I don't think the decision was a narrowly-focused as a revenue stream. More like buying the majority of a market that is consumed by the single most powerful economic force on Earth: young tech-savvy wage earners, each of which will be purchasing upscale items for many decades to come.
Lotta reliable dollars behind those eyeballs. That fruit might be a whole lot heavier with juice in a couple of years... command a much, much higher sale price than a measly-ol' Billion dollars. And if not, it will nonetheless pump up the overall value of Google as a media company. Just watch. It isn't about a hastily-purchased revenue stream. Respectfully, Adam Phillip Churvis President Productivity Enhancement > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 4:18 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Google Chrome > > and i would call YouTube Google's most expensive failure to date. They > make almost nothing from a $1 billion+ purchase. If management had to > defend that move on its own merit, they would all get fired. > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Casey wrote: > > > >> How about Google Video Player? :P > >> > > > > They renamed it to youtube ;-) But I don't think you can label that > a > > product. It is a service with a skinned flash player. Maybe you are > thinking > > of "Adobe Media Player" > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:267467 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
