Slashdot Mirror
Google to be Added to S&P 500 Index
hrbrmstr writes "According to marketwatch.com, Google is being added to the S&P 500, replacing Burlington Resources Inc. While this has provided a short-term boost to the stock price, time will tell what the overall impact will be on this respected index and the institutions (i.e. mutual funds) that follow it."
for Google's corporate image. I wonder when Google makes the Dow Jones? Seems like how Google's stock goes is a big indicator of how the market goes.
Moderation in All Things... Especially Moderation - gurutc
The P/E and forward P/E of the S&P has been getting higher and higher every decade. This won't help. Sure they have to replace Burlington resources with something, but Google? Well, I guess they offset GM for the short term at least.
Right now Google is built on an advertising model. They are just one decline in online advertising away from having everything fall out from under them. If they are going to stay a serious contender, they need to take the corporate search market very, very seriously and make it a key component of their product offerings.
For all that can be said about them, Microsoft at least sells products as the foundation of their business. As long as people need a good (yes, XP is good for many users, this coming from a Mac fan) OS for their cheap PCs or an office suite, Microsoft has a strong position. Google, not so much. They may have the best search product, but they are dependent on online advertising, which can decline even if their engine reachs near sentient comprehension of what you really want to know.
It's a different bubble, though. It's more of an advertising bubble not a tech bubble.
Has anyone really measured the value of a Google add? Are they effective? Maybe it's already been done. Just from my own experience I rarely notice the adds. So if the advertisers would suddenly decide such adds aren't that valuable and stop advertising you'd see Google either change create more intrusive adds or they're going to have to find a completely different source of income.
--
Q
I would take it a step further. I would say it's a market that can, and will, turn upside down at some point. Google keeps expanding and, IMHO, keeps taking their eye off the prize. I'm increasingly having to go deeper and deeper into the search results to find the information I'm looking for and that doesn't bode well. That's exactly why I started using Google in the first place, to find what I was looking for and find it quickly. If some other search engine comes along that does it better, I'll switch in a heartbeat and I know I'm not alone. If I was, Google wouldn't be nearly as popular as it is now because almost every Windows user would stick with the MSN search that IE defaults to. I would argue that people don't use Google because it's Google, people use Google because it works. They are a website, not an OS, and unlike Microsoft people can and will change if somebody comes along that does it better.
Their stock price is inflated beyond belief and worth only as much as someone will pay me.
Kind of like...oh, anything else that you own or produce?
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
The difference is that today, Google is a household name internationally, that has billions in profits. Slightly different than investing in Dr. Koop.com.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
he's talking about dividends. Since Google is pretty hardcore about never splitting stock, you will never get any dividends by purchasing Google stock. Investing in prettymuch any other company (besides Berkshire Hathaway and a few other notable exceptions) you will have a shot at getting dividends on a semi-regular basis. That's free stocks, which translates into free money on top of the increased valuation of your stocks over time ...
m &q=l&c=%5EGSPC,%5EIXIC,%5EDJI: the results are suprising: they are only keeping up with the market. After we get over the first year of hype they are really doing no better than the aggregates. That's pretty sad. Now granted there is some volatility in there from the DOJ and the china stuff, they may rebound, but really they should be doing better. Maybe if they had stuck with the basics...
The problem here is although they are trying to model after Berkshire Hathaway, look at this 6-month trend: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=
According to this guy, this is a big problem with the S&P 500 index funds. When a company gets added, it's riding high. The company that gets bumped is low. So if you follow the S&P, you're selling low and buying high.