_2
They're keeping them seperate. - kiantech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3why you guys bitching, if I was offered 1.6billion I would take it too.
- kozie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Google YouTube?
Like Yahoo Flickr and Google Picasa, and Google Writely...
No. You destroy a brand by doing that... - distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Hope all the bullies that picked on them do.
- noGoodNamesLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Google have a more reputable profile than Yahoo, though. Perhaps they'll brand it "YouTube from Google" with the Google bit in smaller letters. Perhaps you're right, and they'll just keep it as YouTube. Either way, I don't see them dropping the YouTube *name*.
That wasn't the main point though; put simply, there's no reason for Google to continue running two different video systems. Even if they intend retaining separate YouTube and Google (Video) brands, my guess is that (A) they'll both use the same underlying system and (B) they'll both use the same merged archive of video material (albeit possibly restricting the material available via a specific service for marketing or legal reasons).
Which system will they settle on? I don't know. If converting the archive was an issue, I would guess they'd standardise on YouTube's system; but in all honesty, I'm not convinced that that would be a big deal. - blake213, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Is that TGI Friday's in the background? I suppose that's where all the big business deals go down these days (although, Michael Scott prefers Chili's)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Shut up or they will BUY your family.
- Lobster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They deserve their success. Hard core development, venture capital (for fast and furious servers). They did what it takes. They got what they deserve for their hard work. Bravo.
I for one, bow down before our new Geek Kings (paypal donation details provided on request if they are feeling generous). Will they be going in to space and setting up an Ubuntu rival? - MatTipton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow... that's not at all how I interpreted it. Do you say this because they are so candid... or do you know them personally or something? I think you should take into context the video content along with the fact that it was released on YouTube. I'd say they just decided not to take the annoucement very seriously and this is exactly how they wanted to present themselves. I say this because it was obviously not rehearsed and there were obvious mistakes that could have very easily been edited out. Don't you think if they wanted to portray a different image, they would have rehearsed it and/or edited down? They were probably just shooting for a candid "YouTube style announcement".
- distrbnce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, and you'd be ***** James Bond after -winning- a billion dollars.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They already gave back to the community by providing CRAZY amounts of bandwidth for free, making it easy to incorporate videos into blogs, and using Flash Video as their format so that it's easy to share videos between different operating systems. Oh, and by looking the other way when people up tons of stuff that violates copyright laws. ^_^
- zoltan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"the king of surf and the king of video have gotten together, were going to have it our way"
nicely put - kalleanka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Luck had nothing to do with it."
Yeah right, I'm sure luck had absolutely nothing at all to do with it. - EGOvoruhk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3TheReport: Race and color are two different things. He said "a Chinese" not "a yellow"
I saw where you were trying to go with that, but you failed. Miserably - JoshuaGross, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No kidding, Google wouldn't gain anything by rebranding YouTube.
- bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wouldn't worry too much about google stock.. Look at the Earnings growth
http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&cid=694653
The company is growing faster than any other company on Wall St. and hasn't yet shown signs of slowing down. Now that they've bought the top player in the internet video world -- also one of the fastest if not the fastest area of growth on the market, I don't see their stock going down too much if at all.
Granted their multiple is quite lofty at 62 but given their tremendous unmatched growth it's not completely unreasonable.
Heck look at their Historical Income statement..
http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=ii&cid=694653
They have grown from 10 million in operating income to 2 billion in operating income in four years. If they can even come close to monetizing youtube with similar growth... - mobilehavoc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2More money more problems - as cliche as it sounds, there are many documented cases where people who come across large sums of money (like lotteries) more than often end up blowing it all in a matter of years, sometimes less.
I hope they have trustworthy friends and family more than anything - and good financial planning. - Sparks123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Congrats Youtube!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No i didnt fail miserably because I was being sarcastic and retarded, lighten up a bit, my purpose was to be funny not to be politically correct/
- noGoodNamesLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1GreedTube are basically just using embedded YouTube videos in breach of YouTube's TOSs, so they're not likely to last long. YouTube could (and probably will) use legal and/or technical means to stop them embedding when they get fed up paying for GreedTube's bandwidth.
Unfortunately for GreedTube, even if they agreed to give YouTube a split of the profits, they don't offer anything that YouTube couldn't do by themselves. -
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is