Slashdot Mirror
Google in Talks to Buy YouTube
tessaiga writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google is in talks to buy YouTube for about $1.6 billion. YouTube users watch more that 100 million videos daily, and the site's market share tops that of similar services offered by Google and other popular Web sites. This comes after a story earlier this morning that co-founder Sergey Brin is pushing for Google to cut back on the volume of products being offered, complaining that 'I was getting lost in the sheer volume of the products we were releasing'. Guess Google Video is one of the products making the approved shortlist."
What do you want to bet that the programmers at YouTube would have never made it through Google's interview process?
This story bring whole new meaning to nothing to see here :)
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
I didn't expect that!
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Surely they'd only be buying the YouTube name. Google has way more hardware, and an already succesful video product out there. Maybe they are trying to eliminate the competition, and get the ad revenue all for themselves. Is YouTube really worth that much to them though?
Its funny how every day the lines between google and microsoft blur. If microsoft tried this an unholy hell would be released..
Google Video is probably the first example that comes to mind of the emergent Yet Another Half-Baked Google Technology phenomenon. By buying YouTube, they get a best-of-breed player on their side without diverting more in-house R&D resources. Given their (Google's) cash reserves, it's the right thing to do.
IMO, this offer really seems to add credibility to the "myspace sale was a scam" theory.
"cut back on the volume of products being offered"
Didn't we learn last week that you can work on anything you want at Google?
...it's amazing how not sucking works wonders for the way people interpret your actions and qualify the possible repercussions.
These stories are free but worth money.
Gotta love the related story on this one. Only a moron would buy Youtube, indeed.
YouTube links are the only "You gotta see this." links that I get that I actually open on occassion. I think Google is making a great move here, if it's true. Given the other recent story about Google allowing google home page elements to be posted in websites, YouTube is a natural eyeball catcher to pull in people off personal websites.
"Don't you know you're going to shock the monkey?"- Peter Gabriel
I can't pass this link around to my friends -- the1r elliturit.
These stories are free but worth money.
In other news, Google has voted successfully to change the company's motto from "Don't be Evil" to "The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world!"
I want a 120 character signature! Please can I have a 120 character signature? I really really want one! 120 characters!
"Maybe they are trying to eliminate the competition, and get the ad revenue all for themselves."
I hope if Google bought Youtube, google sticks with the brand name 'Youtube' instead of renaming it to 'Google Video'.
Wincopy
How'd that yahoo-facebook deal go? Not a single verification of the story in 2 weeks?
Whaddya know. Not all rumors are true. Last time, it was 'industry executives', this time it's 'a person familiar with the matter'.
They plan to call it "GooTube."
You don't want to know what the new logo looks like.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Being the big gorilla when it comes to a repository of videos fits with their strategy of doing search well - having all media (and related searches) at their fingertips will really help them propel that aspect of their business forward. I totally agree with Sergey. While I can see why they might want to release spreadsheets and word processing to compete with MS / Office, having all those products doesn't help them do what they do best. I think they should stick with their core strength - improving the way people find stuff. Diversifying too much will just leave them open to be dropped like so many SEs of the past (Altavista, etc.)
What, didn't Googles legal team already have enough work with the on-line book thing?
What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
from the dogs-and-cats-living-together-mass-hysteria dept.
What? It hasn't even been a year since the last time.
Oh my.
Have you read my journal today?
I always said google were "morons".. Great big, Filthy rich, billionaire morons.
God Be Gone
or do youTube your Google
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
Not only do the YouTube owners get $1.6 billion for their organization, but they also get out of the recent copyright allegations.
Google hasn't really promoted the brand of any previous acquisitions, such as Writely... Seems to me they've mostly just ditched an acquisition's brand name and assimilated its tech.
This then poses an interesting brand question: YouTube has, oh, about 10^4 times more brand equity than anything else Google has snapped up before, so how would we see this branded? Google YouTube? Google Video Powered by YouTube? YouTube powered by Google?
Your mind is clear / The things that you fear / Will fade with how much you / Believe what you hear
An easy way to vote for duplicate movies! Quite often I find movies with an identical title, run-length and even preview icon. It would be nice if you could (similar to "flag as in-appropriate") you could flag them as "dublicate of:URL". This shouldn't of course remove the duplicates immediately, as one of them could be higher quality, but if there are enough votes it should group them in search results and combine reviews and ratings.
Well a few things here
1. Google is buying out their biggest rival in google video, by adding the huge library and viwership, google video will be the place to go for anything related to videos online and give the already high traffic on google related services a boost
2. But it still doesn't solve the copyright problems google is going to face with RIAA and MPAA
3. This tatic (buying out competitor) sounds a lot like something MS would do, is this a sign that google is finally in a stage of major corporation like MS?
Google video may be the technically superior service, but it is almost completely lacking in social interaction. Youtube encourages you to have a vlog, to post video responses etc. Google video (at least from the standpoint of a Youtube user) is a little cold.
Google may well have the hardware, but they've a lot to learn about what makes a site popular. Myspace has to be one of the ugliest sites around yet its popularity is ever soaring because it is social. Google video just is not.
At the end of the day, Youtube is synonymous with the online video hosting/sharing community and that is what Google are paying £850 million for. That and the ability to integrate with existing Google products (Google calendar & vlog combined? That's some powerful stuff right there.)
"No, no, no, don't tug on that! You never know what it might be attached to."
How about actually presenting arguments and counter-arguments instead of simply modding me Troll, you anonymous fucking dipshit coward. Of course, since you modded me Troll for opposing terrorism, you must be a leftist and/or multiculturalist, so you're incapable of rational arguing anyway. Carry on.
This is a concern with the YouTube system. If the reports turn out to be true, a bunch of pro-jihadists get together and complain about anti-jihad videos on YouTube.
Being concerned about anti-jihad videos being banned at YouTube is no troll.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Did you see the LA Times article? One of our all-time favorites, Rob Enderle, took a nice shot at the enemy of his long-time employer. Deserved or not, it's meaningless when the source is considered.
What is the source of his notoriety, anyway? How does a one-person consulting shop get the attention he does? Discuss...
The secret to that song's short-lived success is no mystery: people are sheep, so when we hear a chorus of other sheep sing along, something clicks and we think "hey, this is cool" and join in.
Wait... I think I just described youtube and myspace also.
Isn't google developing technology that would identify what you're watching on TV based on an audio footprint? Perhpas they'll use that technology to identify videos that use copyrighted material and block them from being posted? But then the question is, would their service remain nearly as popular? If they go through with the purchase and don't do something about copyright infringement, they'll be taking on a huge legal liability. If they do something about it, then they may have purchased youtube for a certain price only to slash its value in half.
Last week Mark Cuban made comments along the line that anyone that buys YouTube is insane. His reasoning was that YouTube is going to get hammered with copyright lawsuits once someone that can pay out buys the company. I really think he's correct. I don't know how many copyrighted news stories, etc, I've watched on YouTube but it's a lot.
Basically the only reason why Youtube is popular right now is because they're the only video service that doesn't try to keep you from uploading blatantly illegal materials. If Google buys Youtube, either they'll have to force everyone to stop being illegal-- destroying what makes youtube popular-- or they'll keep the service as it is, but being a massively more appealing target for litigation than the penniless Youtube they'll suddenly be drowned in lawsuits.
Google look like their joining that happy band of companies that grew so big and had so much cash burning a hole in their pocket that they started buying insane companies for insane prices.
1. Invent Google algorithm
2. Invent Adsense
3. Profit!
4. Profit!
5. Buy loss making company for huge amount of money
6. No more profit!
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
collect all the videos ever made of young girls dancing around and lip synching to POP songs.
This is one buyout that doesn't surprise me at all. Google put a lot into Google video, and just as it opened up, YouTube's popularity exploded, stealing Google video's thunder. Personally I think Google is to blame for the failure of Google video-by requiring users to upload via software instead of the web, they added in one more step, which is one step too many for the masses of people out there who can barely manage to compose a movie with the tools that come in the OS.
So now Google's about to spend 1.7 billion to make up for a really dumb mistake. I can't say I agree, but I'm definitely not surprised.
Weren't there some (probably unsubstantiated) rumors floating around about iTV having direct access to Google Video? If so, Steve must be rubbing his hands together in glee about this. :)
Yeah, modding me a troll clearly shows what a rational and well-reasoned basis there is for your ideology. You win at Internet, sir.
7.?????
8.Profit!
And YOU win at being an asshole!
YouTube is definitely a more intensely used product than Google Video. The data shows this. Google Video received a quick boost in traffic after they added the "Video" link to their homepage, but all other performance indicators are flat for them. More people visit YouTube, they come back to the site more often, and spend more time on the site each time they visit. Take a look at our YouTube vs Google Video analysis at (posted yesterday):
http://blog.compete.com
Just imagine a service that tightly integrated all the great stuff being created and submitted on YouTube, with their Orkut social networking platform (popular abroad), with Dodgeball mobile features thrown in + targeted contextual adverts.
Google uses the flash player too so I'm suprised so many people are dissing on YouTube. Im the first person to jump on myspace hate or microsoft hate but this one doesn't make any sense to me.
Quicktime/WMP/etc are all horrible from what I've seen. Half the time some codec I apparently don't have screws up everything for quicktime. WMP is a lost cause. Don't even get me started on Real.
Google's setup is good but the size of their videos is pathetically small compared to YouTube. So I find myself wondering if everyone thinks YouTube is so horrible what service is supposed to do the job of video hosting better?
There's nothing people don't notice.
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
If Google purchases Youtube they would be able to capitilize more of the advertising market.
----- You know you have ego issues when you register a domain in your name.
O RLY, sir? How am I being an asshole? Do explain.
If Google did buy out YouTube, it could simply rebrand its Google Video site with YouTube icons and the MySpace kids wouldn't even notice.
Google faces significant risks from rushing in behind YT, because Google has money and is eminently suable. They can't afford to simply let copywrite material fly, because the studios will attack them just as newspapers and book publishers already have.
A RoughlyDrafted Magazine article looking at Apple's iTV, and why Apple is in deals with Google, explains more about why YouTube is such a mess and why big pockets will just make that mess more problematic:
Apple's iTV and Alternative Content: the future of podcasting, porn, indie media.
The following article is getting high ratings as well, on how Apple is positioning the iTV as an extension of the iPod platform in casual gaming, living room Widgets, and interactive content, with a history on how Apple dropped the ball with HyperCard, how the web took over, and why Apple has something new to offer today :
iTV Interactive: The Apple Game Console
I like the tub-thumping song. I probably wouldn't have heard it at all if it hadn't been popular, but that's true of most songs. (There's a reason they call it pop music...)
Myspace is different from the other examples because of the network effect. You go to a social networking (or auction, or "news for nerds, stuff that matters") site because of the other people who go there, not the site itself.
Google's move makes sense from a strategically defensive point of view. They don't want Microsoft or Yahoo to purchase YouTube, because that would give them a huge immediate advantage in terms of userbase.
As companies like Yahoo and Microsoft are built upon the "lock-em-in" strategy, that could effectively nullify Google's "out-innovate-and-perform" strategy which otherwise would slowly beat YouTube by attrition.
Therefore, it makes sense for Google to purchase YouTube purely for the immediate userbase. Otherwise, it might take a few years for the "lock-em-in" ploy to start deteriorating, which would just set the entire industry back in terms of actual benefit and usability of the internet for video-on-demand.
And yes, I do imply a certain degree of benevolence on the part of Google. Even though their accountants may say the deal isn't financially necessary or beneficial in the long run, I think they'd rather just not have to deal with yet another multi-year dismantling of another defective-by-design competitor in yet another sector.
Once again, hooray for Google!
I think that this is just a rumour and that it will not happen. It might be a ploy to drive up the bidding price by other companies that are actually looking at YouTube.
A few reasons why:
1. When was the last time Google spent a billion dollars on any takeover -- the answer, I think, is never. They've made small purchases here and there of $50-200M, but this would be the largest and most complex by far. (Unless the price being rumoured is wrong too, which is possible). Why rock the boat with large outside purchases?
2. The liability is HUGE. It just doesn't seem smart to me. Mark Cuban summed it up nicely last week, YouTube is a lawsuit waiting to happen. EVEN IF Google immediately axed the copywritten material (which itself is no easy task), they would STILL be liable for previous infringments! And how on earth is Google (or anyone) supposed to monitor new content for infringements? That's a LOT of manpower. Google has a lot of smart folks, but I don't think that even they would be able to automate that.
3. What's wrong with Google Video that can't be solved with a few programmers? Google has the ability to support Google Video in ways that it hasn't exploited yet. GoogleToolbar, GMail, Adwords and Adsense... all of those can be used to help promote Google Video when the time is right. Mind you, my point 2 about liability would apply to Google Video too.
Anyway, there's my prediction. YouTube will get sold someday for some outrageous sum, but my guess is that it'll go to someone with more media ties.
If youtube gets shelved, and google can innovate fast enough, google video will be the only game in town for user generated shitty content (apple doens't compete well here).
...they could buy over 2.5 million PS3s! Sony would probably be appreciative...
... for Google to go the Microsoft way : If you can't beat them, buy them!
You all have Oo.o and Firefox, so get World Wind.
Welcome to Communist-/., where if they can't beat you, they get jealous and ridicule you to death.
Yeah all you geeks know that a website's true value is in just the programming, and not the audience nor reach.
Ok now go back to your labs, back to work on that PhD.
They have been removing a lot of the propaganda/snuff vids, but users have to find and flag them first. And they quickly get resubmitted under different names. From the NYT article linked on the blog:
It's unfortunate that this sort of thing happens, but it isn't fair to say YouTube (or Google, which the article also mentions) is therefore supporting Islamic fundamentalism. It's a problem of any "democratic" system: you have to find a fair way to moderate the hordes of jerks out there that have the same access as everyone else. The service wouldn't be as popular (or profitable) if they had to review each video before it's posted, and people will of course take advantage of that. Additional checks may be needed.
I also saw the removed MM video, and IIRC, it did intersperse a number of the "offensive" cartoon images between images of angry mobs. An important (American) conservative* value is that people have the right to express whatever idea they want, but no one is obligated to provide a forum or an audience for that expression.
*Not that it's an exclusively conservative value, of course.
How Much Would Founders and VCs Make on A YouTube Sale? YouTube may be wanting to sell because there are so many questions about its future. How much would everyone make if YouTube sold today? If the company sold at $1.5 billion, assuming the rule of 3, i.e. VCs own 1/3 and Founders own 1/3 and employees own 1/3, then here is what everyone would make: Sequoia Capital - $500 million. They invested about $30 million So, that would be 16x their money. Not bad. Not a Google homerun, but great for less than two years worth of work. More ...
http://mrwavetheory.blogspot.com/2006/10/how-much- would-founders-and-vcs-make.html
Web companies always buying each other out. Often it is the end user that suffers. When one company buys the other, What happens to the users data and personal information is what I always ask myself. We already know Google never deletes anything, if even the users delete their personal information... WTF? At any rate: Web 3.0 = Only Google :-}