How to get Google Investor's attention?

There's been a lot of buzz about Jagger in the SEO community, but at the same time, investors are only seeing good about Google. I'm among a few others here who would really like to get the ear of the investor community, as they have pull to get Google to regain some sensibility. What options would we potentially be able to drive to get this done? Here's a few ideas to get the list started. Please discuss and add to the list:

1. Find a way to issue a press release that mentions Google-- maybe the PR wires that investors read would pick these up? Jagger is most certainly news-worthy. If it's kept factual, it couldn't be considered slander or libel in any way, I don't believe(I am not a lawyer...)...

2. Class-action lawsuit. Obviously we wouldn't win, but if there was somehow a class-action lawsuit against Google over Jagger, there might be enough press generated to get Google's and the investor's attention. Some lawyer could try to make a name for himself, and who knows-- the way the courts in this country [don't] work, maybe we even WOULD win...


Any comments and/or ideas?


--
Derek

 

I don't know the exact figures off hand, but I'm pretty sure that AdSense accounts for only 10% or so of Google's total revenue. Almost all of the rest comes from contextual ads on the main Google sites. Thus, I'd think the investors wouldn't really care about a press release detailing Jagger and its effects on AdSense publishers.

Now, if you went with option 2 and the class action suit, that would indeed make some waves.

 

The officers have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize shareholder value. From the current stock price, it would seem they are doing a very good job. As a former officer in a Nasdaq company, I would say the only thing the vast majority of shareholders care about is their share price. I really doubt they give two cents about website owners not getting free placement in the search engine. It will probably only add to their bottom line as many website owners will be forced to go to PPC or other advertising to get traffic this holiday season. Google did the same thing several years ago around this time. This will probably only increase google's profit.

Make no mistake, I don't like the update- I just think any PR is likely to fall on deaf ears.

As far as a class action lawsuit- good luck. A lawsuit would require hundreds of thousands of dollars to initiate and I doubt you are going to find some firm willing to take on a cash stuffed giant like google over "free services" where no consideration exchange has taken place. You are talking about risking millions of dollars and this isn't something like a drug liability issue. Google would certainly spend tens of millions to defend this case as they wouldn't want the public to think they could be forced into listing certain sites at the top.

An organic google listing is a free service. They are free to decide who and what site ranks where they want. You have to adapt to changes if you want to keep on top of organic results. Someone is at the top, you just need to look at what they are doing that you aren't.

 

From Google's last quarter results:

http://investor.google.com/releases/2005Q3.html

Yahoo's and MSN's eagerness to enter this market is not unjustified

 

It's a - Do no evil!
and
Slaves to the grind! - Strategy

 

True, but a large portion of this "revenue" ends up going to the partners (that would be us). Most analysts only count the portion that Google keeps as "real" revenue. I'm pretty sure once you discount the portion we take, the figure is more like 10-20% of Google's total.

Cheers,
Gary

 

As another former officer in another Nasdaq listed company, I agree with mjewel. G is doing exactly what they should be, as far as being a public company is concerned. Anyway nobody would pick up such a PR no matter how much you pay to put it on the wires.

Maybe maybe MAYBE you might be able to write an article for a magazine, but unless you're an established author your chances are slim to none, and still it would not accomplish what you want. From the perspective of corporate management - speaking from experience - whatever's in the magazines, buzz web sites, etc. is ignored. They are simply regarded as entertainment.

Spend more money with Google until you can become a managed account, and then you'll at least have someone there who listens to your opinion.

 

Agree with mjewel, it would fall on deaf ears. My main site got crushed for most of it's terms in Jagger. But, I have to admit that it is pretty heavily SEOed. Google's objective is to reward sites that gain natural links. While I consider my sites to be top quality, they are still relatively new. Other sites have had 5+ year lead to gain links and authoritative status.

I was definitely ticked off at Jagger. Now I'm trying to channel that anger into site building motivation. Hopefully quality sites, not anger-ridden ones will result

 

I'm not quite sure I understand what you are asking. You want investors to be upset with Google over an SEO'd web site that no longer performs like it used to? It's part of the game. There are no guarntees here.

So long as Google continues to make money for investors, investors are not likely to care where/how it is made.

I'd put this energy into finding a way to get ranked well again. There will be other "Jaggers".

 

...and when will the bubble burst? I mean google is now over $400.00/share closing in to the gold price approx. $467.00 until the end of this year as I estimated when the shares were $200.00.

They will have to make everyone happy if they want to stay on top. Growing to fast to big will get them down in no time if they aren't careful.

"When money talks the truth is silent"

 

Google's bubble may not burst any time soon. Their 1 yr P/E is only at 45 or so, not all that outrageous compared to the bubble days. The point is they're actually making boatloads of cash, as opposed to those dotcom companies I worked for back in the late 90's.

 

The price of a stock doesn't really mean anything at all, other than psychologically. Microsoft's stock is around $25, but the company is worth almost 3x what Google is. The difference is in how many shares are issued, Microsoft has a lot more shares than Google, so each one is worth less. Capitalization, or how much a public company is "worth" is equal to the number of shares multiplied by how much each share is worth.

 

Isn't this what Enron and their likes were so good at?


--
Derek

 

Exactly. I'm surprised Google hasn't decided to split their stock a few times by now. Back in the heydey of tech stocks, a split was cause for rejoicing and a good runup in share price, even though technically it's a non-issue (double the number of shares, cut the price in half).

Arguably P/E (price divided by earnings) is the real number you should be looking at when determining whether a company is overpriced. Take the share price, divide it by the earnings per share. Or if you want to get complicated, do this using projected earnings over the next year or so to get a "forward P/E" number.

Microsoft's forward P/E is 18, Google's is 47. So you could say it's a bit more overpriced than Microsoft right now, but it's not outrageous. I still don't own any. I haven't bought or sold any stock since the crash. I'm such a wimp.

Cheers,
Gary

 

How can we talk about post-Jagger results when it's still running?


--
Derek

 

If you're looking for expired Ebay listings, Craig's List postings, and sites that have "Èj<!--DOCTYPE" as the title, I'd have to agree. For me, trying to find results that are useful, the current major-fluxing SERPs are pretty inconsistent to say the least.


--
Derek

 

It won't so long as it is not a "bubble" per say. Google stock price is not a commodity based over evalutation of an industry wide "hype". The company actually has a product, and actually makes money. No bubble to burst...