If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Marketwatch)   Alex, I'll take "Things you can buy with $1000". Okay, the question is: "What is one share of Google stock?   (marketwatch.com) divider line 26
    More: Spiffy, Google, company, 3D printing  
•       •       •

748 clicks; posted to Business » on 20 Oct 2013 at 3:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



26 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-19 11:33:30 PM  
2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda
 
2013-10-19 11:53:39 PM  
What is a penis mightier?
 
2013-10-20 12:02:35 AM  
So the answer is in the category?

What kind of Jeopardy are we playing here?
 
2013-10-20 01:10:32 AM  
I find it odd that so much money gets dumped into the stock market when it has effectively become like a poker game where someone comes and hands you a bunch of chips every hour until you are completely broke.
 
2013-10-20 02:35:39 AM  
Wait a second here. You chose a category and then asked a question. But Alex didn't give an answer first?
 
2013-10-20 03:31:14 AM  
$1000 would get me 100 nights with your mom, Trebek!
 
2013-10-20 03:38:16 AM  

GreenAdder: Wait a second here. You chose a category and then asked a question. But Alex didn't give an answer first?


That's just the feed from the player's microphone, so it didn't pick up the clue, perhaps Alex said "This is something" in between the sentences.
 
2013-10-20 04:07:18 AM  

Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda


The problem with big IPOs like that is that you can't just splurge on buying some shares. Everybody and their mother is trying to buy from a limited number of available shares, which is a fundamental aspect of how stock valuation works. I'd love to buy into the Twitter IPO, but I know it's gonna be gobbled up by fatcats in New York.
 
2013-10-20 04:56:01 AM  
This time next year the shares will be worth the promised Fiddle Of Gold.
 
2013-10-20 05:20:47 AM  

DON.MAC: I find it odd that so much money gets dumped into the stock market when it has effectively become like a poker game where someone comes and hands you a bunch of chips every hour until you are completely broke.



quizzicaldog.jpg
 
2013-10-20 05:25:43 AM  
 
2013-10-20 07:08:32 AM  

BullBearMS: To put it in perspective:

The jump brought its gain since its initial offering to roughly 1,100 percent. During the same period, the shares of Amazon.com rose 830 percent. Samsung, which makes smartphones as well as the chips that go into many other manufacturers' devices, rose 760 percent. And Apple leapt a staggering 3,300 percent.

By comparison, the overall Nasdaq composite rose 120 percent, while Microsoft - 10 years ago the most feared giant in technology - gained just 28 percent.


To be fair, MSFT paid dividends during that time. I doubt that makes its worth comparable to the others, but it has to be taken into account.
 
2013-10-20 07:45:33 AM  
farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2013-10-20 08:20:49 AM  
It's trading at a P/E of 28. About twice as high as anything I'd look for.

Where's the long term? If they were paying a dividend they might have a value, but they currently funnel all their profits into hardware that goes stale in 18 months. Give me a pipeline or power plant any day.
 
2013-10-20 08:51:36 AM  
Goodness knows how frequently I use their services, but all the same the existence of Google in its present state makes me a bit mad.  Everything they do comes back to one thing: collecting user data, analyzing it to pick out useful information, and selling targeted advertisements based on that information.  All the nifty little applications and services are all constructed so as to maximize this harvest, and clearly it is quite profitable to do so in a world where the average person is so bombarded with commercial speech that it is ever more difficult for marketing types to get any attention.

And it seems like such an awful waste of talent, where some of the best minds of a generation are being put to use selling ad space rather than building better automobiles and airplanes, or concocting new cancer treatments, or working in international diplomacy and politics, et cetera ad nauseam.  But GOOG is trading above $1,000, so clearly building the energy-efficient longer-lasting light bulb is not one of the priorities of our society.
 
2013-10-20 08:54:46 AM  

wildcardjack: It's trading at a P/E of 28. About twice as high as anything I'd look for.

Where's the long term? If they were paying a dividend they might have a value, but they currently funnel all their profits into hardware that goes stale in 18 months. Give me a pipeline or power plant any day.


Do you really think that mobile phones are the last thing that is going to come out of Google?
 
2013-10-20 09:54:26 AM  

Robo Beat: Goodness knows how frequently I use their services, but all the same the existence of Google in its present state makes me a bit mad.  Everything they do comes back to one thing: collecting user data, analyzing it to pick out useful information, and selling targeted advertisements based on that information.  All the nifty little applications and services are all constructed so as to maximize this harvest, and clearly it is quite profitable to do so in a world where the average person is so bombarded with commercial speech that it is ever more difficult for marketing types to get any attention.

And it seems like such an awful waste of talent, where some of the best minds of a generation are being put to use selling ad space rather than building better automobiles and airplanes, or concocting new cancer treatments, or working in international diplomacy and politics, et cetera ad nauseam.  But GOOG is trading above $1,000, so clearly building the energy-efficient longer-lasting light bulb is not one of the priorities of our society.


You have to think bigger picture here. For better or for worse, the technology that they're applying towards selling shiatty ads (for now) can directly or indirectly apply to many other things, like building better vehicles and curing diseases.

Whether it will actually pan out that way is another matter, but the potential is there. It's like complaining that all GPU technology just goes towards kids playing Call of Duty, or all nanotube research goes towards writing "HELLO WORLD" on a tiny substrate.
 
2013-10-20 09:55:43 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda

The problem with big IPOs like that is that you can't just splurge on buying some shares. Everybody and their mother is trying to buy from a limited number of available shares, which is a fundamental aspect of how stock valuation works. I'd love to buy into the Twitter IPO, but I know it's gonna be gobbled up by fatcats in New York.


Not positive how it all works (have a broker for that) but can't you buy into a fund that buys into the IPO? I have a fund that has stakes in Google and Apple and a few other big name companies. (at least from what I can tell from the quarterly reports) I could also be completely wrong, but I don't care since it constantly earns me money.
 
2013-10-20 10:02:29 AM  

HotWingAgenda: Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda

The problem with big IPOs like that is that you can't just splurge on buying some shares. Everybody and their mother is trying to buy from a limited number of available shares, which is a fundamental aspect of how stock valuation works. I'd love to buy into the Twitter IPO, but I know it's gonna be gobbled up by fatcats in New York.


No problem to buy it the week after, and you'd still be in good shape -- they didn't get to $1000 overnight.
 
hej
2013-10-20 10:05:46 AM  
Only a short matter of time before Facebook and Twitter shares are the same price.
 
2013-10-20 10:12:58 AM  

hej: Only a short matter of time before Facebook and Twitter shares are the same price.


Uh no. That would give FB a market cap like ten times Google's.

//share price cannot be compared from one company to another
 
2013-10-20 03:06:30 PM  

murray208: HotWingAgenda: Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda

The problem with big IPOs like that is that you can't just splurge on buying some shares. Everybody and their mother is trying to buy from a limited number of available shares, which is a fundamental aspect of how stock valuation works. I'd love to buy into the Twitter IPO, but I know it's gonna be gobbled up by fatcats in New York.

No problem to buy it the week after, and you'd still be in good shape -- they didn't get to $1000 overnight.


Yeah, the big firms only get first dibs on the initial stock offering, so they take advantage of the short term initial jump in the stock price. If you buy the day after and hold on to the stock long term it isn't going to make a big difference if you bought in at $85 or $100 when it comes to your long term gains.
 
2013-10-20 03:48:35 PM  

Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda


Ugh.  I told my guy to buy $5k then.  but he didn't.  and i was young and stupid and didn't know that I could say "no, you buy that farking stock, biatch."
The other $5K was going to go to Apple.

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I try not to think of it
 
2013-10-21 02:27:05 AM  

pivazena: Principal Clarinet: 2004 IPO price was $85.

Yeah - shoulda, woulda, coulda

Ugh.  I told my guy to buy $5k then.  but he didn't.  and i was young and stupid and didn't know that I could say "no, you buy that farking stock, biatch."
The other $5K was going to go to Apple.

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuu I try not to think of it


Did you hold onto the Apple stock? The return on that one since 2004 would be higher, even if you didn't sell last year when it hit 700.
 
2013-10-21 04:54:05 AM  

pivazena: Ugh. I told my guy to buy $5k then. but he didn't. and i was young and stupid and didn't know that I could say "no, you buy that farking stock, biatch."
The other $5K was going to go to Apple.


I had 20k in a blind trust related to an injury settlement .  I would have put it all on either apple or google, but had no say at all.  Wah.   Oh well.
 
2013-10-21 08:05:49 AM  

Leader O'Cola: I had 20k in a blind trust related to an injury settlement .  I would have put it all on either apple or google, but had no say at all.  Wah.   Oh well.


There's a thousand companies you could say that about. Putting all your eggs in either of those baskets would still have been a poor choice, regardless of how well it would have worked out in retrospect.
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report