you seem to be a classic case of someone who likes to have their moral cake and eat it.
On the one hand you waste no time in dissing any competition to LR, no matter how stupid and insulting your language, (the classic - I haven't seen opticalkeyhole (asshole) get turned into a mega-merger or words to that effect) but when faced with a company that actually seems to do most things correctly, you go positively sick-green with envy.
Huge orgs like Microsoft, with pots of money at their disposal, have been put on the back foot by them. No doubt their initiatives will take a while to feed through, but only an idiot would bet against them.
On brand value alone - considerably less than your own despite your mega-coporate-merger - it is being constantly reinforced by the gazillions of mostly positive daily experiences, and is if anything still grossly undervalued.
It may be hype to you, who perhaps wishes for an even bigger mega merger, and cannot stand the thought of anybody who disagrees with you, but compared to the whale of a google, you appear with your ranting to be somewhat less than a minnow.
re: Google: Hypometer in the Red>OMG, what is WRONG with you
nothing much Panda, I just don't like you, and I have an aversion to bullshit, which your blogs in particular are full of. Self serving, self promoting, 9 times out of 10 nothing to do with the subject of the website you work for, and deliberately and stupidly provocative. Sounds like you should become a politician. You sure ain't a writer.
re: Google: Hypometer in the RedLast night I went back and crunched some numbers. I will probably follow up with a column, but the upshot is that if you calculate an implied CAGR for Google at the current market cap, assuming shareholders seek a 20% annual return and industry-normalized P/E of 40 in 2010, Google needs to grow 100% annually for the next five years and have earnings of $5B by 2010 to justify its current valuation (or yesterday's valuation, I should say).
nobody doubts that Google will have a hard time living up to expectations and their capitalisation - about 18% above Cisco (?) - is for sure vulnerable to even the slightest modification in those of expectations.
On the other hand this is an amazing company - not so much in terms of its current management,which is obviously OK to have got this far, but probably will reach its limits sooner or later - but in its theoretical opportunity.
One would have to say that in its position as potential global manager of a very high degree of global information, a five year horizon may not be the right timescale on which to judge them, since their opportunity for significant growth probably covers several decades.
There will almost certainly be a temporary correction in the stock but whether that will take place in 3 or 6 or 12 or 18 months is obviously the question.
you seem to be a classic case of someone who likes to have their moral cake and eat it.
On the one hand you waste no time in dissing any competition to LR, no matter how stupid and insulting your language, (the classic - I haven't seen opticalkeyhole (asshole) get turned into a mega-merger or words to that effect) but when faced with a company that actually seems to do most things correctly, you go positively sick-green with envy.
Huge orgs like Microsoft, with pots of money at their disposal, have been put on the back foot by them. No doubt their initiatives will take a while to feed through, but only an idiot would bet against them.
On brand value alone - considerably less than your own despite your mega-coporate-merger - it is being constantly reinforced by the gazillions of mostly positive daily experiences, and is if anything still grossly undervalued.
It may be hype to you, who perhaps wishes for an even bigger mega merger, and cannot stand the thought of anybody who disagrees with you, but compared to the whale of a google, you appear with your ranting to be somewhat less than a minnow.