Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google buys DoubleClick for $3.1 Billion

Posted by Zonk on from the still-waiting-for-my-buyout-offer dept.

marvinalone writes "The New York Times reports that Google has purchased DoubleClick. That seems to be the conclusion to the speculation we've talked about earlier. From the article: 'Google reached an agreement today to acquire DoubleClick, the online advertising company, from two private equity firms for $3.1 billion in cash, the companies announced, an amount that was almost double the $1.65 billion in stock that Google paid for YouTube late last year.'"

21 of 351 comments (clear)

  1. whoa by rbochan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now Microsoft's anti-spyware will absolutely flag it!

    --
    ...Rob
    The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    1. Re:whoa by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Heh, Microsoft should be concerned with Google; they're everywhere that Microsoft wants to go, and if you don't keep moving as a corporation, you lose investors.

      When I saw this headline, all I could think was "Google buys up another chunk of the internet." Seriously -- DoubleClick is everywhere. It's almost like google's trying to become the web.

      --
      The big brain am winning again! I am the greetist! Now I am leaving for no particular raisin!
  2. Let me be the first one to say... by logixoul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google is the new Microsoft. :^)

    1. Re:Let me be the first one to say... by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I, for one, welcome our new online advertising overlords, and I'd like to remind them that as a trusted member of Slashdot, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground click farms.

      --
      "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
  3. obligatory by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

    DoubleClick got owned!

    no, really!

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  4. I felt a great disturbance in the Force... by h4ter · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...as if millions of chairs suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

  5. What ever happened to ... by LorenzoV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... "Do no evil?"

    Every doubleclick host that I can identify is permanently blocked here for web bugs and Dartmail. I don't see that changing any time soon, either.

    One could hope that Google will change Doubleclick's behavior before putting their own name on the services.

    1. Re:What ever happened to ... by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Do no evil", if it was ever anything other than clever PR, went away the moment they caved to China. It actually probably went away, again if it ever was even a real credo, long before that.

  6. I hope it was for the client list by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I sincerely hope Google will simply replace all DoubleClick-crippled sites with AdSense. DoubleClick's tracking cookies are the reason I block web ads.

    1. Re:I hope it was for the client list by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um, might want to know more about how ad sense works then before making that statement.

      Doubleclick operated under the '3rd party' cookie system. Sites hosted thier cookies, and users of modern browsers had the ability to decide, or 'opt in' to being tracked by third party cookies. Of course, most browsers by default blocked them, and life was good.

      Google ad sense operates on a different level...using cookies is just part of the game. Via IP pingbacks, toolbar tracking, and account identification, users may unkowningly be giving out alot more data than they realize.

      Say for instance that you use Gmail. or any Google service that requires login. Google can track you via that login to each site you visit that has a google ad (70% of the net from what I understand). See, doubleclick never had this part of the equation...they never had account info. Google can tie your IPs, usernames, email content, and web browsing activity...and you can't do jack about it (short of blocking the google scripts themselves).

      Even without login account info, Google has the ability to track your individual machine via IP pingbacks. If you nav to page one, the google ad gets your exposed ip, then the next page you visit that has a google ad...yep..that ip is used to track that navigation. No cookie needed. Of course, if your behind a firewall, only the firewall ip would get exposed. But still...do you really want to give anyone that much information about you?

  7. Now slashdot needs a new meme by bugnuts · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gootube was easy.....

    Doogleclick?

    Doobleclick?

    Goobleclick?

    Youtoogleclick?

    1. Re:Now slashdot needs a new meme by HOTTILA.COM · · Score: 5, Funny

      YouGoClick

      --
      Strive to be happy...
  8. Re:Won't change much for me by alphamugwump · · Score: 5, Funny

    I block ads at my firewall with moblock/bluetack. Then, I block them again with privoxy. Then, I use the pgl blocklists with konqueror. I also change my MAC address every 3 hours, do all my browsing through Tor, and clear my cookies when I'm done.

    Yeah, I'm a little obsessive.

  9. Re:It's f*****d company all over again. by Araxen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    3.1 Billion or let Microsoft automatically become the #2(Maybe #1?) On-line advertising service on the Internet? Which do you think Google is going to choose?

  10. Re:It's f*****d company all over again. by coredog64 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft bidding on DoubleClick brings to mind the following joke:

    A duck hunter is out early one morning hunting ducks. He's not having a lot of luck and he's about ready to pack it in and go home.
    Then he catches a break and shoots a duck. The duck falls to the ground on the other side of a fence. He hops the fence to grab the duck
    and a farmer appears from nowhere and asks "What are you doing with my duck?" The hunter says "That's my duck! I shot it." The farmer replies "Doesn't matter -- it's on my land. But I'll tell you what. We'll take turns kicking each other in the nuts as hard as we can until one of us gives up. The winner keeps the duck. Oh, and I kick first." So the farmer winds up and kicks the hunter square in the nuts. The pain is so awful the hunter throws up and then collapses. 10 minutes later, he tentatively gets to his feet and says "Okay, my turn." To which the farmer replies "That's okay, you can keep the duck."

    I have a sneaking suspicion Microsoft wasn't that interested in DoubleClick. But they wanted to make damn sure that Google overpaid for it.

  11. they never said BUY no evil... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    :)

  12. Re:Those generic eBay ads by Burning+Plastic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Still doesn't compare to the "Buy Steve Irwin Dead on eBay" offers that were popping up after the event...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/05/ebay_steve _irwin/

    --
    [All Your Fish Are Belong To Us]
  13. haha by Traa · · Score: 5, Funny

    You think you are in pain for having to swallow that our great Google bought doubleclick?

    Ha, you could imagine it like this: The people at doubleclick just got paid 3.1 BILLION dollars.

    By Google.

    Have a great weekend.

  14. Re:Sad to say, but by FutureDomain · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does DC have something technologically interesting under the hood somewhere? Think a minute about all the advertising capital that Doubleclick has! It has banner ads everywhere, and advertising partners to buy all those ads. Now every Doubleclick advertising partner is also a Google advertising partner. Google is positioning itself as the Internet advertising company.

    Although I also wandered what Google was getting itself into buying a company that notoriously places tracking cookies on computers everywhere, I can see what they're trying to do. I only hope that Google will clean them up instead of Doubleclick dirtying Google. They should stop putting tracking cookies on people's computers, remove any tracking cookies already on the computer, and deny any overly flashy banner ads. That would strongly increase Google's credibility and help eliminate some of the garbage on the Internet.
    --
    Hydraulic pizza oven!! Guided missile! Herring sandwich! Styrofoam! Jayne Mansfield! Aluminum siding! Borax!
  15. Re:D'OH! by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Now $300-$500 million might be more acceptable.

    Based on your careful due diligence, no doubt. Or is that just some number you pulled out of your ass that "seems more reasonable" to you.
    So what you think happened? Google called them up, got a quote of 3.1 Billion, and said "OK, if that's what you think it's worth."?

  16. Re:Sad to say, but by Prune · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Are you shitting me? Google's tracking is far more nefarious. I quote another post from this thread by an Anonymous Coward:

    Google ad sense operates on a different level...using cookies is just part of the game. Via IP pingbacks, toolbar tracking, and account identification, users may unkowningly be giving out alot more data than they realize.

    Say for instance that you use Gmail. or any Google service that requires login. Google can track you via that login to each site you visit that has a google ad (70% of the net from what I understand). See, doubleclick never had this part of the equation...they never had account info. Google can tie your IPs, usernames, email content, and web browsing activity...and you can't do jack about it (short of blocking the google scripts themselves). Even without login account info, Google has the ability to track your individual machine via IP pingbacks. If you nav to page one, the google ad gets your exposed ip, then the next page you visit that has a google ad...yep..that ip is used to track that navigation. No cookie needed. Of course, if your behind a firewall, only the firewall ip would get exposed. But still...do you really want to give anyone that much information about you?

    --
    "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."