Comments on: Why It Make Sense For Google To Buy YouTube

By: RAnk Arena

RAnk Arena — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 23:33:53 +0000

Well if you can do the code in 30 minutes then do it and stop whining.

By: 2006 Year In Review « John Chow dot Com

2006 Year In Review « John Chow dot Com — Mon, 01 Jan 2007 04:20:09 +0000

[...] The Internet continues to grow at a crazy rate in 2006. We’re seeing crazy valuation placed on unprofitable companies with unproven business models. The buying frenzy that started in 2005 continued. The biggest buyout of the year; Google paying $1.65 billion for video sharing site YouTube. [...]

By: Digg In Acquisition Talks « John Chow dot Com

Digg In Acquisition Talks « John Chow dot Com — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 08:25:44 +0000

[...] Well, well, well. The day after Google purchased YouTube for $1.65 billion I made a post asking is Digg next? The story made it to the front page of Digg but then got buried because some diggers thought I was just making things up. Looks like I’ll be getting the last laugh. [...]

By: Oskar Syahbana

Oskar Syahbana — Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:07:05 +0000

Uh… I don’t see anything on that list that correlates and justifies the 1.6 billion that Google ‘burned’ to buy YouTube.

Does this means money isn’t relevant anymore?

One cannot get 1.6 billion from ‘eye-balls’ only you know…

By: Dustin

Dustin — Sat, 14 Oct 2006 07:00:43 +0000

I agree with you… except for “A site the size of YouTube would take 80% to 90% share of ad revenues.”

There’s no way they’ll get 80% of ad revenues. Content owners would be insane to make that deal.

By: Peter Haimes

Peter Haimes — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:59:30 +0000

PS. Mark Cuban is a knob!

By: Peter Haimes

Peter Haimes — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:57:52 +0000

My friends who are not tech savvy and rarely use the interent have become hooked on You Tube they wouldn’t have a clue about Google Video or any other video service for that matter. Google would of had a hard time competing with You Tube so I guess buying them out and maintaining the seperate identity aswell as market domination is a good thing.

By: Gene q

Gene q — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:35:49 +0000

They probably could have purchased two video sites for that price. Veoh and Revvers would have been a cool combo. People would visit a site by google regardless of who had owned it before.

By: Dan Raine

Dan Raine — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:45:58 +0000

In answer to Tick Tock:

I agree with your points, inovation or expansion through aquisition is very important to Google at the moment.

My point was that they do, do a good job of making ‘good things’ better. Hell I hardly know anyone who uses Hotmail anymore…

I do disagree with your point on ‘You will see innovation happen on the search side of things, but not necessairly on other ends’

They buy a lot of small companies (take writely.com for example), short term they are only going to get folded into the Google brand, but long term I think they will take these to the next level.

In the not too distant future we will see mainstream
distributed apps. Not in the Zoho way, but in the sense that people will use a Google OS, they will log into their Google Desktop, They will ‘launch’ and not just ‘go to’ Google Mail.

By: Dan Raine

Dan Raine — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 03:32:40 +0000

I think Fox has a lot of power here, I do think their numbers (60-70% of YouTube traffic comes from MySpace) are a little high however, but even so it does give them a bargaining position… but it is not one they will ever go down… But they may take the legal high road at some point with the copyrighted material.

Dan