I was trying to link to the consensus revenues number.

I am still checking with folks within the analyst community and see how they report their numbers, just to make sure.

to be fair, 20% increase is pretty darn good. i am still trying to find a similar growth story in any business at this revenue level.

but then when the stock is hovering at $500 a share, 20% isn’t enough.

AP
Google 4Q Earnings Nearly Triple
Wednesday January 31, 11:02 pm ET
By Michael Liedtke, AP Business Writer
Google 4Q Earnings Nearly Triple to Sprint Past Analyst Expectations

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google Inc.’s fourth-quarter profit nearly tripled as the online search engine leader once again sprinted past analyst expectations,

…
The company’s revenue for the period totaled $3.2 billion, a 67 percent increase from $1.92 billion in the prior year.

After subtracting commissions paid to its advertising partners, Google’s fourth-quarter revenue was $2.23 billion. That also exceeded the average analyst estimate of $2.19 billion and represented a 20 percent increase from the third quarter.

The sequential change in Google’s quarterly revenue is closely watched by investors. Besides exceeding analyst expectations, Google’s sequential revenue growth also outpaced the 15 percent increase posted by Yahoo Inc., which operates the Internet’s second-largest advertising network.

Through December, Google held a 47 percent share of the U.S. search market, compared with 28 percent for Yahoo, according to comScore Media Metrix.

For all of 2006, Google earned $3.08 billion, or $9.94 per share, on revenue of $10.6 billion. That compared with net income of $1.47 billion, or $5.02 per share, on revenue of $6.1 billion.

The $3.2 bn number you site on the top is the gross revenue figure:
“Google just reported1 its fourth quarter 2006 sales of $3.2 billion..”

where as, the number you quote in the bottom is the number (ex-TAC), which is how most analysts look at it, hence the discrepancy.
“For the fourth quarter 2006, the high end revenue expectation were $2.31 billion. This is a moon shot..”

If you look at Google’s rev-ex TAC ($3.2 bn less TAC of $976 mm) of $2.2 bn which is lower than the high analyst estimates of $2.3 bn.

Still very impressive growth but not the moonshot type story.

They grew 19% ex-TAC (Q-o-Q) and 73% (y-over-y for the 4Q)

thanks for the post. I am checking into this. the revenue estimates on some of the random reports i get from wall street firms don’t indicate that the revenue numbers are ex-TAC. Regardless, I will check and recheck this and update the post accordingly.

I find your posts usually insightful, but looks like lately in order to come up with catchy headlines, you are ignoring your journalistic roots and not checking your data for accuracy.

Agree with Keith and Darren comments earlier that the revenue beat was minimal if you compare the right revenue figures!

Kind of stuffy if you ask me…

It’s a Wizard of Oz situation.

I am amazed that Wall Street does not challenge the numbers more on that revenue yet find it comical that Sarbanes Oxley forces more traditional companies to disclose why they bought to much toner..