Latest InsideMicrosoft Posts: InsideGoogle: Google Decides Not To Release Quarterly Report .comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Google Decides Not To Release Quarterly Report
Citing a desire to remain unconventional, Google decided today not to release its quarterly figures as expected and mandated by law, reports Yeald. Gooogle founder Sergey Page and Larry Brin were quoted as saying “We were afraid people would see us as a conventional company with quarterly reports and all. We really want to be unconventional.” They also revealed a little known Google motto: "Say nothing, keep smiling". The article continues on with Google's consideration of using a Dutch-style auction for the quarterly report, using lava lamps to solve Califonia's energy crisis, CEO Eric Schmidt's statement that Google's IPO prospectus clearly states Google can be "unconventional", and if you haven't figured out by now that this is a satire article, you really need to work on your deductive reasoning.

Five hours to go...

There's more to this story...

The Corporate Governance Quotient lists factors such as accountability and executive compensation levels. ISS found 21 bad practices at Google, earning it a CGQ of only 0.2, and so placing it last in the S&P 500. The watchdog criticized the two-tier share structure, not enough external directors, insider loans, and stock repricing options.

"I'd say those numbers sound pretty darn evil," ISS senior veep Patrick McGurn told the FT.
factual-news = bad
funny/fake-news = goood

Welcome to disneyland.
Okay, to clarify, the previosu comment by anonymous was in response to my comment, which read:

I guess the difference is that the story I linked to was supposed to be funny on a satire site, and the one you linked to was a real story, trashily reported by a British tabloid. Personally, I'd rather read fake news than that kind of news.

Now, me responding to him:

Fake news = funny. Useless, but entertaining
Real news = essential. A cornerstone of civilization
Trashy tabloid news = useless. A bane on mankind, completely immature, and pathetic.

I probably should have first mentioned that in the non-blogging world, I'm an editor at a New York newspaper. I look at articles like the one you linked to and get disgusted by them. If I ever wrote trash like that, I would fire myself.
So, you're saying Google's corporate governance style is actually normal for the market ?

(we're listening, very closely on this one...)

Granted, a public relations machine can build all sorts of fuzzy/we're-unconvential-corporate-america images. But, when the SEC investigates, it's got a good reason:

"The Securities and Exchange commission has confirmed that it will investigate Google's chaotic allocation of buddy shares..."

Seriously, take a good look at the investigation, people. The American investor deserves better corporate governance than we're getting.

Argue on the facts, sans the rhetoric.
I didn't say anything about Google's corporate governance, just about the article you were linking to. The article is from a tabloid, and a bad one at that, and as a "newspaperman", I felt the need to say something about your choice of where you get your news. I wouldn't read a site like that if I were you, and I certainly wouldn't believe everything I read, any more than I would a humor site.

As for the governance report, Wall Street has made no secret of the fact that Google pissed them off when they went rogue with their IPO. For three months, we've had to deal with meaningless reports from normally trustworthy analysts giving Google bad ratings and claiming the stock had peaked. Now, with Google up almost 100%, investors are pissed that their trusted brokers lied to them and bashed Google when they should have been more concerned with getting the best-performing stock for their customers. This "corporate governance" rating is pure bull, and was dismissed very heavily when it came out over a month ago. It sounds good as a headline, but it doesn't hold up so well under any sort of scrutiny, and I like to push a more serious brand of journalism here.
The author of that sleazy tabloid's article was also interviewed by the *BBC* regarding Google. He just might know what he's talking about -- or at least the BBC appears to believe so. Is the BBC turning into a tabloid, too? I sure hope not.

"...Andrew Orlowski in Manchester - he writes and lectures in California on IT issues."

Check out the BBC article here:

I dunno, maybe it's a matter of pure opinion. But, the consensus does seem to be that Google's financial practices are, for a lack of a better term, irregular.

America's industry needs companies that raise standards, not lowers them. Indeed, corporate America as a whole should be leading the world when it comes to financial practices. That's not happening, especially in Google's case.

I think we all agree, there's a lot of room for improvement at Google in terms of corporate governance. Correct?

.rob adams
LOL - ...and Google will redifine binary - by forsing only oooo's into programming. I love reading these sarcastic and light posts - they are way more funny then any comedy in FT. And yes Google has a cooperate Kindergarten language - and it's difficult to compare it to a listed Breakfast producer or a coffee shop - And they should be dizz'ed - and yet its the new world - and so cool of them to try to keep fresh (WHILE PERFORMING LIKE an Bicycle Athlete with a gasoline injection). Dear N - please shoot much more of this - and camouflage it. The anonymous posts are even more funny then your posts... ;). respect.
I'm not entirely sure what you just said, but I appreciate the compliment. It was a compliment, right?

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Who Reads InsideGoogle?

The Seattle Times

Evan Williams

Most Popular Posts
A Look At Google's Secret Instant Messaging Product: Hello

New Gmail Features Include An Atom Feed

An Interview With Google's Marissa Mayer at Digital Life

Google And Microsoft: Neighbors