What I'd like to see:
Tech Companies: Senator, are you ashamed?
Senator Lantos: Ashamed of what, I'm very proud of everything that I have done.
Tech Companies: Are you ashamed that because of the policies of the US, we have such a huge trade deficit to China? Are you ashamed that we owe so much debt to a country that has differing opinions about human right? Are you ashamed that we fought an unjust war in Iraq? Are you ashamed of OUR human rights violations in Git-mo? Are you ashamed of our prisoner abuses in Abu Graib? Senator, I can go on and on. Please answer the questions!
[Sigh] The hypocrisy...
Basically, the adults only part was only available after a post delivery hack/mod. Why doesn't someone mod games and release it to the press to show that any game could potentially be adults only?
Turn the Chinese army in BattleField2 into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the cheerleaders in Madden into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the characters in some Disney game into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the Tetris pieces into... you guessed it.. naked playboy bunnies. You get the gist of it...
The issue that the general public is not understanding is that post-delivery mods can transform any game into a new game.
Are ads and 'google appliance' sales enough to drive the $189 per-share stock price? -- You do realize this question has no meaning. You can't compare stock prices to stock prices because they have different numbers of outstanding shares. The number you should be looking at is the market cap. This takes the number of shares into comparison. The market cap for GOOG is about the same as that of YHOO. Of the two, which do you think will be more successfull?
I wouldn't say that Google has low profits. They are already profitable. They've been profitable even before the IPO. Their last report fourth quarter net incoming was $204.1 million.
Are ads and 'google appliance' sales enough to drive the $189 per-share stock price?
I just wish I got into GOOG at 85.
How does that affect anything at all? Google ranking is done by links. The relevancy of an url to your search is based on this ranking. Applying the attribute to a tags will have no value.
Unless I'm not understanding what your intentions are.
Either show up to the movie early or walk out of the movie with a sore neck...that's the rule around here at least.
Movie theaters in NYC get pretty packed even before the movie starts. If you're not there on time or early, don't even think about sitting with your friends...
If you read a large number of blogs or content per day it may be a lot easier to get the feed rather than visit each of the site to check if it has been updated or not. At work, we have a news feed and a slashdot feed. There's no point in constantly hitting reload on/. to see if there is a new story. Now, I only visit if there is a new story and it is something that I'm interested in.
Been following them for the past year. They are facing a problem of becoming a commodity. Each independent cable/satellite company is rolling out their own home grown DVR box. DirectTV dropped them last March and divested from them quite a bit.
the last big news was that Microsoft just signed a deal with Comcast to provide DVR service, which directly competes with TIVO.
This ad-skipping commercial is good news for us shareholders. They need to prove that they have alternative revenues than just subscription.
Now to put on my consumer/techy hat. Why would anyone have a problem of seeing a banner ad rather than a blank screen when they fast forward? It's not hurting you in any way. I understand that since you pay 12.95 a month you should get it ad-free. But why not make the same request to cable television? I'm paying $33/month for cable TV, should I have the same expectation that Comedy Central is ad-free?
Errr.. MTV's Rock the Vote drive has always been non-partisan. Saying the Republicans should be embarassed for resorting to this is just as likely as what you said above.
I have one for work at an investment bank [not through AOL]. Basically it generates an unique number every 60 seconds. AOL doesn't have to generate it nonstop. Basically they just generate it based on the timestamp at the time of login.
Why would you think they would update every second even if nobody is logging in? That would be pretty piss-poor design.
I'm guessing you didn't read the footnote:
$67 million Palmyra Atoll dollars
With a population of 0, I'm not sure that Palmyra Atoll dollars are in high demand
Is it legal? Yes it is considering Amazon is paying licensing fees to Google
Anyone else think A9 is just diverting requests to Google and reformatting the results? Yes, that's EXACTLY what it does
This isn't A9 vs Google, this is Google vs Google+AmazonAds. Wonder who's gonna win... Those are Google AdClicks. So Google makes money from you viewing those ads on Amazon. In addition, Google is a major investor in A9. So basically Amazon is doing all the grunt work and Google is raking in the financial benefits.
I would say, RTA(rticle)!
Movielink (www.movielink.com) is the leading broadband movie download service offering U.S. customers an extensive selection of new and classic hit movies, foreign films and other hard-to-find content. The service is owned and operated by Movielink, LLC, a joint venture of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Universal Studios and Warner Bros. Studios. Movielink draws its content offerings from the vast libraries of those studios as well as Walt Disney Pictures, Miramax, Artisan and others on a non-exclusive basis.
They have permission to do so because they own the copyright for it whereas you don't and cannot sell something that you don't own [legally]
Re:Location, location
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This was the original idea back in the 1950s for the future of nuclear power. People would buy their own power stations to put in their yards to generate power. But power companies were against this [no money to make] and people were in an uproar about safety issues
It seems like what this service does is calls the two numbers and conference them together. So even if they get the ANI, it's going to be the ANI for the central server.
Number of employees: 1,900+
Cash on hand: $454 million
Total Asset: $1.079 Billion
2004 Net Income (pretax): $155 million
Google is ABSOLUTELY not a small-medium business.
You have the right idea, but wrong argument. Share prices have nothing to do with the size of the company. A better number is market capitalization, which is total number of shares x share price. This is the value of the company attributed to it by the shareholders. For example, Coca-cola, a multinational entity has a share price of $45, whereas eBay is at $90. Comparing these two numbers is like apples vs oranges. B/c there are significantly more shares of KO out there than EBAY.
At $85/share, Google has a market cap of about $22.8 Billion. In comparison YHOO is $38.75 Billion and Coca-cola is $108.16 Billion.
Is it priced to high? Who knows. I personally think that at $85/share, Google is a lot closer to their actual value than it was at $135. Also, I disagree with you about volatility. I think it will be volatile, but volatility is volatility at $100/share, $50/share, or $25/share. Although, by pricing it this high, it reduces the number of small investors that may not be knowledgable enough and would be too scared off easily.
I don't think that is true. No company *has* to go public. Also if there is pressure from the SEC to go public, why did they reject Google's recent IPO bid?
It is quite true why they are IPO-ing now. I never said they "had" to go public. However, due to their size, the SEC is forcing them to release their financials to the public. This occurred back in April. They had two choices: release their financials and stay private, or release their financials and go public. Either way, they are allowing outsiders/competitors to see how Google is operating. By going public, they get the benefits of being a public company. There is only one company that has more than 500 shareholders and have not decided to go public: Levi Straus.
This Blog with link to Economist article talks briefly about it.
Here's another blog.
Better article about the regulation. -- The reporting standard also involves a significant added expense. Corporate attorneys say it can cost in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars for smaller companies and as much as $2 million for large companies. Many companies will go public before they have to deal with this reporting standard, they say.
Also, also, how would their competitors have an edge? They only have to disclose their balance sheet. That doesn't reveal any sensitive information that would benefit another company.
A lot can be deciphered from the financial reports. If you remember months ago on/. [How Many Google Machines, Really?], some guy had analyzed the number of servers that Google is using. Another beneficial information is how much ad revenue they are generating. This allows a company like Yahoo to raise/lower their rates to be competitive. Also, in annual reports, companies typically announce to the shareholders where they are headed in the coming year. All these information is quite useful for Google's competitors.
In regard to you comment as to why SEC declined their application is that they are currently still investigating whether the playboy interview violated the regulation preventing company officers from talking to the public about the company. However, they should approve it by the end of today.
In the end, they probably would have preferred staying private and not having to go through all this. In most situations, companies go public only to raise capital. Google is a profitable company and need not raise any additional funding.
Lastly, there have been a lot of negative news about Google since the IPO announcement. This is speculative, but I've heard that part of this is that the i-banking industry is angry/worried about Google's method of going public. Usually, when companies go public, bankers earn upwards of 7-10% of the amount that the company raises. However, by going Dutch auction, they only get 2-4%. With such a huge company going public, this is a big cut from their commissions. In addition, they worry that if Google does succeed, other companies would want to follow in their path and do an auction style IPO, further eroding i-banker's future profits.
Slashdot Mirror
What I'd like to see: Tech Companies: Senator, are you ashamed? Senator Lantos: Ashamed of what, I'm very proud of everything that I have done. Tech Companies: Are you ashamed that because of the policies of the US, we have such a huge trade deficit to China? Are you ashamed that we owe so much debt to a country that has differing opinions about human right? Are you ashamed that we fought an unjust war in Iraq? Are you ashamed of OUR human rights violations in Git-mo? Are you ashamed of our prisoner abuses in Abu Graib? Senator, I can go on and on. Please answer the questions! [Sigh] The hypocrisy...
Basically, the adults only part was only available after a post delivery hack/mod. Why doesn't someone mod games and release it to the press to show that any game could potentially be adults only?
... you guessed it .. naked playboy bunnies. You get the gist of it...
Turn the Chinese army in BattleField2 into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the cheerleaders in Madden into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the characters in some Disney game into naked Playboy bunnies. Turn the Tetris pieces into
The issue that the general public is not understanding is that post-delivery mods can transform any game into a new game.
Err..that's not Slashdot doing it.. It's Google's AdSense. Google's AdSense parses the page and places ads closely related to the content of the page.
...And that's called Job Security...
Incidentally, that's the name of the Social Insurance Number [SIN] that people in Canada get.
There was that whole discussion with NetFlix a while back. Hopefully they'll be able to get that up and running by the end of the year.
Stupid slashcode. It should have said:
Are ads and 'google appliance' sales enough to drive the $189 per-share stock price? -- You do realize this question has no meaning. You can't compare stock prices to stock prices because they have different numbers of outstanding shares. The number you should be looking at is the market cap. This takes the number of shares into comparison. The market cap for GOOG is about the same as that of YHOO. Of the two, which do you think will be more successfull?
I wouldn't say that Google has low profits. They are already profitable. They've been profitable even before the IPO. Their last report fourth quarter net incoming was $204.1 million.
Are ads and 'google appliance' sales enough to drive the $189 per-share stock price?
I just wish I got into GOOG at 85.
How does that affect anything at all? Google ranking is done by links. The relevancy of an url to your search is based on this ranking. Applying the attribute to a tags will have no value.
Unless I'm not understanding what your intentions are.
Either show up to the movie early or walk out of the movie with a sore neck...that's the rule around here at least.
Movie theaters in NYC get pretty packed even before the movie starts. If you're not there on time or early, don't even think about sitting with your friends...
If you read a large number of blogs or content per day it may be a lot easier to get the feed rather than visit each of the site to check if it has been updated or not. At work, we have a news feed and a slashdot feed. There's no point in constantly hitting reload on /. to see if there is a new story. Now, I only visit if there is a new story and it is something that I'm interested in.
Holmdel?
Been following them for the past year. They are facing a problem of becoming a commodity. Each independent cable/satellite company is rolling out their own home grown DVR box. DirectTV dropped them last March and divested from them quite a bit.
the last big news was that Microsoft just signed a deal with Comcast to provide DVR service, which directly competes with TIVO.
This ad-skipping commercial is good news for us shareholders. They need to prove that they have alternative revenues than just subscription.
Now to put on my consumer/techy hat. Why would anyone have a problem of seeing a banner ad rather than a blank screen when they fast forward? It's not hurting you in any way. I understand that since you pay 12.95 a month you should get it ad-free. But why not make the same request to cable television? I'm paying $33/month for cable TV, should I have the same expectation that Comedy Central is ad-free?
Isn't this something you learn in 3rd grade. Distillation.
Basically, put a clear plastic over a bowl of water. Put in sunlight. Water evaporates and condenses on the plastic and dribbles down.
Hard to explain. But I'm not sure if this removes chemicals.
Errr.. MTV's Rock the Vote drive has always been non-partisan. Saying the Republicans should be embarassed for resorting to this is just as likely as what you said above.
Depends on what you're playing. 7 Card Stud, you see some of people's cards
B/c in the online version, you don't know when the cards are shuffled.
I have one for work at an investment bank [not through AOL]. Basically it generates an unique number every 60 seconds. AOL doesn't have to generate it nonstop. Basically they just generate it based on the timestamp at the time of login.
Why would you think they would update every second even if nobody is logging in? That would be pretty piss-poor design.
I'm guessing you didn't read the footnote:
$67 million Palmyra Atoll dollars
With a population of 0, I'm not sure that Palmyra Atoll dollars are in high demand
Is it legal? Yes it is considering Amazon is paying licensing fees to Google ... Those are Google AdClicks. So Google makes money from you viewing those ads on Amazon. In addition, Google is a major investor in A9. So basically Amazon is doing all the grunt work and Google is raking in the financial benefits.
Anyone else think A9 is just diverting requests to Google and reformatting the results? Yes, that's EXACTLY what it does
This isn't A9 vs Google, this is Google vs Google+AmazonAds. Wonder who's gonna win
I would say, RTA(rticle)!
This was the original idea back in the 1950s for the future of nuclear power. People would buy their own power stations to put in their yards to generate power. But power companies were against this [no money to make] and people were in an uproar about safety issues
It seems like what this service does is calls the two numbers and conference them together. So even if they get the ANI, it's going to be the ANI for the central server.
Number of employees: 1,900+
Cash on hand: $454 million
Total Asset: $1.079 Billion
2004 Net Income (pretax): $155 million
Google is ABSOLUTELY not a small-medium business.
You have the right idea, but wrong argument. Share prices have nothing to do with the size of the company. A better number is market capitalization, which is total number of shares x share price. This is the value of the company attributed to it by the shareholders. For example, Coca-cola, a multinational entity has a share price of $45, whereas eBay is at $90. Comparing these two numbers is like apples vs oranges. B/c there are significantly more shares of KO out there than EBAY.
At $85/share, Google has a market cap of about $22.8 Billion. In comparison YHOO is $38.75 Billion and Coca-cola is $108.16 Billion.
Is it priced to high? Who knows. I personally think that at $85/share, Google is a lot closer to their actual value than it was at $135. Also, I disagree with you about volatility. I think it will be volatile, but volatility is volatility at $100/share, $50/share, or $25/share. Although, by pricing it this high, it reduces the number of small investors that may not be knowledgable enough and would be too scared off easily.
This Blog with link to Economist article talks briefly about it.
Here's another blog.
Better article about the regulation. -- The reporting standard also involves a significant added expense. Corporate attorneys say it can cost in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars for smaller companies and as much as $2 million for large companies. Many companies will go public before they have to deal with this reporting standard, they say.
A lot can be deciphered from the financial reports. If you remember months ago on
In regard to you comment as to why SEC declined their application is that they are currently still investigating whether the playboy interview violated the regulation preventing company officers from talking to the public about the company. However, they should approve it by the end of today.
In the end, they probably would have preferred staying private and not having to go through all this. In most situations, companies go public only to raise capital. Google is a profitable company and need not raise any additional funding.
Lastly, there have been a lot of negative news about Google since the IPO announcement. This is speculative, but I've heard that part of this is that the i-banking industry is angry/worried about Google's method of going public. Usually, when companies go public, bankers earn upwards of 7-10% of the amount that the company raises. However, by going Dutch auction, they only get 2-4%. With such a huge company going public, this is a big cut from their commissions. In addition, they worry that if Google does succeed, other companies would want to follow in their path and do an auction style IPO, further eroding i-banker's future profits.