What is Digg?Sponsored by NerdyShirts.com
Buy 80's Casio Watches - Nerd to Live view!
nerdyshirts.com - TV remotes, calculators, solar-powered...it's like McGyver on your wrist
76 Comments
- csqg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Everyone is forgetting - Class B shares.
These share are owned by insiders, founders and venture capitalists. Larry and Sergey are just selling Class A shares. They still have control over the company - Class B shares have 10 votes while Class A shares have only 1.
Also, they will eventually be granted more stock options.
I read that they recently bought a NEW Boeing jet for themselves. - rm999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Who cares if it is automatic or not? Whatever the deal, they are content with holding little of their own company. I am fairly certain this says something about their confidence in the current stock price.
Let's face it: google is sort of in a slump. Their stock is extremely overvalued, the company is starting to get more bloated, and the last truly great idea they have had afaik (from a financial point of view) was text ads. They are still a great company for the consumer and are sticking it to microsoft, but I don't see where they are going. How many of you have ever purchased anything from google? The most I do is click on a text ad every now and then. Contrast this with other large successful companies. - whizzbang, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Two upcoming acquisitions..
1. Gold house
2. Rocket car - notkevin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why sell off $5 billion in stock? For totally iced out rims to put on their H2s, of course.
- Nyghtewynd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If you're getting ready to say, "Google's overvalued", you don't know anything about the stock market. This isn't some early 90s dot.com that hasn't made a dime yet. This company makes a lot of money, and is still growing, and you have to pay for that. Jim Cramer's been calling for GOOG to hit $350 for a few months now, and that's a *low* estimate. A stock is NEVER overvalued. It is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for it.
- Lynxpro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wouldn't be too worried about it. The money they raised for themselves could also be used to buy start-up companies that Google might be interested in but would draw too much attention if the Google company itself started poking around (like inciting interest from Microsoft or Yahoo to poach the companies first). The guys could then instruct Google to buy out those companies from them or do a stock swap, thereby getting back some of the shares they just cashed out with.
These guys don't strike me as trying to make Google into a Broadcast.com, ie. getting lucky based upon a bubble and having nothing really to justify the stock being overvalued. Google is in it for the long run.
And as another poster stated, they still have their class B shares, aka "the non-sucker shares". Check out how the Roberts family manipulates the Comcast company even though they own something like less than 30% of the common stock. Their preferred stock allows them full control of the company. - EvilCowSan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It could be that they need the capital for something huge, perhaps spreading their wifi thing from san fran to across the country.
- AlfaWolph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1because their stock is overpriced and they are cashing out. i would too if it were that high.
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I would contrast this with Bill Gates, who still has 1 Billion plus shares of MS. Who trusts their own company more???
- spadin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think you guys are missing the point that some people are trying to make about Google being in a slump. Sure GMail is great, Google Maps is awesome and so will the upcoming WiFi Service... But none of these make money for Google. The stock market doesn't care about cool products (directly), it cares about profits and losses.
- MWWLSE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1To diversify their assets. It'd be stupid to hold so much money in one risky asset, hence all the problems with employee stock options in the late 90's. Finance 101
- m0bilitee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Umm, according to the yahoo link given there are:
Total Insider Shares Held 149.24M
with about 8 Million sold. Not 140,000 ? Where did that number come from?
48 million shares are institutionally held (big mutual funds, banks, etc.). The insiders are very much in control of Google according to these numbers. 8 million isn't much compared to the remaining 149 million still held. - bleutuna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wanna make a point here - people are saying, "Well, it's a matter of wanting to control the company or not. Gates clearly does. Google's founders don't."
Then, I ask you to think about this in conjunction with how inundated our daily lives are becoming with Google, and how many of have been clearly stating that Google *will* become an evil Empire.
If the founders, those responsible for the "Don't be evil" mantra no longer have any true say in the company, then it's simply another business like all others. Now it's about profit more than function, about turning a dollar more than loyalty. Shareholders don't care about "don't be evil," they care about getting paid.
Makes me glad I've refused to install any of the Google crap that permeates your harddrives and that I don't use Google mail. The countdown to when the company bites you sheep in the ass has officially started... - The_Dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Perhaps they own some restricted voting shares of their stock which aren't available at all to regular investors.
- pdevor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow, you people are all retarded. Google isn't overvalued. Its estimatied one year forword P/E is like 40.
BE MORE RETARDED. - chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Not 140,000 ? Where did that number come from?"
If you click on the names of Brin and Page it tells you the number of remaining shares that they hold. Brin has like 100,000 and Page has like 36,000 (or vice versa). Then goto the Microsoft page and click on Gates to see his 1,000,000,000 shares. - rjasong23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It has nothing to do with their confidence in their own company - they, like many many people, recognize that Google's stock is waaaay overprices. Eventually their little mini-bubble will burst. But before it does they'd like to cash out - I would too. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if they ended up buying some shares back after the stock price deflated. If you know anything about financial statements you'd know that while Google is awesome and doing a terrific job, the stock price is still over-inflated.
- mikeyj10, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They probably have pressure on them from their state of incorporation to either give up some of their ownership interest or management of the corporation. Since, they'll always be rich they probably decided to keep their management powers. Generally, owners of a corporation are not allowed to exercise management of a public corporation.
- Metman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And now... financial experts! Each with thier own 'knowledge' of the subject. Ironically, 90% of them are wrong even in theory. Seems Economics aren't such popular course(s) these days?
- iomegadrive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Uhm, what if they are smart and know that the stock price is going to crash, right? Then they cash out. And when the stock PLUMMETS, they buy the shares all back at a greatly lower price? They will have those shares back AND they will have the money from selling at such a higher price. Hence, Google = smart.
- MWWLSE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Plus the other two keys to happiness: the solid gold house and the rocket car.
- Jammerdelray, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Simple, so their share holders can buy them up
- BxBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Simple Answer: Because they can!
- earthtoandy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well experience tells us that this whole dot com bubble will soon burst and stocks will plumet.... but these boys will be A OK!
the stock is way overvalued... why NOT cash out and when it crashes buy some more! - B111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Two upcoming acquisitions..
1. Gold house
2. Rocket car
Ha, ha! But yeah, the stock is overvalued, so now would be a good time to cash out. ALthough I don't think they ever anticipated teh stock being worth this much now. - wastern, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0why wouldn't they, sell now, get 5Bil and they're set for life without having to worry about what happens in the future. 5 billion is more then one person can ever spend....
this also frees their mind up and will let them take bigger risks that can drive the company forward without having trepidation about what it will do to their own pocket book. if they are trying to take on MS (which is what the buzz around them is now) they are going to have to do something bold, drastic, and very risky - danlin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0it has nothing to do with the recent sale to the public. that came from the company to fund the corporate bank account. this post is talking about what they cashed out for themselves. do you really think larry and sergey will sell their own personal shares to reinvest in google? come on.
- NCoolmn67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Most likely they arent selling the stock to get rich. I bet they arent keeping a pretty great majority of what has been sold. Companies go public and sell stock to, like the previous post says, get capital for other investments in the company. So all these people saying that their going to buy ***** is stupid, I wouldnt be surpirsed, given the track record of google people, that all the money goes back into the company.
- earthtoandy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>>I would contrast this with Bill Gates, who still has 1 Billion plus shares of MS. Who trusts their own company more???
more like who is more concerned about maintaing control over their company! bill gates already has the money... these guys had so much in one spot. time to cash out.
Plus, mr. gates could find himself losing a lot of money when that stock starts to plunge and i am sure it will in the future - jobalt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The "Assistant Secretary" linked to in the comments is Larry Page. He and Sergey are the google founders. Also notice on that page that he is the CTO and part owner of Island Pacific which owns half a billion dollars worth of Google too.
Whether google is doing well or not all bubbles burst. So setting the sell numbers at inflated prices from 250 and up makes a lot of sense. Then you can get back in later when the price settles, or move your money elsewhere. - serpentor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0While I'm not their financial advisor, I'd assume a large portion of that $7B is being diversified overseas, specifically away from the US dollar. They are quite wise not to have all their capital tied up in the company, and in the same respect, tied up in the murky future of the US dollar. No one should hold just US-dollar based assets in their investment basket. With the debt, trade defecit, inflation, peak oil crisis, and several other potential trillion-dollar calamities potentially awaiting us, it's best to keep your eggs in safer baskets.
- mdmoya, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>>"Check out this person. There Title is "Assistant Secretary""
Dude, that's Larry Page. You know, the "Page" part of "Larry Page and Sergey Brin"?
>>"why are they getting rid of all their stock???"
In the word of Lewis Black, "Well, they had to buy *****." Or maybe it's because they only make $1/year. http://digg.com/links/Google_chiefs_agree_to_work_for_$1 Or maybe it's all that stuff that the people that actually know about the stock market are saying. According to the story that other Digg (the $1/yr one) links to, "Schmidt, Brin and Page have all sold chunks of their Google stake during the past few months through pre-determined selling plans." So it is predetermined. - willgonz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If your stock was worth $300+ a share you'll sell it too. IPO'S do it all the time. Doesn't mean something is wrong with google. Doesn't mean they are jumping ship.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0> Why are the Google founders offloading all their shares?
There are exactly two answers to that question.
1) they know they're participating in a bubble that's about to crash.
2) way less than 50% of the company was put on the market with the initial (and subsequent) offering(s). - jasonpsimon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0PROBABLY BECAUSE IT'S WORTH $6 BILLION!!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i highly doubt that is going into thier bank accounts.
overvalued or not when you are talking billions .. money rarely matters.. bill gates one said money was most usefull as a people incentive. otherwise 1 billlion or 5 billion it is still hard to spend.. that is unless you are buying up all the dark fiber in the country.. or maybe want to make a bid on AOL.. going from advertising company to telecommunications one is expensive.
besides for clickable ad's google is also going into print.
Jus cause someone divisets his stoick holdings doesnt mean they are leaving a sinking ship.
they just snagged the microsoft exec..the are doing wifi, google library (maybe), voip, microsoft is talking about restructoring to compete with google. Just to get microsoft to say "they aint worried about you" shows google is far from dying. ANyone with much intelligence wants to work their. AS for greed microcrap got rid of stock options that made all of it's employees millionaires.. google employees are still becoing millionaires.. hmm which company is greedier? - dimplemonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How can you just make money if you don't ever spend it? He's finally cashing in his chips! Go buy me something, guys!
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The point of this digg is why are Page and Brinn selling ALL of thier shares? Of course they are making a ***** of money, and I would do the same, but what can you do with $7B that you can't do with say $2B?? Personally, if I had that much in stock, I would sell ALL of it, buy a private island and just live my life of luxury - but Page and Brin are not of that cloth.
As far as the "they set up the automatic sell" argument, why would they sell virtually ALL of their stock within the first year? I can see maybe selling 1/2 of it, but why 99% of it? - The_Dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Also, look at the Yahoo information. There's still 149 million shares held by insiders. Only 5% of insider stock has been sold. You can't glean any useful information about the company from this information. Also, institutional investors have added to their holdings which is usually good.
- ArchAngel21x, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They are selling their shares because they want the F-ing money. How difficult is it to figure that out?
- The_Dude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes, the stock is priced sky high. Kind of seems like a no brainer. Then again, I thought it was a good short at 200 so what do I know.
- ImAtHome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dude...they're billionaires. cut 'em some slack. they never have to work again.
- EntrepreNerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0To those who think Larry and Sergey are selling it so they can be rich, have some vision.
If you had the means to bring the worlds information to the finger tips of every man, woman and child, what would you do with it?
I would envision a way to bring the information to the people through intuitive content related ads, thus linking the seeker with those who wish to be sought. OH wait, they did that already and are making a killing from it.
OK, what next then? Perhaps provide the world with Free Internet so that all people could use the services with a valid Google user account. Then make one massive global GLAN (Google Local Area Network) allowing people to share anything with anyone on the network in the same fashion you would on any other LAN w/ the same speeds. Gigabyte Internet anyone? Perhaps make an online OS that give people control over all application and information on there system via the GLAN. Thus allowing companies, and ever one for that matter, to share applications as though they were on a LAN. . . Envision what you can from here. A world of open source apps. Total control of virus, spyware, poppups, spam, and hackers. Here, just think of anything then apply it to a GLAN infrastructure.
Some people use vision to avoid stumbling, while others use it to circumnavigate the blind on their path to brilliance. Which are you? - mousky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That is 140,000 shares of Class A common stock, which is a meaningless stock when it comes to control of Google. Brin and Page own 79 percent of the more important Class B shares, you know the shares that give them control over Google.
- jefferson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Im surprised they still show up for work, I sure as hell wouldnt.
I'd spend it all on high class hookers and booze. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0so what makes selling over inflated stock unethical? i guess they should wait until they can sell it at a loss.. not like that kinda of information isnt public
and adsence is far more than search engine advertising.. just happens to be on a whole lot of pages on the net besides google..
as far as i know not many stock advisors have a sell rating for google.
i still highly doubt they are doing this soley for the cash.. but i guess they could be buying all that dark fiber for their own personal use to have a great connection no matter where they are..
pretty sure they are building the online library just so they dont have to buy books anymore.
I am pretty sure both of them spend their spare time killing kittens.
i wish Bill would hurry up and buy them and make us all safer. - SbooX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Don't know, but its probably the same reason Yahoo! people are doing it to. To be covered in solid gold.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=YHOO - a_greer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sounds like the movie "Wall Street" where Gordon Geko stands up at the shareholders meetings after having bought a controlling stake in the firm and fires the board -- refferancing the ~5% ownership of the company between all 30 execs...and ends the speech ith the most famous line from the movie; "Greed is good!"
- viday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They are not stupid. They know as well as we do that google isn't worth anywhere near $87B. They're getting out while they can and they have been doing it pretty quietly too, huh. Gotta love the greed!
- bill.clark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Maybe they're afraid Ballmer's going to "***** kill Google!" ;)
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is