M
martin griffith
Guest
Are they all daft or what?
What (TF) has Google done to us?
martin
What (TF) has Google done to us?
martin
R
Rich Webb
Guest
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:45:13 +0200, martin griffith
<martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
read: Do no evil to the shareholders.
Yahoo has the "Yahoo Groups." Therefore, Google needed "Google Groups"
and they hijacked their usenet archives and bastardized the interface to
create them.
--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA
<martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
They went public. Their motto has apparently been amended slightly to
read: Do no evil to the shareholders.
Yahoo has the "Yahoo Groups." Therefore, Google needed "Google Groups"
and they hijacked their usenet archives and bastardized the interface to
create them.
--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA
P
Pooh Bear
Guest
martin griffith wrote:
Seems to have lost the plot.
Graham
What has google done with its groups too ?
Seems to have lost the plot.
Graham
A
Al Borowski
Guest
martin griffith wrote:
Although I'd agree that the new google groups interface is retarded
Al
And whats wrong with gmail?
Although I'd agree that the new google groups interface is retarded
Al
M
martin griffith
Guest
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:04:55 +1000, in sci.electronics.design Al
Borowski <al.borowski@EraseThis.gmail.com> wrote:
martin
Borowski <al.borowski@EraseThis.gmail.com> wrote:
answered by a quick Google come from people wth Gmail accounts.martin griffith wrote:
Are they all daft or what?
What (TF) has Google done to us?
And whats wrong with gmail?
Although I'd agree that the new google groups interface is retarded
Al
I noticed that many of the really dumb messages that could easily be
martin
F
Frithiof Andreas Jensen
Guest
"martin griffith" <martingriffith@XXyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:34eeb11o37vfg2v5e03mp9epan00egicgt@4ax.com...
the stock.
Google is a 10 dollar paper once the hype dies; and it will. The question on
when is really about how many propellerheads still have money left to waste
on the stock.
news:34eeb11o37vfg2v5e03mp9epan00egicgt@4ax.com...
Make us wealthy on selling the stock - and soon even rich buying put's on
the stock.
Google is a 10 dollar paper once the hype dies; and it will. The question on
when is really about how many propellerheads still have money left to waste
on the stock.
K
keith
Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:05:27 +0200, Frithiof Andreas Jensen wrote:
perhaps it worth a *little*, perhaps an order of magnitude, more than $10?
At least GOOG is making money, unlike most of the dot_bombers.
--
Keith
Don't you think your exagerating just a little? With a P/E of ~114,
perhaps it worth a *little*, perhaps an order of magnitude, more than $10?
At least GOOG is making money, unlike most of the dot_bombers.
--
Keith
F
Frithiof Andreas Jensen
Guest
"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
newsan.2005.06.22.12.47.38.919913@att.bizzzz...
The market value of GOOG is USD 77,000,000,000--, in return for assuming
that risk was earned USD 399,119,000 or about 0.5%. For about Zero risk 2%
can be earned in bonds/money markets, so the share price should logically be
at least 4 times lower - probably more because stock is much more risky; it
can go to zero.
So, really, all what keeps the price up is the investors expectations of a
golden future where unlimited exponential earnings growth will ensure that
hardnosed & patient GOOG investors will be holding a sizeable portion of the
US GDP in a decades time.
The investors can almost see themselves living in a venetian-style palazzo,
the hard part of the day being deciding which colour porche will go with
todays dinner suit before going out and grab some babes at the casino.
Hundreds of USD for a stock that will *guarantee* a life of leisure is damn
cheap, Thousands is maybe more reasonable. Dreams are priceless.
*When* GOOG eventually misses analysts expectations one sorry quarter,
disaster strikes: the palazzo burns and the porsche collection chrashes.
Maybe even Margin Calls. The stock instantly becomes mere thrash, unworthy
of tainting any portfolio except for the most foolish, stupid people. The
put's become solid Gold.
making expectations!
Look what happened to Michael Jackson: deemed a failure for not being able
to beat his 50 million record year ... only 30 Million sold, the entire
business go: "Pah, Pathetic Looser" ;-/
Eventually, investors expectations are raised to make failure inevitable -
all the while, the bet on failure becomes better and better for every
success. The bet also becomes a lot cheaper, so the odds improve, because
"past history shows than ... 90% of all option trades lost money", as they
will repeatedly say on Yahoo web TeeVee (conveniently forgetting that 1% of
the winning trades paid about 1000 times the risk) .
So, do we know which quarter?
No, but I do know that I can afford to loose *a lot* of smallish bets on the
accounts with all the cash made by that one, winning, quarter where the
stock falls with maybe a cool 30% instantly kicking volativity way up and
then shorting the stock to follow it all the way down to the P/E of a normal
business (which right now would be around 30-60 for the stock).
news
an.2005.06.22.12.47.38.919913@att.bizzzz...Perhaps 20 then, base 10 is a bit too rich ;-)
The market value of GOOG is USD 77,000,000,000--, in return for assuming
that risk was earned USD 399,119,000 or about 0.5%. For about Zero risk 2%
can be earned in bonds/money markets, so the share price should logically be
at least 4 times lower - probably more because stock is much more risky; it
can go to zero.
So, really, all what keeps the price up is the investors expectations of a
golden future where unlimited exponential earnings growth will ensure that
hardnosed & patient GOOG investors will be holding a sizeable portion of the
US GDP in a decades time.
The investors can almost see themselves living in a venetian-style palazzo,
the hard part of the day being deciding which colour porche will go with
todays dinner suit before going out and grab some babes at the casino.
Hundreds of USD for a stock that will *guarantee* a life of leisure is damn
cheap, Thousands is maybe more reasonable. Dreams are priceless.
*When* GOOG eventually misses analysts expectations one sorry quarter,
disaster strikes: the palazzo burns and the porsche collection chrashes.
Maybe even Margin Calls. The stock instantly becomes mere thrash, unworthy
of tainting any portfolio except for the most foolish, stupid people. The
put's become solid Gold.
It's not making money that truly matters in the stock pricing game. It's
making expectations!
Look what happened to Michael Jackson: deemed a failure for not being able
to beat his 50 million record year ... only 30 Million sold, the entire
business go: "Pah, Pathetic Looser" ;-/
Eventually, investors expectations are raised to make failure inevitable -
all the while, the bet on failure becomes better and better for every
success. The bet also becomes a lot cheaper, so the odds improve, because
"past history shows than ... 90% of all option trades lost money", as they
will repeatedly say on Yahoo web TeeVee (conveniently forgetting that 1% of
the winning trades paid about 1000 times the risk) .
So, do we know which quarter?
No, but I do know that I can afford to loose *a lot* of smallish bets on the
accounts with all the cash made by that one, winning, quarter where the
stock falls with maybe a cool 30% instantly kicking volativity way up and
then shorting the stock to follow it all the way down to the P/E of a normal
business (which right now would be around 30-60 for the stock).
K
keith
Guest
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:32:38 +0200, Frithiof Andreas Jensen wrote:
a "normal" number (P/E = 20) for a stable stock with no big up-side.
....of course, no great chances for a down-side either.
our company becomming something like 2% of the GNP by 1990, though it
wasn't compared to the GNP (engineers tend to do reality checks on
marketeers.
middle. ;-)
GOOG is a nutso pedophile? ;-)
864,253.5:1.
much the order of magnitude I was suggesting. ;-)
BTW, I tend to agree with you. I didn't touch GOOG when it was under
$100. Then again, my brother made a few $M off INTC and M$ in the '90s,
that I didn't.
--
Keith
Even at $20, that's a P/E of ~8. That's nuttin' these days. $50 would be"keith" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news
Don't you think your exagerating just a little? With a P/E of ~114,
perhaps it worth a *little*, perhaps an order of magnitude, more than $10?
Perhaps 20 then, base 10 is a bit too rich ;-)
a "normal" number (P/E = 20) for a stable stock with no big up-side.
....of course, no great chances for a down-side either.
It can also go to $300. ;-)
Well... I remember when I was given (read: force-fed) some malarky about
our company becomming something like 2% of the GNP by 1990, though it
wasn't compared to the GNP (engineers tend to do reality checks on
marketeers
.The poor play the lottery. The rich play GOOG? I guess I'm in the
middle. ;-)
It *is* making money. $700M, according to my envelope.
MJ is a tad in the read ($260M last I heard). ..or are you saying that
GOOG is a nutso pedophile? ;-)
That's why people play 00. The superfecta on the Kentucky Derby paid
864,253.5:1.
We? You're the one predicting doom. Your dice!
Ok, a P/E of 30-60 is, uh, about $70 to $140/share, not $10. ...pretty
much the order of magnitude I was suggesting. ;-)
BTW, I tend to agree with you. I didn't touch GOOG when it was under
$100. Then again, my brother made a few $M off INTC and M$ in the '90s,
that I didn't.
--
Keith