Too bad it also means fewer jobs to make the money to buy the cheap items... Since it takes fewer people to make the same # of items it did 10 years ago.
10 years ago, nobody had a DVD player. People will just invent something that will be the equivalent of the cheap 40$ DVD player 10 years from now. If things are cheaper, people can afford to buy more stuff. Instead of a 500$ DVD player, I can now afford to buy a DVD player, a portable mp3 player and a bunch of other things.
Being a genius and inventing something doesn't guarantee financial success. Just ask Microsoft(or it's former competitors). What's my point here: The fact that it's big bad wall street saying the google IPO is overvalued doesn't change the fact that it is really overvalued.
Linus is a genius, but he made his millions on an overvalued IPO and using the same Wall Street bankers that are being criticized for having a vested interest against the google IPO.
Your claim that Linus made millions using precisely this system is incorrect.
No..I think Linus made money on an overpriced stock. Most investors got burnt. Buying an overvalued stock just because we love google here on/. will result in the founders of google getting rich and you ending up with worthless stock. I personally don't have anything against the auction system or Linus making money from the VA linux IPO. Question is: would I buy google? No..And the fact that evil vested interests from Wall street are saying the same thing about google's valuation won't change my decision.
The fact that CSFB is involved doesn't change the other(albeit inconvenient) fact that google may be overvalued at 33billion$. Speaking of CSFB, Linus made million off the VA Linux IPO. Here's some interesting information.
Nobody knew it at the time, but the apex of the Internet rocket ride came on the morning of Dec. 9, 1999. Executives of computer maker VA Linux Systems Inc. gathered at 6 a.m. in the trading offices of Credit Suisse First Boston (CSR ) on the 17th floor of a San Francisco skyscraper for the company's initial public offering. Among those assembled were Larry M. Augustin, the chief executive, and his friend Linus Torvalds, the inventor of the Linux operating system, who was dressed in his customary T-shirt and sandals. Their three toddlers scampered around underfoot while the adults watched in stunned silence as the stock price jumped from 30 a share to more than 200 within minutes. Augustin nudged Torvalds and whispered: "Did you ever think we'd be here?" At the end of trading, the company's shares were worth 239.25 apiece, up 697.5%, making it the best-ever first-day IPO performance.
Google is more than a search engine, but how does it make money? Mostly by paid search results. Don't get me wrong...I think google is great..I just don't think it's worth 36billion$.
underpriced shares are handed out to favored investors and grateful CEOs."
That's how Linus made millions.
Here's an article in Business Week on the google IPO.
Commentary: Google This: Investor Beware
The Web search outfit's business is terrific, but its long-term outlook is cloudy
When Google Inc. predicted a wallet-cleaning price range of $108 to $135 for its shares on July 26, few on Wall Street flinched. And why should they? Despite a valuation as high as $36 billion for its offering expected in August, the search kingpin's business continues to dazzle. Growth in sales and profits have rocketed over 100% so far this year. And analysts project Google will generate more than $350 million in 2004 net profits. Even with stepped-up competition, Google's share of the U.S. search market has grown five points in the past year, to 37%, giving it a comfortable 10-point lead over Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO ), according to researcher comScore.
Sure, IPOs are inherently risky, but Google stock may be especially unwise at this nosebleed price range. At the midpoint price, Google's would-be $33 billion valuation is a step down from its closest competitor, Yahoo, a seasoned Internet giant with a diverse revenue stream and a market value of $40 billion. Compare projected 2005 earnings against these valuations, however, and Google's multiple is just a speck below Yahoo's. That's troubling, since Google is largely a one-trick pony, with no easy means to diversify its business and hefty management challenges. "It's priced for ultimate perfection," says a skeptical Google investor who plans on selling after the IPO.
Long-term investors should be very wary of Google's single-barrel business model. Selling ads that appear next to search results, or paid search, contributes over 80% of Google's sales. According to Forrester Research Inc (FORR )., the U.S. search ad market grew 94% in 2003 to $1.9 billion, but growth is expected to slow from 45% in 2004 to 16% in 2007. As long as Google remains so heavily dependent on a single search market, it should trade at a discount to Yahoo, says American Technology Research Inc. analyst Mark S. Mahaney. Citing its quiet period, Google won't comment.
Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page aim to expand into new businesses, but that won't be so easy. The most obvious foray would be into so-called branded marketing, the multimedia ads that adorn most Web sites. Unlike the text-only ads that accompany Google's search results, these snazzier ads entice large advertisers that are as concerned with building brand as they are with driving traffic to their sites. It's big business, worth about $4.5 billion in the U.S. this year, according to Forrester, vs. $2.8 billion for search ads.
Google, however, is a long way from proving itself a player in branded marketing. Sure, the six-year-old company is tinkering with a trial program that delivers targeted image ads from its roster of 150,000 advertising customers to other online content providers. But Google has not hinted at near-term plans to open up its own prime real estate for branded ads. Such a risky move would run contrary to Google's long-established mission of providing a sleek, simple page that favors speed over sizzle.
Even if Google does pull the trigger, it would desperately trail such rivals as Yahoo, Microsoft's (MSFT ) MSN, and AOL (TWX ), which have spent years building their salesforces and relationships with traditional marketers. Although Google points to its 150,000-plus advertisers, buyers of search ads often aren't the same people who buy branded ads. "The people who control these budgets are very different," says Wenda H. Millard, chief sales officer at Yahoo.
Google's management structure could also be a concern. The company prides itself on an organization that is nearly devoid of middle management and values freedom for engineers and their work. But Google's headcount is growing faster today than at any other time in its young life -- adding 3.
How do you connect multiple handsets with a single VoIP box? If you live in a townhome and want a phone at each level, it could be a slight problem. Other than that, I am very happy with vonage.
Most broadband providers are monopolies in the markets they operate in. They have no reason to drop their prices. They'll only drop prices if there is an alternative technology like WiMax or something. It's just like your local phone monopoly. They'll only drop their prices when they see VoIP taking customers away from them.
It's more likely that broadband companies will try to takeover other broadband companies or big media companies(Comcast/Disney). To increase revenue, they will need to bundle services. Maybe they'll start offering VoIP phone services at less than what the phone company charges. If you paid 55$ for your cable internet service and 55$ for your phone service, they'll sell you a "bundle": internet service + phone service at 90$.
Changing the default SSID doesn't help. Unlike Netgear, Linksys routers have no way to stop broadcasting the SSID. WEP helps but most people don't bother.
How does changing the default password help if you don't turn on WEP? Can't someone get on the network using the default SSID(linksys) and sniff for passwords?
All the latest technological innovations don't come from the US. That's because the US is an open society and mostly open standards. A company in, say norway, can innovate and make the next big thing. If China has it's own standard, they risk losing access to a great pool of innovators outside China. OTOH, with a market of 1.3 billion, the current pool of innovators will be lining up to produce innovations in the Chinese standard.
The Chinese government is really doing this to control the technology....Just like America protects its defense technology, China will have access to all the technology used in China. Call me paranoid, but this is an attempt by the Chinese government to take up what they see as their rightful place in the world.
Losing it's dominance is not the same as falling behind others in the realm of scientific research. It just means America is ahead by a smaller margin.
Public school education is just part of the problem. Specifically: the lowering of standards and the dumbing down of kids.
The real problem is lack of parental involvement. If you aren't doing what it takes to ensure your own kid reaches his potential, you can't blame the public school system.
I don't remember where i read this: The e-voting machines being used in India aren't networked. At the end of the day, the poll workers take the machines to the main district office and plug them into a network. The software on the machines itself isn't reprogrammable.
Why is this marked offtopic? That just reflects the moderators first-world bias and phony sense of outrage. Whether you like it or not, life is cheaper in third world countries like India and China. The Indian and Chinese governments, always eager to encourage foreign investment in biotech, will write the laws to shield the drug companies from major liabilities. Besides, there is never a shortage of people in India and China who will volunteer to be test subjects.
While this is a sad story--especially about the poor guys with Indian "consultants" following them around asking a zillion questions about how to do their jobs-
Where do you work? Where I work, managers don't make the decision to hire the big consulting companies for the really big projects. People higher up than the managers do that.
Why should you hire consultants to do what you can but for more? Most consulting companies care more about their own billing. Deloitte refused to comment on the AWE problems....wonder why?
If they have a RFID chip in your car, it's just an incremental change to link the chip to your engine. IF the "authorities" want to stop you, they know exactly where your car is and they can turn it off....just like Tom Cruise in Minority Report.
Slashdot Mirror
especially free pr0n, which is only available on the internet.
10 years ago, nobody had a DVD player. People will just invent something that will be the equivalent of the cheap 40$ DVD player 10 years from now. If things are cheaper, people can afford to buy more stuff. Instead of a 500$ DVD player, I can now afford to buy a DVD player, a portable mp3 player and a bunch of other things.
They bought Daksh, a call center company. Customer support != IT. While IBM does outsource programming work to India, let's avoid the FUD.
Why is it surprising? The US population is more productive. They achieve more with less.
About Linus and how he made his millions:
Inside Frank Quattrone's Money Machine
Linus is a genius, but he made his millions on an overvalued IPO and using the same Wall Street bankers that are being criticized for having a vested interest against the google IPO.
No..I think Linus made money on an overpriced stock. Most investors got burnt. Buying an overvalued stock just because we love google here on /. will result in the founders of google getting rich and you ending up with worthless stock. I personally don't have anything against the auction system or Linus making money from the VA linux IPO. Question is: would I buy google? No..And the fact that evil vested interests from Wall street are saying the same thing about google's valuation won't change my decision.
Inside Frank Quattrone's Money Machine
Nobody knew it at the time, but the apex of the Internet rocket ride came on the morning of Dec. 9, 1999. Executives of computer maker VA Linux Systems Inc. gathered at 6 a.m. in the trading offices of Credit Suisse First Boston (CSR ) on the 17th floor of a San Francisco skyscraper for the company's initial public offering. Among those assembled were Larry M. Augustin, the chief executive, and his friend Linus Torvalds, the inventor of the Linux operating system, who was dressed in his customary T-shirt and sandals. Their three toddlers scampered around underfoot while the adults watched in stunned silence as the stock price jumped from 30 a share to more than 200 within minutes. Augustin nudged Torvalds and whispered: "Did you ever think we'd be here?" At the end of trading, the company's shares were worth 239.25 apiece, up 697.5%, making it the best-ever first-day IPO performance.
That was then. This is now.
Shot at what? Buying shares of a company that will be worth 33 billion $ at the current valuation?
Google is more than a search engine, but how does it make money? Mostly by paid search results. Don't get me wrong...I think google is great..I just don't think it's worth 36billion$.
That's how Linus made millions.
Here's an article in Business Week on the google IPO.
Commentary: Google This: Investor Beware
The Web search outfit's business is terrific, but its long-term outlook is cloudy
When Google Inc. predicted a wallet-cleaning price range of $108 to $135 for its shares on July 26, few on Wall Street flinched. And why should they? Despite a valuation as high as $36 billion for its offering expected in August, the search kingpin's business continues to dazzle. Growth in sales and profits have rocketed over 100% so far this year. And analysts project Google will generate more than $350 million in 2004 net profits. Even with stepped-up competition, Google's share of the U.S. search market has grown five points in the past year, to 37%, giving it a comfortable 10-point lead over Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO ), according to researcher comScore.
Sure, IPOs are inherently risky, but Google stock may be especially unwise at this nosebleed price range. At the midpoint price, Google's would-be $33 billion valuation is a step down from its closest competitor, Yahoo, a seasoned Internet giant with a diverse revenue stream and a market value of $40 billion. Compare projected 2005 earnings against these valuations, however, and Google's multiple is just a speck below Yahoo's. That's troubling, since Google is largely a one-trick pony, with no easy means to diversify its business and hefty management challenges. "It's priced for ultimate perfection," says a skeptical Google investor who plans on selling after the IPO.
Long-term investors should be very wary of Google's single-barrel business model. Selling ads that appear next to search results, or paid search, contributes over 80% of Google's sales. According to Forrester Research Inc (FORR )., the U.S. search ad market grew 94% in 2003 to $1.9 billion, but growth is expected to slow from 45% in 2004 to 16% in 2007. As long as Google remains so heavily dependent on a single search market, it should trade at a discount to Yahoo, says American Technology Research Inc. analyst Mark S. Mahaney. Citing its quiet period, Google won't comment.
Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page aim to expand into new businesses, but that won't be so easy. The most obvious foray would be into so-called branded marketing, the multimedia ads that adorn most Web sites. Unlike the text-only ads that accompany Google's search results, these snazzier ads entice large advertisers that are as concerned with building brand as they are with driving traffic to their sites. It's big business, worth about $4.5 billion in the U.S. this year, according to Forrester, vs. $2.8 billion for search ads.
Google, however, is a long way from proving itself a player in branded marketing. Sure, the six-year-old company is tinkering with a trial program that delivers targeted image ads from its roster of 150,000 advertising customers to other online content providers. But Google has not hinted at near-term plans to open up its own prime real estate for branded ads. Such a risky move would run contrary to Google's long-established mission of providing a sleek, simple page that favors speed over sizzle.
Even if Google does pull the trigger, it would desperately trail such rivals as Yahoo, Microsoft's (MSFT ) MSN, and AOL (TWX ), which have spent years building their salesforces and relationships with traditional marketers. Although Google points to its 150,000-plus advertisers, buyers of search ads often aren't the same people who buy branded ads. "The people who control these budgets are very different," says Wenda H. Millard, chief sales officer at Yahoo.
Google's management structure could also be a concern. The company prides itself on an organization that is nearly devoid of middle management and values freedom for engineers and their work. But Google's headcount is growing faster today than at any other time in its young life -- adding 3.
How do you connect multiple handsets with a single VoIP box? If you live in a townhome and want a phone at each level, it could be a slight problem. Other than that, I am very happy with vonage.
It's more likely that broadband companies will try to takeover other broadband companies or big media companies(Comcast/Disney). To increase revenue, they will need to bundle services. Maybe they'll start offering VoIP phone services at less than what the phone company charges. If you paid 55$ for your cable internet service and 55$ for your phone service, they'll sell you a "bundle": internet service + phone service at 90$.
Changing the default SSID doesn't help. Unlike Netgear, Linksys routers have no way to stop broadcasting the SSID. WEP helps but most people don't bother.
How does changing the default password help if you don't turn on WEP? Can't someone get on the network using the default SSID(linksys) and sniff for passwords?
The Chinese government is really doing this to control the technology....Just like America protects its defense technology, China will have access to all the technology used in China. Call me paranoid, but this is an attempt by the Chinese government to take up what they see as their rightful place in the world.
I heard a girl killed herself because she got an SMS saying she had failed. She had actually passed.
hopefully they are advertisers for products usually sold in spam(large johnson etc.). This should really hurt their bottom line.
Losing it's dominance is not the same as falling behind others in the realm of scientific research. It just means America is ahead by a smaller margin.
The real problem is lack of parental involvement. If you aren't doing what it takes to ensure your own kid reaches his potential, you can't blame the public school system.
I don't remember where i read this: The e-voting machines being used in India aren't networked. At the end of the day, the poll workers take the machines to the main district office and plug them into a network. The software on the machines itself isn't reprogrammable.
Why is this marked offtopic? That just reflects the moderators first-world bias and phony sense of outrage. Whether you like it or not, life is cheaper in third world countries like India and China. The Indian and Chinese governments, always eager to encourage foreign investment in biotech, will write the laws to shield the drug companies from major liabilities. Besides, there is never a shortage of people in India and China who will volunteer to be test subjects.
Why should you hire consultants to do what you can but for more? Most consulting companies care more about their own billing. Deloitte refused to comment on the AWE problems....wonder why?
If they have a RFID chip in your car, it's just an incremental change to link the chip to your engine. IF the "authorities" want to stop you, they know exactly where your car is and they can turn it off....just like Tom Cruise in Minority Report.