Don't ruin this for me, scruff.
...tell you what. If you don't say anything, I'll let you use my pasta bar coupons once a week.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Selling Motorola Mobility to Lenovo for $2.91 Billion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't ruin this for me, scruff.
...tell you what. If you don't say anything, I'll let you use my pasta bar coupons once a week.
Wauw some nice pure speculation, or do you have anything to back this up?
Not at all it refers to the fact that the vast mayority of x86 pc's was priced the same and had the same capabilities .
MS never had a true monopoly .
As I said, you dont get google. Google just doesnt sell add places. The search engine is actually just one way of getting info just like most of its other products are. Google sells that info by the way of showing you relevant adds.
They go beyond that and they sell to partners derivative bussines you can also benefit from.
Everything they created feeds this and is important to keep being relevant wih info for its customers.
Take the nexus line, it doesnt matter google isnt making any money on it, android acceptence was important . Now that android is the dominant phone OS, its no longer needed.
They are direct competitors google has a 60% market share far from monopoly .
Nope and you have just hsown it. If google can get that info from you yelling at your android phone, its just as valid to them as typing it in google search .
Al they want is you use any google product .
Don't ruin this for me, scruff.
...tell you what. If you don't say anything, I'll let you use my pasta bar coupons once a week.
Not enough. I want more. I want your key to the executive men's room too.
The companies misuse of its strength was the reason for its unpopularity and that of its founder. The public has a much higher opinion of Bill Gates, since he is no longer running the company and can't do no more evil.
That's debatable. What he is responsible for is software licensing becoming a business. He pretty much invented the concept of being a software company selling only bits and bytes. His business model is now in danger, because Google introduced a new strategy, to give software away for free in order to grow a service. Microsoft isn't doing Bing out of pure evil, its also a defensive move against Google attacking their core business.
They sure act as if they still have one. Windows 8 is the attempt to exploit the old desktop monopoly to gain traction in the new tablet market. That's the reason it has two UIs glued together. It just isn't working this time around.
Are you managing your relationship status with Twitter? I want to run a direct marketing campaign aimed at single women age 20 living in Minnesota. The potential to create a competitor to Facebook is zero. Not everything using the buzzword "social" is a network comparable to Facebook. All the clones around the world, who did what Facebook does, are loosing their active members. Only in China were Facebook was banned, it obviously couldn't grow a monopoly.
A convenience feature, conveniently setting you up to feed Googles cash cow service. Microsofts OS-integration of browser and media player also were mere convenience features. And you always could change the defaults of all purposefully redirected filetype associations, shouldn't you fear the hassle.
Sure they are. Most importantly the AppStore is a monopoly for installing apps on the iPhone, with sometimes arbitrary rules and an unavoidable 30% cut for Apple.
All services requiring the input of a maximum of users to be useful are monopolies as soon as they become dominant. Look at auction sites, even if they are free of charge, they can't attract buyers or sellers. Everyone goes to ebay, because everyone is on ebay.
Sure I can, nothing easier than that. I can set a limit of what is deemed to be too successful and cut all the shoots above it. I can even forbid selling search-based advertising altogether, if I find that necessary. I am not the slave to some corporation, corporations exist to serve me and the public good.
And you have what to back that up? Whatever, if you like they only had a false monopoly. I don't care anymore.
That's what I've said. I don't know why you want to disagree with me on this point. Sure they want your info, but only to sell more ads. They aren't the NSA. The info is only a means to an end to make the ads more relevant and more valuable to advertisers.
There are dozens of flavors of Android, without being more specific that sentence means nearly nothing. Nexus is about unchanged vanilla Android and it was only somewhat successful in promoting it.
Except for Chinese Baidu which is a special case, Google with 68.1% is 10 times the size of Yahoo 6.4% and Bing 5.6%. More than enough to be a monopoly.
That's why they need to keep control over Android, which is hard since it's based on free software and can be forked by anyone. Amazons Fire OS is loosely based on Android, but stripped from everything resembling a Google service. Amazon has no interest in feeding information to Google, they have their own services to promote. Google only wins, when unchanged vanilla Android wins and that isn't so sure.
What they really want is to become indispensable, so that they can never be pushed away on any product. Without making millions of devices, you can't decide which apps and services become preinstalled. Its absolutely fine to sell the devices at zero profit, as Amazon is doing it. But you still have to make them and to sell them, otherwise there is no guaranty, that your services are ready when the user is yelling at the device.
„We want to make money when people use our devices, not when they buy our devices.“ – Jeff Bezos
I'm still trying to understand the spin out there that this sale was pushed for by Samsung. It doesn't make any sense to me because Moto as it stands now was really no threat to Samsung. Lenovo getting serious about smartphones seems like a bigger threat to Samsung than Moto, a Google company, ever was.
Samsung was threatening to leave android for their own os, tizen. I could see samsung getting bent out of shape because IMO moto has been showing samsung how it's done lately with respect to a non bogged down , non touchwiz android. All signs were pointing to a potential moto x -2 putting samsungs flagships to shame. With Lenovo at the helm, now everything has changed
It's all rather funny because tizen would probably have sucked.
It's not really that simple, because you forget to discount what they once paid for it.
Well, they were actively proceeding towards leaving android.. Or are you arguing semantics since tizen could likely run android apps?
How developing Tizen means that "they were actively proceeding towards leaving android"
By the way, Tizen can run. Android apps but they can't run Google services
Makes a good reason for Lenovo to buy Moto to get themselves into the market with a name thats popular for phones already.
the deal is questonable from Google side. it's not as terrible as the people in this thread are screaming about. Still makse you raise an eyebrow.
But for 3b, Lenovo just bought themselves a company that could get them back into mobile, in a way they did to get into the PC business when they bough IBM's computer business.
While I had hoped they would use Motorola Mobility to expand into manufacturing their own android phones, we all know that they bought Motorola primarily for the patent portfolio. They are retaining the patents that they wanted. This a separate deal that has nothing to do with the first and it gives them $2 billion in revenue. Hence they made money. Simple as that.
The math of the transaction looks something like this:
SO, the purchase as it stands now of Moto cost Google 4.19b.
However, Google didnt sell all. They are retaining a portfolio of what? 10,000 patents. in 2012, those patents were valued at 5.5b. I'm not sure what they are worth in 2014, could be less, could be more. have to wait to see what the financials say. They also retained a few subsidiary companies that Moto owned, including the development house working on that modular phone prototype.
yup.
The rumour mill on the net is claiming that When Samsung showed off their 12" pro tablet at CES, with it's extremely modified skin, Google decided it was time to try and reign Samsung's designs in. They felt it varied too much from the Google experience and that it too closely resembled other technologies. Google and Samsung apparently had some talks, where Samsung promised to shelve tizen for a while and scale back Touchwiz's modifications.
the Rumours and conspiracy thoerists believe that Google's concession was selling Moto so not to directly compete with Samsung in the hardware business. I'm just not sure how much truth there is to that.
Well if you reverse the signs.
My point only was that "Google gained 2B, it's that simple" is not correct. I have no idea how much they lost or how much they have gained from Motorola during their ownership, neither do you.
That is not leaving Android as you claimed.
It is funny, the more vocal sites about Samsung leaving Android and predicting the fail of that OS are the ones that can not stand nor Android nor Samsung
Not to argue your larger point (I disagree with the person that you are responding to), but it is perfectly reasonable to refer to Microsoft as a monopoly.
There are other definitions besides wikipedia.
http://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/comp...ws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined
Add in another $1.5-2 billion in operating losses.
Well if you reverse the signs.
My point only was that "Google gained 2B, it's that simple" is not correct. I have no idea how much they lost or how much they have gained from Motorola during their ownership, neither do you.
Nope!
we also don't know how much of the initial purchase was considered "goodwill" either.
there's a lot that, as speculating couch analysts we will never be privy too. its a lot of speculation based on evidence. Thats all we have. and thats why we are here on MacRumors discussing it, instead of being paid the 7 figure salaries
I view that as semantics
if touchwiz is any indication of how tizen would have performed, you can see why people would make that argument.
I wish samsung would just make the hardware and forget about software, make the useful apps downloadable from the play store, basically follow moto's example.
Windows has never been a monopoly? **************************!
About 9.970.000 results (0.20 seconds).
Yea that google search proved a lot.
Let me google "google is a toaster" for you.
About 8,500,000 results (0.48 seconds)
I just proved Google is a toaster. Yay me.
Michael