backtop

Print 20 comment(s) - last by TimberJon.. on Feb 4 at 10:21 AM
They did not sign in blood, Google's top brass pledge an oath of service to their company

One traditional problem area for big companies is the issue of executive turnover.  A shining example of this is Yahoo, who over the Summer had to install a new CEO, Jerry Yang, and now faces buyout and the resignation of its chairman, Terry Semel. 

Competitor Google is aware of this potential pitfall, and its top executives are determined to do everything in their power to run a steady ship.  In an interview with Fortune magazine, which is set to run February 4, Co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, together with Chief Executive Eric Schmidt make a major revelation of a joint decision which will certainly effect the course of the company.

The trio apparently made a private pact, which they only now chose to unveil to the public, in August 2004, before the company's initial private offering.

They vowed that they would each commit at least 20 more years to the company and to working together.   Schmidt states in the interview, "We agreed the month before we went public that we should work together for 20 years."

In 2024, the expiration date for the pact, Schmidt will be 69, Page will be 51, and Brin 50.  Each of the executives is a billionaire, almost exclusively owing to the company they steer, which is now worth close to $170 billion USD.  As well as being Chief Executive, Schmidt is also Chairman.  Brin is president of technology and Page is president of products.

There is much curiousity on Wall Street over Google's 2007 revenue, which it will soon release.  With an impending Microsoft and Yahoo deal, exactly how good the news is may have a significant effect on the company's stock price.

Still, some analysts may look to the announcement as a sign of some stability from Google, whose stock is oft disregarded as overvalued due to scarcity, with share prices of over 700 dollars.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Man you people are downers!!
By Darkskypoet on 2/2/2008 2:23:33 PM , Rating: 5
@0 years is a long time, oh sure they're on top now but, etc, etc, bloody etc.

You are missing the point.

A 20 year pledge is good in that it stabilizes the management team that brought us Google, also it won't be stories of (and any one of them could sell out and take off right now) early retirement, sell outs, etc that tank their stock. (stability is good)

But look at it in another light:

20 years of running an organism that has given you the ability to research and develop any thing you could possibly want! You have a crap load of money, a crap load of engineers, the ears and eyes of the world, and damn it all, You're Google!

Anyone here, who reads this tech site, honestly would cream or wet their pants at the opportunity of being in that spot.
Just think, "hey guys, lets make some Android consoles... Let's buy AMD." You could actually do it. You have the cash, the clout, the anything you'd need to pull it off. You also have the distinct advantage of being the "good" guy. (for now)

I think that friends coming together and saying hey, we have control of one of the most powerful internet-centric companies in the world, and can fulfill most any of our dreams... Lets not F# it up. Is a no-brainer, and a good thing.

Sure there will be battles to be fought, challenges that arise, and innovation and advances erupting... But damn it, they'll be at the center of it, with a hand strong enough to be at the center of it all. Thats where I'd want to be. A player, in the thick of it, with a damn good squad to back me.

Wouldn't you?




RE: Man you people are downers!!
By AntDX316 on 2/4/2008 3:37:23 AM , Rating: 1
i use google on my pocket pc and my main pc before google went stock market

its the fastest search engine

before there were times where i cant get a connection anywhere (serious connection problems) else but i did with google

not to mention when u search u most likely find what ur looking for really quickly unlike other search engines (ive used alot of them) where the advertising gets in the way


By TimberJon on 2/4/2008 10:21:34 AM , Rating: 2
Sign me up man. I'll take phone calls and notes.


Confident...
By jadeskye on 2/2/2008 7:45:13 AM , Rating: 3
One thing's for certain, they're extremely confident in google's success. They have full right to be too with google's share price being what it is. But still 20 years is a hell of a long time. with breakthroughs coming thick and fast lately who knows? Google could be obsolete in half that time.

unlikely in the currant climate but still possible.




Of course they do...
By iFX on 2/2/2008 7:13:36 PM , Rating: 2
Things are going well, they have all become millionaires. They have no reason to leave and it gives stock holders "piece of mind". Will they actually stay for 20 years? Who knows, maybe if the cash keeps flowing in like it is now.

If Google starts to do poorly and goes into the red for several years in a row these guys will bail ship just like any other corporate executive, plain and simple.

Everyone always makes big claims when things are going well.




By ChipDude on 2/3/2008 3:03:24 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder how many leaders made pacts when things were going good.

I'm sure these three are a little special, but in now way can they predict what the next 10 years will do to change there prospective, values, and more importantly where Google will be in 5 years.

The technology work, especially theres is very fast moving. 10 years ago no one would have tought MS would be at risk for becoming irrelevant and look now.

With billions and a quick change of the wind this pact means nothing. They could all be shown the door or like the beatles be split up by things they never saw coming.

Its all a bunch of PR to try and prop up the stock as well as take some spotlight from the MS bid for Yahoo.




By kenji4life on 2/4/2008 4:12:09 AM , Rating: 2
Google has the potential to revolutionize the telecommunications industry. If Google were to build a wireless network with a unique model (like phone/internet/tv the wireless way, at a competitive price) they would have a chance at breaking the mold that Verizon, and the other "baby bells" or should we call them "baby bell boomers", since they are all grown up now, are creating.

That was a long winded sentence!

-Google bids on 700 MHz spectrum and enters wireless
-Google "trades" or "shares" some of the spectrum in exchange for higher frequencies suited for high-speed data.
-Google breaks into the telecom and builds a new mold, T-Mobile follows suit and Vzw, Cingular/AT&T and the others fall in line.

Now when someone comes across this post 10 years from now and I'm either amazingly correct, or obviously off my rocker, I'll have long since forgotten I even posted this in the first place.

:)




20 years together?!?
By pugster on 2/2/2008 1:29:48 AM , Rating: 2
Right now Google is probably riding on top of the world. Google seems like the next Microsoft of the web, but it could also be the next yahoo.




RE: 20 years together?!?
By lompocus on 2/2/08, Rating: -1
20 Years is a LONG TIME
By JohnnyCNote on 2/2/2008 2:40:01 AM , Rating: 1
A lot can happen in a quarter of that time . . .




Errors
By Bremen7000 on 2/2/2008 3:30:54 PM , Rating: 1
"which will certainly effect the course of the company."

"before the company's initial private offering."

Just proofread your blogs once before posting, that's all I ask!




the hate windows factor
By nerdye on 2/3/2008 3:05:47 AM , Rating: 1
I know,
I didn't love xp at first, and still do not love vista to this day (yet service packs over the years make such downsides non existent), but there are other things to consider when saying such. Mac offers an OS every 1.5 years at 100 bucks plus, and it is slightly different from the last previous iteration so it cannot be harshly judged, but rather moderately applauded from its audience that would buy steve jobs used socks if available. Linux variations are free and constantly evolving and wonderful in their own right, but one must compile certain difficult drivers like wireless on laptops themselves and joe shmoe is not capable of doing such. I'm not taking sides, I'm just stating that before taking a side and passing judgment, understand the demographics and natures of the users of each platform.




GOOG
By conrad13a on 2/2/08, Rating: -1
RE: GOOG
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 2/2/2008 1:37:34 PM , Rating: 2
I very much doubt this. Microsoft is a battle hardened veteran when it comes to eating other companies and dealing with difficult management. Don't think for a second Microsoft won't be able to gobble up Yahoo and do something with it. History tells us that if anyone can do it, Microsoft can. These guys wrote the book on take overs and integration.


RE: GOOG
By retrospooty on 2/2/2008 2:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
Yup... MS is also really good at putting out a fairly cruddy product rev 1, and over several years and several version make a really useable dominant product. Look at Windows 3.1 to XP/Vista. Look at MS-Office, IE, or Win Mobile. All started out crap, and now all dominate their markets. MS can do anything given time.


RE: GOOG
By HrilL on 2/2/2008 8:26:45 PM , Rating: 2
While I do agree with you mostly. Windows 3.1 is what made windows, windows. It was so much better then anything that was offered at the time. And as for Vista it is still crap and needs a lot of work. MS has been pushing unfinished products lately. Look at exchange server 2007. Public folders was something that hardly worked and when sp1 came it all added again. Now we wait for sp1 for vista and we'll see how much that fixes/adds to windows.


RE: GOOG
By Ringold on 2/2/2008 8:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
That's your opinion, of which you're entitled to, but I'd never go back to XP, and the market gobbled up 100 million copies of Vista within 11 months of release (not including the holiday season). Those that complain about Vista as "crap" tend to be a minority, but a vocal one. It's superior to XP, Linux for the desktop and Leopard (only because its not available for non-Apple systems) and that's all that particularly matters when we're talking about corporate performance. It's selling, their other stuff is selling, and Microsoft posts good numbers.

I thought Crocs were crap too, if I'd looked at things the way you do I'd of missed a stock that sure ramped up a ton and a company that performed well.


RE: GOOG
By Clauzii on 2/2/2008 10:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
About leopard: Just do it the other way around with BootCamp ;)


RE: GOOG
By Ringold on 2/2/2008 8:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft also has as much revenue in a single quarter as Google has in an entire year; they've got the cash to see things through to completion.

MSFT; the company everyone loves to hate, but defiantly gives the world the finger and performs anyway.


RE: GOOG
By retrospooty on 2/3/2008 11:03:28 AM , Rating: 2
"Microsoft also has as much revenue in a single quarter as Google has in an entire year; they've got the cash to see things through to completion."

Yup, thats how they do it. They can afford to. If they set their goal to beat out Google, 10 years from now, it will happen.

for reference to this determination and market power, just ask Apple, Wordperfect, Lotus123 (whoever made them), Netscape and Palm.


"Well, there may be a reason why they call them 'Mac' trucks! Windows machines will not be trucks." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki