Slashdot Mirror
Google Files for IPO
bobwyman manages to be the first to submit this story, apparently by using his own web service: "Well, the PubSub.com SEC Edgar notification system just sent a message a few minutes ago saying that Google has finally filed their S-1 to go public. See: Google's S-1 which was accepted by the SEC at 2004-04-29T13:53:49-04:00. If you had had a PubSub.com SEC Edgar subscription, you would have been one of the first to see this filing."
I almost fell out of my chair when I read how large they are in terms of revenues and earnings! Did anyone else think Google was maybe a $10 million dollar-revenue company or what?
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
How long after the stock goes public will the general population be able to purchase some? What's the game plan for these people - is Google worth the buy?
mix_master_mike
vafrous
Google's doing things the right way?
From the yahoo.com link:
The Mountain View-based company earned $105.6 million, or 41 cents per share, on revenue of $962 million last year. Google got off to a fast start this year, with a first-quarter profit of $64 million, or 24 cents per share -- more than doubling its earnings of $25.8 million, or 10 cents per share, at the same time last year.
It's refreshing to see an internet company actually pulling a good profit. Hopefully google will be able to use the money it raises to actually grow their business, and not do as so many other companies have done and just go out and spend their new cash on worthless crap (*cough*mp3.com*cough*). It'll also be very interesting to see how an auction-based IPO works for a company with as much interest as google. Interesting quotes from the SEC form:
We will not shy away from high-risk, high-reward projects because of short term earnings pressure.
It is important to us to have a fair process for our IPO that is inclusive of both small and large investors.
Casual Games/Downloads
From the Introduction to the Letter from the Founders:
Google is not a conventional company. We do not intend to become one.
The coolest voice ever.
The initial option grants to many of our senior management and key employees are fully vested. Therefore, these employees may not have sufficient financial incentive to stay with us.
Many of our senior management personnel and other key employees have become, or will soon become, substantially vested in their initial stock option grants. While we often grant additional stock options to management personnel and other key employees after their hire dates to provide additional incentives to remain employed by us, their initial grants are usually much larger than follow-on grants. Employees may be more likely to leave us after their initial option grant fully vests, especially if the shares underlying the options have significantly appreciated in value relative to the option exercise price. We have not given any additional grants to Eric, Larry or Sergey. Larry and Sergey are fully vested, and only a small portion of Eric's stock is subject to future vesting.
Have you Meta Moderated t
1) An IPO is a huge distraction. I doubt, given the hype, they'll be able to stay focused on their competitors.
2) Their competitors are coming on strong. Y! is making gains in the space.
3) They could suffer from a huge brain drain. If the IPO is uber successful then a lot of folks will get very rich and leave.
That being said, I wouldn't mind having some $.25 fully-vested google options right about now...
"Where quality is like a dead stinking rat - you just can't miss it."
Looks like they're going with the share auction plan. Seems like the SEC filing is buried, but the key details seem to be:
1) Underwriters manage the auction
2) You pre-qualify, etc.
3)You bid (and can multiple bid - ie, one bid for 9K shares at $20, another bid for 1K shares at $40, you'll get 10K shares if the price is $15)
4)The reject "manipulative" or "speculative" bids
5)They calculate a clearance price that'd sell all the shares offered according to the bids, and accept bids accordingly
6)They determine whether to hand out all the shares bid, give everyone 80% of what they asked for, give the bid/little guys everything they asked for, or let original bid price determine who gets everything they asked for.
I'd be really interested in what some professional equity people think of this process, it seems really interesting to me.
I hope Google keep to their game-plan that's made them the best, and richest search engine in the world. I hope shareholders don't start voting for popups on the main page, and lots of links to cheap holiday deals.
Get your own free personal location tracker
Yeah, because every company that has gone public has stopped innovative R&D and constant steady growth. Look at some of the major public companies out there (3M and General Electric) to see what R&D can really accomplish. Add in the fact that Google will gain at least $2 billion that they can use towards more services, current research, and increasing infrastructure. Your comment is baseless.
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
Although of course this was inevitable, it is somewhat disheartening. Google will become a company that is steered by stockholders. As everybody knows, most stockholders don't care about being not evil, or really anything other than profit.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the guys who own Google currently like profit, but public companies are different. A stockholder wouldn't normally feel bad if the company they owned some fraction of used terabytes of user information for slightly shady practices. The only publicly held company I truly trust is Apple, and of course there's no logical reason for that.
- Allen Pike
Altering time, one time at a time.
This, of course, has some Underwriters worried, given that a fee in the range of 5% could yeild over 100 million dollars for an IPO such as google.
Many believe, however, that this will not indicate a trend due to the fact that this may be easy for google, because they are allready a household name. In most other cases, an auction will not be so easy.
Top ten reasons not buy Google IPO
I'm not trolling, I'm just a pessimist...
I'm sorry, but it's not going to beat Google.
You see, the open source community is capable of some amazing feats, but half of the most skilled search engineers in the world work for Google. They have an obscene collection of fantastically talented people working on theory that few others understand.
As others realise the money in search try and compete with Google the premium on employing search experts will go up so high that there won't be many with the principles to work on open source.
It's sad but true.foo mane padme hum
Here's the wsj article(for subscribers).
An interesting paragraph-
"According to the filing, Chief Executive Eric Schmidt made $ 250,000 in salarly and got a $301,556 bonus last year, plus other compensation of $2,894. Co-founders Mr. Brin, now president of technology and Mr. Page, now president of products, both got salaries of $150,000 and bonuses of 206,556.".
And you can compare the pay with other US companies. Other companies can learn from google here.
For those worried that Google will become a wall street pawn, here's what the founders are doing about it-
"The offering documents were filed with a lengthy letter, called the "Owner's Manual" for the company. In it, co-founder Larry Page said he and co-founder Sergey Brin have worried that the "standard structure of public ownership may jeopardize the independence and focused objectivity that have been most important in Google's past success and that we consider most fundamental for its future."
As a result, the founders "have designed a corporate structure that will protect Google's ability to innovate and retain its most distinctive characteristics."
Part of that will be a dual-class structure, in which the founders will hold a higher-vote class of stock that will allow them to control much of the company's fate.".
Bottom line? Once you go public, wall street makes you ride to its tunes. Preventing that at google will establish it not only as the intelligent company but a financially astute one too.
Side note-Berkshire hathaway is planning to soak up as many shares are available.
Any ideas what Google will do with the money it raises?
There are only two ways a stock has value; if it pays a dividend, or if there is prospect of somebody buying it.
Now, why would any stock that doesn't pay dividends have anybody interested in buying it? There are three:
1) It gives control over the company's money
2) A dividend is expected in the future
3) The price of the stock is expected to be bidded up despite the lack of tangible benefits to owning it.
1) is essentially zero for non-voting stock; since it exerts no control over the company, it exerts no influence over the company's money. Your only hope is that the voting stock owners sign a merger deal that results in you getting reimbursed.
2) assumes that they will eventually pay a dividend. Since the company says it doesn't intend to, you're betting that they'll change their mind. Since your share is non-voting, you merely have to hope.
3) is the Greater Fool theory.
Non-voting no-dividend stock is almost worthless; its only real value is the possibility of a future change of policy by the voting-stock owners to give up control (a merger) or pay dividends. To value it highly, then, one must expect a Greater Fool to come along and buy it despite the lack of tangibles.