Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Its confirmed. Google buys youtube for $1.6 billion
marketwatch.com — Google Inc. said Monday it's buying No. 1 Internet video sharing Web site YouTube Inc. for $1.65 billion in stock. The deal is regarded as a largely defensive one that leapfrogs Google into a leading role in a burgeoning Internet marketplace
gizmoojo- 7918 diggs
- digg it
- ifonly, on 10/15/2007, -91/+700LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEROOOOOOOOOOOOY JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSS
- hotbeefman, on 10/12/2007, -298/+30There is nothing that could be said to summarize the moment, this will do just fine. don't digg him down.
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -12/+101I think it sums it up quite well. Think of all the other players as investors and Google as Leroy... good match, no?
if you have no idea what I'm on about: http://youtube.com/watch?v=q3DtKMEO9N0 - MrPig, on 10/12/2007, -36/+5Also found from Yahoo:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061009/ap_on_bi_ge/google_youtube - diggywiggit, on 10/12/2007, -44/+13Oh noes, controlled media!
- thelastknowngod, on 10/12/2007, -10/+59i dont know if this is a good thing or a bad thing. google def has the cash but do they really want to pay THAT much?
- VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -78/+9lol only took 16 mins to get to frontpage :) yeah baby
to be honest. im not liking this at all. google made it so difficult to even put your own videos online, unlike youtube. for example, google wouldnt let me upload this video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=305dOW-BzI0 but youtube allowed me.
well, congrats on leveling up google - takai, on 10/12/2007, -6/+60YouTube was Google's number one competitor for online video distribution. What better way to compete than with yourself.
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -20/+7Just when they said it couldn't be bought.
Bravo to Google, bowing to the masters of online video distribution. This *has to* be part of their open information projects (e.g. scanning books, etc.). I'm thinking they're going to use YouTube as a platform for defying copyright in video media, too. - FreakTrap, on 10/12/2007, -6/+83@VipeNess
If I were google, I wouldn't let you upload that either. - NinjaBoy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+21I like google's player and such. But i also love reading the comments people leave. It lets me know if i should even bother watching the video.
- FreakTrap, on 10/12/2007, -7/+47@thelastknowngod
They didn't really 'pay' a thing. They gave them Google Stock, which can be sold to other people for money, but costs Google nothing to distribute. - pooslinger, on 10/12/2007, -32/+7One overpriced company acquiring another overpriced company. DotCom crash part deux?
- thebman990, on 10/12/2007, -5/+118At least Google has chicken.
- steelmaverick, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4So according to that dude (can't remember his name), google must be a moron?
But according my me and my reality, (i rejected his and replaced it with my own) Google is one step away from being God.
So what shall happen to the google video service? - spotmonk, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1and then there's this one...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IOvrv2YOMw - JoshuaGross, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Mark Cuban. As I commented, Mark Cuban is a self-promoting arse and only said that about YouTube to generate attention about himself.
- 0crabby0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+65First there was the "Amazon Model" - sell a lot of product, but not make a lot of money.
Then the "Google Model" came along - make money but it's hard to track cash flow(may or may not have to restate earnings next year).
Now there's the YouTube model - hemorrage cash and sell it for billions(1 1/2 billion).
I'll stick to the Digg model - Podcasts and beer. - VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3i made a truthful note that google takes forever to get a video posted online, and youtube goes super fast, and they wont let you upload certain videos. go ahead and digg me down. but im warning you now, when the frontpage of digg says youtube sucks and they arent playing my videos.. im going to reference right back to this story, and make you read this paragraph called. I told you
http://youtube.com/watch?v=305dOW-BzI0 - Daiken, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16Umm...just cause they're giving them stock still means something. Their stock is part of their assets. So is cash. Give either away, and you're left with less. Google now cannot sell those stocks and therefore has lost $1.65 billion. Of course what's good about this deal is that if Google's stock price drops, which it likely will as investors realize Google isn't the dream machine that churns out money, those stocks won't be worth as much as they are now. Unless youtube unloads them all right now...
Regardless, I'm a bit surprised at Google. I can't imagine anyone wanting to buy YouTube with all the copyright lawsuits on the horizon. Not to mention, Google will probably try to abide by copyright laws so we're going to stop seeing a lot of the content we want on YouTube. That in turn means less viewers, less revenue for Google, and so on. - khyberkitsune, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4@freaktrap
Dude, that video was pure gold, and I *HATE* rap. That dude just started his own mini-moshpit, and resolved it in SECONDS. That takes ***** BALLS.
Now get your young ass the ***** off my lawn, biatch, lest I bust a cap in yo' young'n virgin ass! - jayc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10@FreakTrap
There certainly was an opportunity cost involved. Google could have sold that $1.6 billion in stock on the open market, increasing their profit by $1.6 billion. Instead, they aquired an asset with the stock. It borders on silly to say it didn't cost anything. - arunforce, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Now I remember all those articles saying Google is the LEAST likely to buy, and Yahoo!, News Corp, and all those other companies have a higher chance...
That's why I don't give a ***** about other people's opinions. - Monolith2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32Prepare to start seeing a lot more of this:
http://www.youtube.com/index?&session=gAJ9cQEoVQxlcnJvcl9maWVsZHNxAmNfX2J1aWx0aW5fXwpzZXQKcQNdhVJxBFUGZXJyb3JzcQVdcQZVOlRoaXMgdmlkZW8gaGFzIGJlZW4gcmVtb3ZlZCBkdWUgdG8gY29weXJpZ2h0IGluZnJpbmdlbWVudC5xB2FVCG1lc3NhZ2VzcQhdcQl1Lg== - VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -13/+2@Monolith2
that is what ive been talking about this entire time! and i keep getting dugg down. they just dont understand seo in video anymore do they.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=305dOW-BzI0 - zirtbow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4YouTube was great to watch old music videos that couldn't be found anymore. Things anyone might remember seeing when they were a lot younger or uncut/uncensored stuff that couldn't be shown on TV (probably because of explicit lyrics). I don't know where the heck you could buy those from even if you wanted to. Google will probably -have- to eliminate those sort of things but where will users that mainly went to YT for things along those lines go now? I can't see another giant like YouTube rising out of nowhere...
- palmer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Well, no need to question whether the bubble is back.
IT IS, and as asinine as ever. - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Reuters has a lot more about the deal: http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-10-09T232359Z_01_WEN6650_RTRIDST_0_TECH-MEDIA-GOOGLE-DC.XML
This will be fantastic for Google, they've already gained more in market capitalization today than what they paid for Youtube.. - pjsson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0I guess Google have no choice than staring to buy up all these successful websites. It has built new data centers and lots of dark fibrer so it must use it for something and besides Google map and search they haven't been that succesful compared to others, like Myspace and YouTube. Congrats to youtube's three founder, 1.65 billions for a company founded February 2005, wow. Still better than Google's Myspace deal, this time they get the company and not just partner with it.
- Flump5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7are any of the above comments actually replys?
- tim04, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2my god google is getting senile...no ones bought youtube for a reason
- hellyes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@jayc
you don't sell stock to make profit. stock is an equity account held by the shareholders. it is not profit. - stockjones, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Google needs something to make more money. They are so hyped up and over valued right now. Get ready to pay for your YouTube subscriptions and services.
- TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3What will happen to Google Video? Will they merge? If we combined the good parts of google video, and youtube it would be awesome in my oppinion.
- TheWorm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Meanwhile, somewhere in Los Angeles, Tom sits in a corner, puts on some emo, and cuts his wrists.
- djjoemex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Digg founders are wondering, why did'nt we sold Digg when we have the chance so we could use the money to build a Video Social Sharing website?
Alexa says, Digg traffic is place 89th while youtube is 6th. Maybe digg isn't so great at all
http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none - infobeat234, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't care. We all are slaves of MrGates&Co - when you read this - to be more advanced in seo, webdesign, html, php, ajax, whatever - they quietly play golf on sunny wet grass, breath morning and send to you their beautiful air kiss. I mean this is virtual love.
http://qqbq.info/sitemap.htm - TomCherry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://3couleurs.blogspot.com
- Matic, on 10/12/2007, -49/+7This is great news for me
- bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -42/+4Me too, snatched up some stock a couple weeks back and boom youtube rumors and it takes off, this should be very interesting to see their plans for integration, hopefully they'll give some insight in their next earnings call or blog.
- jacobee519, on 10/12/2007, -10/+23What about google video? I'm assuming they're just going to use youtube's tech, (thank god!)
- bbatsell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+78@jacobee519:
I much prefer Google Video, if only because it allows me to stream the video, as well as navigate to any particular part of a video, as opposed to progressive download + very few chapter points with YouTube. - macewan, on 10/12/2007, -20/+2Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!
- TenebrousX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I'm assuming they will merge the technologies -- so you can link to specific places in videos and download them as well
- VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1http://youtube.com/watch?v=305dOW-BzI0
- frenzy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3this isnt great news for anyone, after google cleans out all the "unauthorized" content from music vids to tv shows they will have about the same content as video.google.
i assume they will apply the same review process they do for video.google, which means people will not post those types of content anymore
- compu73rg33k, on 11/07/2007, -8/+139Man google is so lucky! Now they get to pay those astronomical bandwith bills!
- boneill428, on 10/12/2007, -1/+225Youtube is so lucky. They just made off with 1.65 Billion. Suckers...
- dwwatk01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+87What Google has succeeded with thusfar is purchasing smaller, more manageable companies with which they could more easily integrate (great example - Writely). I understand Google has the assets for such a purchase, but I am somewhat skeptical of this purchase.
Then again: me = programmer finishing up college, and them = very successful billionaires. - Battlecry, on 10/12/2007, -60/+71.6 billion in stock. I'm sure theres a stipulation that that can't sell off large amounts of shares for a certain period of time, if ever. Like google has 1.6 billion in cash lying around.
- OMGWTFROFLMAO, on 10/12/2007, -3/+119"Like google has 1.6 billion in cash lying around."
i'm sure they do. - jdb252, on 10/12/2007, -5/+65I wouldn't be surprised if they actually just had a little trapdoor somewhere where they can just pull out billions of dollars. It's Google.
- ThrasherC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+79I would if I were them -- like the freakin' Money Bin in Ducktales.
- tokyomonster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+67"Like google has 1.6 billion in cash lying around."
Are you kidding? I hear Eric and Seregey bathe each other in 100 dollar bills every day. - alex.will, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29"Man google is so lucky! Now they get to pay those astronomical bandwith bills!"
...and collect the millions in advertising revenue. - simd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28Keep in mind that Google a) already has massive bandwidth and b) has been buying large amounts of dark fibre, presumably with the express point of using it to move huge amounts of data.
Bigger tubes = lower cost YouTube. - ja1217, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@ThrasherC
+ Digg for the Ducktales reference. Haven't heard them mentioned for years. - coldshuts, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16Google is gonna run the Internet their way.
The way they run the Internet rocks. - palmer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1"and collect the millions in advertising revenue."
Uh, what millions? - JohnboiWaltune, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I watched grainy VHS rips of DuckTales on YouTube.
Man, that Scrooge McDuck and his wacky nephews really tickle my funny bone! Imagine, swimming in a vault full of gold coins!
Ha! Ha! - locojones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"Uh, what millions?"
Exactly. Look at Google Video now, there's no advertising whatsoever that accompanies the videos. How will they manage to incorporate AdSense -- that analyzes the textual content in a page and serves up targeted advertising -- into a video-serving technology? AdSense can't tell what the subject or content of a video is, aside from the title entered by a user, so my guess is targeted ads won't do much at all. If there were millions of dollars to be made from such advertising, don't you think YouTube would've implemented it already?
If Google really is preparing to enter into content sharing agreements with media providers, then you should expect to see commercials before any video. That's the only way, aside from subscription fees, that one would expect Google to make any money whatsoever from providing videos. - memo06dic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Like google has 1.6 billion in cash lying around."
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/D664.html
and #27 is Larry Page - UrlorJkron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They could use the tags applied to videos to decide what ads to show.
- DarkSenay, on 10/12/2007, -8/+37With a high profile company like google, it seems it may be hard for the entertainment companies to sue, unless they feel like their artists or programs being excluded from Google's search engines. Also, they would lose any marketing opportunites they might have with Google. And what other company has the infrastructure to handle and minimize the costs of bandwidth other than Google. Sounds like a good buy.
- rkettner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Besides which most people seem to ignore that Google Video already has the rampant spreading of copyrighted materials too... and nobody seems to be doing anything about it there... so why should this be different.
- merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25Are you kidding? Google gets sued all the time. Yes, they have the muscle to put up a decent fight, but they've also got more money than god, which always draws lawsuits.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I think it's the opposite way around. With a bigger company like Google, more greedy bastards will sue them.
- venir, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think a lot of people are missing out on the fact that YouTube isn't getting sued yet because they are protected under the DMCA as long as they remove the copyrighted content when asked. Therefore they are not breaking the law unless they refuse to remove copyrighted content.
- 1nd1g0, on 10/12/2007, -16/+4Those guys made some money off that one. I saw some YouTube HQ pictures a few months ago and it was just a handful of empoyess in a shotty office.
- geriy, on 10/12/2007, -30/+5Man, the whole upcoming queue is filled with Google buy Youtube news submission.. WTF.
- compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -31/+4OMG IT MUST BE TRUE THEN!
- 1nd1g0, on 10/12/2007, -24/+6Bury 'em...
- goduke06, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11Well Google's smart and if they thought that copyright issues would be a huge problem than they wouldn't have bought. Maybe they know something we dont.
- darkstar949, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Likely they know something we don't. However, they might be in a better position in regards to custom software to try and filter copyrighted materials companies are. It will be interesting to see how the lawsuits go now that Google is one of the major players.
- joel8x, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I agree with this - I think a lot of companies see this kind of distribution model as the future of TV, in other words - IP TV for the whole world that is as free as the Internet.
- NinjaBoy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2YouTube recently implemented a copyright scanning program to detect copyright infringement. This gives google something to build off of.
- sekyuritei, on 10/12/2007, -5/+36Hey, at least this will kill all the speculation / they should / they shouldn't / articles, right?
- hotbeefman, on 10/12/2007, -19/+9No people are still gonna submit that it's a rumour tommorow.
- ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Or predictions on what they will do with youtube, or commentaries on why it's good or bad...
Fact is, there are people out there paid to fill space with words and they will continue to do so no matter what. - sfatoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@ahawks
and there's also people like us who don't get paid to fill spaces with words and we still do it anyway... - mexter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Also, this new should appear on Slashdot in about four days. Then again a week later.
- elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Actually, it's already on Slashdot:
http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/10/09/217207.shtml
And we're going to end up seeing it in two hours again on Digg. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. Then we'll see it again in another two hours. etc.
- jeromeerome, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1Lets see how Google handles all these speculations that they are now the target of YouTubes copyright violation lawsuits. I smell greedy lawyers.
Personally I think they should leave them alone and accept it as good advertisement for their videos. - wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Hmm, this is strange. I wonder what will happen to google video, especially now that it's on the main page of google.
- bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I'm listening to the Webcast. Google Video and Youtube are like apples and oranges.
The main differences they outline are the social networking of Youtube and just the pure video content of Google Video.
- bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I'm listening to the Webcast. Google Video and Youtube are like apples and oranges.
- readme, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4Gentlemen, start your lawsuits.
- SuckMyDigg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4If you read some of the previous comments, it's not likely to happen. There may be one or two high-profile suits, but I can't imagine any company wanting to risk their access to the google indexes or even their advertising for a copyright violation. If they won it might be good times for a little while, but eventually it will hurt a lot more.
- goduke06, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Finally made it to the front page now the queue will die down
- tomboy501, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12good god...I must've seen 25 dupes submitted in the last 20 minutes on spy
- donn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19Just goes to show that you can still make coin off dot-com vapo money pits. You just need to be a little more AJAXy about it.
- obppr, on 10/12/2007, -12/+0Why does everyone keep talking about copywrite? Did everyone forget that they ALREADY went though this with Google Books... what happened? Oh yeah, nothing.
- kodek, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2What the ***** is "copywrite"?
- Sutoka, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0"What the ***** is "copywrite"?"
Its pretty much like "copy & paste". Though what you're "pasting" may not be what you copied. Get it?
- Soccrmastr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+111heres the offcial press release:
http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/google_youtube.html- Archeologist, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7I didn't blieve it until I saw this. Thanks for the link.
- LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4thanks, well, its settled! hooray for google!
i, for one, welcome our new media overlord.
also, what will happen to google video? - jeromeerome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Live conference call with shareholders.
http://investor.google.com/webcast.html - jeromeerome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hey legendarysock they just said on the conference call that Google Video was still going to be a major part of their business and not disappear after this purchase.
- mogus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This is just my two cents, but it is consistent with their goal to organize the world's information. The mountains of video out there definitely qualify.
- sunwukong, on 10/12/2007, -12/+74$1.65 billion in stock. . . that's like 10 shares
- nborders, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3If a company is to buy YouTube, Google should be it. Best to have a company who does not re-brand things to its own (Blogger comes to mind) and has a "do no evil" clause in it's charter.
YouTube has become the primary altenative video option outside the mainstreem. We need to keep it that way.
~n- theonlyvlad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
And what isn't power, today, if not the ability to control the organization of all of the Internet's information? Ohh, you just wait. - tgone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@nborders,
Why don't you just bend over and put a target on your ass? Google will become the next Microsoft...
- theonlyvlad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
- h4lofourt33n, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Great news, I can't wait to see where this goes. I wish I would have started YouTube, I'd be P-A-R-T-Y-I-N-G right now.
- Deep, on 10/12/2007, -29/+17Official press release here: http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/google_youtube.html
- jpf., on 10/12/2007, -21/+4Digg this comment. This should have been the link to make front page.
- burke, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3Why the hell is this being dugg down? It's the *official* *GOOGLE* *press* *release*!
- justhim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14You should read other users' comments before linking to a story that has already been covered. The official press release is about 4 posts up from your's.
- LegendarySock, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4its being dugg down because soccrmastr beat him to it.
- superwawi, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1Wouldnt youtuve just turn around and open another site, like me tube. and what is up with this monopoly? We need more doors, yes a billion doors.
- Hitchhiker90, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2Let the copyright lawsuits begin. What would Google benefit from YouTube since they have Google Video? Just another means to kill the competition.
- Paralex, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1NOOOOOOO!!!! Oh well...
- wrongplanet, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Google Video offers downloads of the videos that are playable on ipods and anything else. Maybe they'll streamline Youtube's "channel" subscription system and offer it in RSS format for podcast subscribing.
(Even with tools that allow you to download the flv files from youtube, it's still a lotta work to get everything you want.)
I'm hoping Google will do a ton of cool things with Youtube. - kanavulator, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Whatever happens, I still want to be able to download this stuff for my iPod.
- SoulCast, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2This sounds like a win-win situation for both sides in terms of money and stability. My concern is content, however. Usually, the bigger the company, the more there is at stake and the more censorship there is...let's keep our fingers crossed that YouTube stays true.
- joel8x, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3I am very happy about this. Google has not been being evil through all of their progress, and this will only keep the momentum of YouTube going forward IMO. If they integrate it nicely with their other services, Google will be the "Microsoft" of the future as far as dominating the web services market.
- tgone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3you're happy that Google will be the next Microsoft? Why?
- spiffytech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Being the sole source of control on the internet isn't necessarily the problem. It's what you do with that power. I know that Google might go bad with that much control, but they have a pretty good track record thusfar, and if any company was going to be in charge of most of the internet, I'd rather it be Google than most other companies.
- tgone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2spiffytech,
Yea, Google has a pretty good track record so far. They're also young and still growing. We should always remain skeptical and never be complacent. Some people blindly support Google and assume they'll never corrupt. Even the anti-Microsoft camp has sheep. We should always be critical when a company has this much power.
- KnightMareInc, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1idiots
- GabrielS, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1Microsoft + Walmart = YouTubeDoom
- muffins, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6Goodbye copyrighted videos.
- IamTheProfessor, on 10/12/2007, -25/+1You Posted a Duplicate Story
http://digg.com/tech_news/YouTube_Purchased_Google_to_Announce_Soon- fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Sucks 2bu, Prof
- fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Now you know how Gore must Have felt In 2000
- mp3tricord, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3This purchase makes absolutely no sense to me. Youtube does not have any sort of a business model. Nor can they establish a model based on content that could infringe other companies copyrights. Google is already a major player in the video arena. Youtube was lossing 1 million + on bandwidth alone each month, only raised 12 million from Sequia. youtube's days were basically numbered. This is just an awkward purchase I find it wierd the market is rewarding them...
- mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I assume Google thinks this will bring in more ad money...
- duke_nate, on 10/12/2007, -1/+40Google owns a ton of dark fiber, and probably part of the internet backbone itself.
They get a pretty decent discount on bandwidth ;)
They have big dumptrucks going down their big tubes. - Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32This makes sense for two reasons:
1) Monetization. Google makes the vast majority of their money through advertising. Because google IS the advertising company, if they use their own advertising, they keep 100% of the profit. There is nobody to share it with (like with AdSense, or whatever ad company YouTube is currently using). This allows them to get a lot more money out of a web site than anybody else can.
2) Bandwidth. YouTube's bandwidth bills are incredibly high. Google, on the other hand, in many cases doesn't even pay for bandwidth. This is because not only does Google control a lot of fiber themselves (allowing them to link their own datacenters together for free), but they have a lot of peering arrangements with ISPs that are also free
So this purchase will do two things. First, it will dramatically increase YouTube's revenue. Second, it will dramatically decrease YouTube's costs. The combination of the two means that YouTube will go from burning through money to being immensely profitable.
There are other benefits, of course. Google has deep pockets (Billions of dollars in the bank unspent), and can easily afford any legal battles that copyright owners might bring against Google (as well as any settlements that Google might need to pay). YouTube, on the other hand, was in a much more precarious financial position when defending against copyright infringement lawsuits.
So, this purchase of YouTube really is the perfect ideal company for Google to acquire.
- Drakh, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2Now that YouTube has a cash cow to milk from, media lawsuits commencing in 3... 2... 1...
- VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1http://youtube.com/watch?v=305dOW-BzI0
- diecastbeatdown, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2bye-bye copyrighted material.
- SirThom, on 10/12/2007, -17/+21.6 Billion divided by 60 employees....
~$266M for each employee. Not a bad bonus.- interval, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Yeah, likes it's going to be split evenly? I don't think so.
- dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14"1.6 Billion divided by 60 employees....
~$266M for each employee. Not a bad bonus."
actully.. it.s 2.66 million not 266 million. close though. - xenubaba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6That is some lame calculations. DUDE. Venture Capitalists hold the bulk of the shares in the co.
The founders have like 20-30% in all?
The employees? Try 1-3% in total.
Still not a bad pay day though. - burke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"actully.. it.s 2.66 million not 266 million. close though."
Right. That adds up to 159 million. close though. - Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And you can bet that the two co-founders will get the lions share.
- G-RaZoR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15You guys are a bunch of idiots. For one, Ventures gets most, founders may get 20-30%, some of the executives may get 5-10%, and then the rest probably nothing but a free dinner.
oh, and by the way. $1.6 Billion/60 people is $26.666 million each.
Also, what about Youtube's new CFO? Leaves Yahoo, goes to the 'tube, and now works for google? That's one hell of a resume, eh? - Mirag3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Thanks, G-Razor, you beat me to it, its $26.6 (repeating) million.
You guys need to go back to school. ***** retarded. In case you haven't noticed, your computer has a calculator built in to it, as does Google.
or, if you're a scientist:
1.6 x 10^9 / 60 = 2.66 x 10^7 - christiancadeo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Just to get it clear. The VC probaely got about $500 million. 3 co-founders about $500 million to share between the 3 depending on allocation. The rest to the 60 odd employee's. For the most part everyone got about $1 million in stock at the very least. Good for them.
BTW - all in google stock with different vest periods. VC probably vested right away. Co-founders probably same with the buyout containing a change of ownership clause. Employee's will probably be 2 years for full vest. - dBLiSS, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Touche.
- ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22So let me get this straight, Google just bought a company with $1.65 billion in stock whose claim to fame is not making any money and having a business model that relies on the rampant and unregulated distribution of copyrighted material?
Great idea... if your goal is to get the crap sued out of you.
The only reason YouTube wasn't getting sued up until this point was that they didn't really have any money to get sued for. Now that some deep pockets own them it's going to be open season.
Expect to see the first lawsuits within a month.- Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4YouTube was already being sued by major copyright holders, so your theory is just bunk. Since they're already getting sued, their purchase of Google will likely dissuade copyright holders from pursuing lawsuits (since Google's deep pockets let them fight lengthy protracted lawsuits with ease).
Considering YouTube was already beginning to make deals with major IP holders to solve this problem, Google's huge clout will only aid YouTube in getting deals with a lot more copyright holders.
Think about it. A copyright holder can think "OK, so I can sue Google for this copyrighted video on YouTube, and spend millions to get a small settlement. Or I can make a deal with Google for a share of the ad revenue." - ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Guspaz - "YouTube was already being sued by major copyright holders, so your theory is just bunk."
Hardly. The current lawsuits are nothing compared to what is to come.
"A copyright holder can think "OK, so I can sue Google for this copyrighted video on YouTube, and spend millions to get a small settlement. Or I can make a deal with Google for a share of the ad revenue."
Doubtful. Copyright holders can get MASSIVE settlements in their favor *in addition to* getting cuts of ad revenue. YouTube/Google doesn't have a foot to stand on. They are clearly in violation of multiple copyright laws and the content owners have all the power. - ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Guzpas - Despite the fact you almost ceratinly will never see this, I thought I would add this quote I found today to further back up my claims.
"Todd Dagres, general partner at Boston's Spark Capital, says that Google's large market cap of $130 billion makes it much more vulnerable to lawsuits than a private company such as YouTube. 'Once Google starts to apply its monetization machine, there is going to be more money at stake and people are going to go after it,' says Dagres."
- Guspaz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4YouTube was already being sued by major copyright holders, so your theory is just bunk. Since they're already getting sued, their purchase of Google will likely dissuade copyright holders from pursuing lawsuits (since Google's deep pockets let them fight lengthy protracted lawsuits with ease).
- IvanB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8CNN Money link:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/09/technology/googleyoutube_deal/index.htm?cnn=yes - kkaabboomm, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3people keep talking about copyright lawsuits -
youtube just today announced deals with sony bmg and universal music, and cbs. they are working hard to get legit access to this IP, and now that google owns them i expect the last major music studios/etc to grant IP access as well (for a share of ad dollars and ultimate veto power ala the warner deal a couple weeks ago). the copyright issues are beginning to be fixed faster and faster... - flipmeat, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2 Google already has a system for _selling_ videos in place. Yes, there's DRM, it's a bit less obnoxious then the other systems. (example: not tied to hardware) Eventually YT will be able to generate revenue.
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Sit and wait before commenting about how stupid Google is for the purchase. Don't you think this publicly traded company has a darn good reason to pursue Youtube.com? It's not as if they were Yahoo! snatching up every little company that's 2.0'ish in nature.
- JackAxe, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1WTF!!!
- johlin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I don't really care if they use the software from YouTube or Google Video but if they use YouTube, I really hope the include a "download to iPod"-link.
- joe90210, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10This is funny, Google can't compete with YouTube so they buy them off. If this was MS, there would have been thousands of article and rants about how MS doesn't innovate, they just buy out.
- lopla, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3But you see Google innovates & buys interesting companies. MS does not innovate and tries to buy interesting companies but usually fail because since they don't know how to innovate it's harder for them to know when a company is interesting..
- joe90210, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14@lopla
you couldn't sound any dumber if you tried - Clemenceau, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I would have actually expected Microsoft or Yahoo! to buy Youtube to compete with Google Video. Of course, Yahoo! has some other video plans according to Wired. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.09/yahoo.html
- lateralus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27Hey i'm just glad it isn't Rupert/Fox's toy.
- gab00n, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4I bet they will start determining what makes it to the front page for most viewed, top rated and what not like they do with their google video, they always censor 9/11 truth video and other hard hitting documentaries.
- Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9That is because the 9/11 "Truth" video is stupid
- Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9That is because the 9/11 "Truth" video is stupid
- drpeppper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33All your video are belong to Google.
- theantidote, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9The good news is that Google has already signed a deal with Sony/BMG to allow them to host music videos: http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/google_sonybmg.html
And they also have a deal with Warner: http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/google_wmg.html
So that should get many legal monkeys off Youtube's back. The only problem is Viacom, so we may have to kiss the extensive Daily Show and Colbert Report archives goodbye unless they sign some sort of agreement.
At least Google has the bandwidth to power YouTube. - greenflash, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The tech market is starting to get bubly again. It's like a volcano that erupts every 7 years. Don't go near it when it really begins to explode.
- OMGWTFROFLMAO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+46Youtube was founded in February of 2005. Do you know how insane that is? These guys built a company that went from being worth $0 to $1.65 billion in just over 1 and a half years. The company basically grew $2.5+ million/day (if it were a linear rate..which it wasn't).
Hats off to them.- UberC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Yeah and google was founded in 1998 and is worth $130.5 billion. That's 45,000,000 a day
- fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33Marc Cuban is getting Drunk right Now
- BarryG, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26Mark Cuban is a ***** douche bag
- drpeppper, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3I concur with said barryG
- RonaldLewis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This is great news -- and it confirms a viable future for YouTube, and an even brighter one for online video distribution.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 151 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by