Comments on: Google 4000? Why Not? http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/ The Business of Technology Sat, 22 Nov 2008 03:15:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: David McDonald - Freelance Web Designer » Blog Archive » Cracks in the Google Share Price?Melbourne Australia http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41099 David McDonald - Freelance Web Designer » Blog Archive » Cracks in the Google Share Price?Melbourne Australia Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:49:12 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41099 <p>[...] I tend to agree with him. Google stock has increased around 300% since it’s IPO in August 2004. The last few weeks it has been interesting to watch the stock, as it hit a high of around US$475, and now today has slowly dropped back to around US$444. With some analysts predicting $2000 a share, all this speculation seems to be getting a little out of hand, and slightly reminiscent of 1999. [...]</p> [...] I tend to agree with him. Google stock has increased around 300% since it’s IPO in August 2004. The last few weeks it has been interesting to watch the stock, as it hit a high of around US$475, and now today has slowly dropped back to around US$444. With some analysts predicting $2000 a share, all this speculation seems to be getting a little out of hand, and slightly reminiscent of 1999. [...]

]]> By: My Stuff http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41072 My Stuff Thu, 12 Jan 2006 05:24:30 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41072 <p>[...] English at 2006-01-12 15:22 Categories: Technology, People, History, Politics (world) TRACKBACK Trackback Andy Kessler, who made his bones with Wall Street Meat, a book that skewered people beingwelcomed back by John Battelle sums up the current silliness around Google’s price targets in his latest post…. Ah, price targets are back in fashion. And stupid investors will fall for them again. It’s what we do on Wall Street while we wait for real news. Analyst Safa Rashtchy at Piper Jaffray made a splash with a $600 target on Google. Not to be outdone, an old competitor of mine, Mark Stahlman (is he still at it?) now at Caris & Co., declared Google will hit $2000, or about a $650 billion market cap. Yeah, maybe. [...]</p> [...] English at 2006-01-12 15:22 Categories: Technology, People, History, Politics (world) TRACKBACK Trackback Andy Kessler, who made his bones with Wall Street Meat, a book that skewered people beingwelcomed back by John Battelle sums up the current silliness around Google’s price targets in his latest post…. Ah, price targets are back in fashion. And stupid investors will fall for them again. It’s what we do on Wall Street while we wait for real news. Analyst Safa Rashtchy at Piper Jaffray made a splash with a $600 target on Google. Not to be outdone, an old competitor of mine, Mark Stahlman (is he still at it?) now at Caris & Co., declared Google will hit $2000, or about a $650 billion market cap. Yeah, maybe. [...]

]]> By: Om Malik on Broadband : » Google 600, 2000, 4000 http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41064 Om Malik on Broadband : » Google 600, 2000, 4000 Mon, 09 Jan 2006 19:24:23 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41064 <p>[...] Andy Kessler, who made his bones with Wall Street Meat, a book that skewered people being welcomed back by John Battelle sums up the current silliness around Google’s price targets in his latest post…. Ah, price targets are back in fashion. And stupid investors will fall for them again. It’s what we do on Wall Street while we wait for real news. Analyst Safa Rashtchy at Piper Jaffray made a splash with a $600 target on Google. Not to be outdone, an old competitor of mine, Mark Stahlman (is he still at it?) now at Caris & Co., declared Google will hit $2000, or about a $650 billion market cap. Yeah, maybe. [...]</p> [...] Andy Kessler, who made his bones with Wall Street Meat, a book that skewered people being welcomed back by John Battelle sums up the current silliness around Google’s price targets in his latest post…. Ah, price targets are back in fashion. And stupid investors will fall for them again. It’s what we do on Wall Street while we wait for real news. Analyst Safa Rashtchy at Piper Jaffray made a splash with a $600 target on Google. Not to be outdone, an old competitor of mine, Mark Stahlman (is he still at it?) now at Caris & Co., declared Google will hit $2000, or about a $650 billion market cap. Yeah, maybe. [...]

]]> By: Google Quietly Acquires Reqwireless - More Mobile Startups Gobbled Up - Allen Tsai - Technology in Motion http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41061 Google Quietly Acquires Reqwireless - More Mobile Startups Gobbled Up - Allen Tsai - Technology in Motion Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:16:04 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41061 <p>[...] Search engines are very serious about the mobile industry, and Google is at the head of the pack. Those insane stock price projections may not be so far off. [...]</p> [...] Search engines are very serious about the mobile industry, and Google is at the head of the pack. Those insane stock price projections may not be so far off. [...]

]]> By: BC http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41059 BC Sun, 08 Jan 2006 15:13:33 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41059 <p>I like the Google Pack updater. It reminds me of "apt-get" for Windows. It's something that Microsoft should have built into the OS from day 1.</p> I like the Google Pack updater. It reminds me of “apt-get” for Windows. It’s something that Microsoft should have built into the OS from day 1.

]]> By: bill http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41057 bill Sat, 07 Jan 2006 23:13:15 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41057 <p>The Google price is an expression of the future. If U beleive in the future buy. If you believe in the past lose.</p> The Google price is an expression of the future. If U beleive in the future buy. If you believe in the past lose.

]]> By: Chris Edwards http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41054 Chris Edwards Sat, 07 Jan 2006 14:46:21 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41054 <p>There is no reason why a product cannot be successful simply because company founders reckon they would like to buy it themselves: it's worked fairly well for Steve Jobs at Apple. </p> <p>However, I agree that Google's founders might have to try a bit harder than a software bundle to up the numbers - and the share price - by any significant amount. That is unless we just slipped back 10 years time and everyone forgot to tell me it's 1996 all over again.</p> There is no reason why a product cannot be successful simply because company founders reckon they would like to buy it themselves: it’s worked fairly well for Steve Jobs at Apple.

However, I agree that Google’s founders might have to try a bit harder than a software bundle to up the numbers - and the share price - by any significant amount. That is unless we just slipped back 10 years time and everyone forgot to tell me it’s 1996 all over again.

]]> By: Sunny http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41051 Sunny Sat, 07 Jan 2006 08:34:45 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41051 <p>Somebody buy them some PowerBooks.</p> Somebody buy them some PowerBooks.

]]> By: Emergintex http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41048 Emergintex Sat, 07 Jan 2006 07:38:16 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41048 <p><strong>Google Pack Installer/Updater</strong></p> <pre><code>It promises to be an updater too, so you wont have to worry about updating to newer versions of Google Goodies when they are out. It is clean and to the point. Like that. </code></pre> <p>...</p> Google Pack Installer/Updater

It promises to be an updater too, so you wont have to worry about updating to newer versions of Google Goodies when they are out. It is clean and to the point. Like that.

…

]]> By: Erik http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41045 Erik Sat, 07 Jan 2006 05:00:24 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41045 <p>At 2000 the market cap would be 592 billion dollars, that's almost as much as the GDP of Australia. </p> <p>http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html</p> At 2000 the market cap would be 592 billion dollars, that’s almost as much as the GDP of Australia.

(link)

]]> By: Beef Jezos http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41043 Beef Jezos Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:34:45 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41043 <p>In 100 years time, we will look back on Google as we do now on the great Tulip Bubble and Ponzi Pyramid Scheme.</p> In 100 years time, we will look back on Google as we do now on the great Tulip Bubble and Ponzi Pyramid Scheme.

]]> By: khabri http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41041 khabri Sat, 07 Jan 2006 01:12:20 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41041 <p>Sure $2000 or whatever, but what is the rational behind arriving at that figure ? The only one I can think of is $20 EPS which is achievable if they grow at 100% over the next two years.</p> Sure $2000 or whatever, but what is the rational behind arriving at that figure ? The only one I can think of is $20 EPS which is achievable if they grow at 100% over the next two years.

]]> By: Om Malik http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41039 Om Malik Sat, 07 Jan 2006 00:44:03 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41039 <p>i don't think we can top that.... can we.</p> i don’t think we can top that…. can we.

]]> By: brian http://gigaom.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41036 brian Sat, 07 Jan 2006 00:39:53 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2006/01/06/google-2000/#comment-41036 <p>Heck, what do mere Wall St. analysts know. I will out raise them all. My price target for Google is ONE GOOGOL (1.0x10^100). Ironic, eh?</p> Heck, what do mere Wall St. analysts know. I will out raise them all. My price target for Google is ONE GOOGOL (1.0×10^100). Ironic, eh?

]]>