Google in Talks to Buy YouTube 157
tessaiga writes "The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google is in talks to buy YouTube for about $1.6 billion. YouTube users watch more that 100 million videos daily, and the site's market share tops that of similar services offered by Google and other popular Web sites. This comes after a story earlier this morning that co-founder Sergey Brin is pushing for Google to cut back on the volume of products being offered, complaining that 'I was getting lost in the sheer volume of the products we were releasing'. Guess Google Video is one of the products making the approved shortlist."
But they couldn't solve our puzzles! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! (Score:5, Interesting)
Stuff I hate about YouTube:
1.) Takes forever to load some videos. Google Video is lightening fast.
2.) Can't really shift to a point on the timeline. Unlike Google Video, it can't seem to pick up midstream. What's the point of even giving the user the option to move the timeline if you can't stream from that point?
3.) Sometimes you leave comments and they aren't saved.
4.) Regardless if the comments save or not, the page will completely refresh restarting the video. (No problem, you think -- I'll just fast forward to where I was. Wait, can't do that).
5.) Sometimes pages flat out won't load. View the historic pages for stuff like "most popular video" and you'll sometimes see this.
Not to mention the UI guys look like they threw up all over the screen, and the general content (like Google Video) is lacking. If you see one dumbass 14-year old kick someone in the crotch, you've seen them all. (On a sidenote, who are these teenagers that have all day to kick people in their crotch).
I'm hoping one of these days people will realize, just like Tamagotchies, pet rocks and the Tubthumping song, that the only reason sites like YouTube and MySpace prevade culture are because they're popular. It has nothing to do with great content or inherently good design. All you need nowadays apparently is crap code and a userbase willing to kick people in the crotch.
Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! (Score:5, Insightful)
One request for both: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
well then no WONDER Microsoft has done so well to date...
To get Linux on the desktop we need users willing to be crotch-kickers.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Nonsense, just set up a cron job.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That must be Step 2!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Most people [1] (especially teens) want to feel like they are unique or belong to an exclusive group. Once said group goes mainstream, it's boring and dull.
[1] Not me of course, I read Slashdot for the scintillating comments at -1 threshhold and
Re: (Score:2)
You sound like someone who says they hate hip hop because it's misogynistic and "it's just talking anyway". Sure, you use YouTube to watch 14 year olds kick each other in the crotch. Other people don't.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NXdCYRppCc [youtube.com]
The problem with YouTube is the same as the problem with Myspace, though. Its owners are censor-happy. But unlike myspace, you can just take your ball & go home to some other host,
Re:But they couldn't solve our puzzles! (Score:4, Informative)
Incorrect! The comment feature is still labeled as new, but it's been available for a while now. Look on the right side of the page, below the download button and the description of the video. There's a list of links, "Playlist - Details - From user - Related - Comments[New!] - Flag as inappropriate".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Myspace is different from the other examples because of the network effect. You go to a social networking (or auction, or "news for nerds, stuff that matters") site because of the other people who go there, not the site itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This story (Score:1, Troll)
Google's a moron? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well you still shouldn't -- while it might come to pass, I'd take this story with a massive grain of salt (mountain sized). The story comes from one unnamed individual, and is then circulated by some people that have a long history of rumors that didn't come to pass.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Somehow "a really tiny grain of salt" didn't sound right. I think the meaning is pretty clear and nonambiguous to anyone who doesn't literally parse a common saying. Basically I'm talking about readers who don't suffer from Severe Aspergers/Autism.
I don't understand why they need to. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't understand why they need to. (Score:5, Interesting)
My money has Google and MS getting slaughtered by Apple here.
Re:I don't understand why they need to. (Score:5, Informative)
Google is too smart to walk right into a battle with Apple. My guess is they will try to seek some mutually beneficial arrangement with Apple. Don't forget this [apple.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, leaving what, exactly? Something worth $1,600,000,000? I hardly think so. There is no way to keep YouTube valuable while filtering the content enough to make sure no one sues you. And with Google's deep pockets, I'm sure the queue to sue would begin on the day of the aquisition. YouTube is a poisoned pill that no company could aquire, much less pay for.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Google/YouTube: Thousands of downloadable videos, user supplied content, comments system, etc.
iTunes Video: US Only download system. No idea what's on it exactly (apple won't let me even look) but I believe it's only studio produced content.
No name change pls! (Score:2)
I hope if Google bought Youtube, google sticks with the brand name 'Youtube' instead of renaming it to 'Google Video'.
The new name. (Score:5, Funny)
You don't want to know what the new logo looks like.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The new name. (Score:5, Insightful)
I already have a television, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isnt that just Television in general?
Re: (Score:2)
What is YouTube doing that makes them so much more popular than Google Video? If they can identify that, they could just compete with them instead of buying them. Is it just the network effect of having a large user base building on itself? Or is YouTube clearly a better service and is more successful as a result? They all seem pretty much the same to me, but I'm only watching videos, I've never tried posting any.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, excepting the fact that YouTube itself is a crappy badly done webpage.
If you think YouTube is a well-designed website, you should maybe start getting your eyes checked. Then, just make sure to stay far, far away from any web-related programming or design.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"YouTube commanded 46% of visits to U.S. online video sites in August, according to market research firm Hitwise. That compared to a 23% share for the video activities of News Corp.'s MySpace social-networking site, and 10% for Google Video."
I wouldn't go as far to say a 10% share for Google video was unsuccessful, but getting a 50%+ share of the video market would be far more successful. So in that sense I say it would be worth quite a bit. I'd agree I can't see why they need t
Re:I don't understand why they need to. (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe their "Don't be evil" clause also means keeping YouTube out of the hands of Newscorp.
Re: (Score:2)
Even showing interest in YouTube will drive up the eventual price Newscorp would pay. Which benefits google if it forces Newscorp to pay millions of dollars of money that they would have otherwise been able to spend beefing up the service.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Google and Branding (Score:2, Interesting)
This then poses an interesting brand question: YouTube has, oh, about 10^4 times more brand equity than anything else Google has snapped up before, so how would we see this branded? Google YouTube? Google Video Powered by YouTube? YouTube powered by Google?
Re: (Score:2)
Still $1.6 billion seems an awful lot to pay for something with no solid income stream and a vicious lawsuit waiting to happen. Google might just redirect youtube.com to video.google.com, or it may turn it into youtube.google.com with
Well (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Xenix didn't such compared to other UNIXes.
OS/2 didn't suck, and neither did Windows NT next to desktop UNIX or DR-DOS+GEM
Microsoft Word 2 didn't suck next to any of its competition.
Microsoft have released more products that don't suck than Google (although, to be fair, I suspect most of us have been forced to use more of the ones that do suck). Google search has gone downhill a lot in recent months; I'm frequently finding searches fail to return any useful information, or if they do it's buried on page 3-4 of the results. Google is a young company, and they haven't had the time to screw up as badly as MS yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Once MS locked up the desktop OS market, it seemed like their MO was to suck. They absolutely stopped caring about sucking less and more about pumping us for money and destroying competition (sometimes by deliberately sucking more). They may be a little better now
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But it did suck compared to some of the multitasking DOS clones.
Xenix didn't such compared to other UNIXes.
Not sure on the timeframe or truth of that. Wasn't I using Dynix back in the day, and was that better than Xenix? I just don't know.
OS/2 didn't suck, and neither did Windows NT next to desktop UNIX or DR-DOS+GEM
Compared to NeXTstep, they all sucked. (OpenStep by the time NT came out)
Microsoft Word 2 didn't suck next to any of its competition.
When was Wor
Re: (Score:2)
These were released some years after DOS, however.
Not sure on the timeframe or truth of that. Wasn't I using Dynix back in the day, and was that better than Xenix? I just don't know.
It may have been better, but I doubt it was sufficiently better to be able to say Xenix sucked in comparison. Oh, and Dynix was released four years after Xenix.
Compared to NeXTstep, they all sucked. (OpenStep by the time NT came out)
True. Most things still
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Compared to NeXTstep, they all didn't require a $10,000 computer.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but nor did NS, once the slab was out.
Re: (Score:2)
How many jobs that exist today are there that *totally* rely upon computers and software? I'm biased and obsolete, as I can still operate pencil, paper and a straightedge competently and also effectively communicate relatively complicated concepts by drawing pictures without electricity.
Oh wait, I forgot that death will take care of that problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Its funny how every day the lines between google and microsoft blur. If microsoft tried this an unholy hell would be released..
If MS were doing this, they'd already be talking about how they'll use this to kill Google.
It makes sense... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
-1, Buzzword.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, please. This has nothing to do with technology, and everything to do with expanding their user base and their foothold in the online video market.
Re: (Score:1)
compared to myspace (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't it up to the programmers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Didn't we learn last week that you can work on anything you want at Google?
Re: (Score:1)
It looks like the Google management team might be trying to bring a bit more focus to their efforts which is probably a good thing IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Guy 1: Where do you work?
Google Guy: At Google.
Guy 1: Wow, that's impressive. Which application did you work on? Search? Gmail?
Google Guy: I worked on something that they decided not release.
Guy 1: Oh, that's too bad.
Only a moron... (Score:5, Insightful)
YouTube links are the only "You gotta see this." links that I get that I actually open on occassion. I think Google is making a great move here, if it's true. Given the other recent story about Google allowing google home page elements to be posted in websites, YouTube is a natural eyeball catcher to pull in people off personal websites.
Re: (Score:2)
I jump on links friends send me from YouTube as well, because I know that I'd better watch the videos before they get pulled from the site. I know after a recent PPV event (Ultimate Fighting Championship), a friend sent me a link to one of the fights that was up on YouTube. It got pulled a day later. I know that there used to be those types of vid
Summarize This Story In A Short, Crusty Video! (Score:1)
In other news ... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Whaddya know. Not all rumors are true. Last time, it was 'industry executives', this time it's 'a person familiar with the matter'.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It fits with search (Score:1)
Lawyers Wet Dream (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
$100 million to YouTube, $1.5 billion in the Lawsuit Warchest.
Moo (Score:1)
What? It hasn't even been a year since the last time [slashdot.org].
Oh my.
This verifies my theory. (Score:2)
Morons. (Score:1)
Do you GoogleTube (Score:1)
solves more than one problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
there's also a spat of censorship cries going on over a bunch of videos of soldiers in Iraq and the associated groups getting banned/deleted/whatever they do. which is probably just due to a broken rating and offensiveness system and terrorists abusing the system, but thats neither here nor there.
Copyright (Score:2, Interesting)
1. Google is buying out their biggest rival in google video, by adding the huge library and viwership, google video will be the place to go for anything related to videos online and give the already high traffic on google related services a boost
2. But it still doesn't solve the copyright problems google is going to face with RIAA and MPAA
3. This tatic (buying out competitor) sounds a lot like something MS would do, is this a sign that google is finally in a stage of major corpora
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but when has Microsoft aquired a defacto monopoly in a particular area by simply buying out its biggest rival in that area? I can't think of any example off the top of my head (one could argue that they tried to with the MS/Intuit deal that the DOJ nixed).
Am i the only one who thinks this makes sense? (Score:5, Insightful)
Google may well have the hardware, but they've a lot to learn about what makes a site popular. Myspace has to be one of the ugliest sites around yet its popularity is ever soaring because it is social. Google video just is not.
At the end of the day, Youtube is synonymous with the online video hosting/sharing community and that is what Google are paying £850 million for. That and the ability to integrate with existing Google products (Google calendar & vlog combined? That's some powerful stuff right there.)
Mark Cuban Is Right (Score:1)
Uh oh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Invent Google algorithm
2. Invent Adsense
3. Profit!
4. Profit!
5. Buy loss making company for huge amount of money
6. No more profit!
We will combine our forces and... (Score:1)
Obvious (Score:2)
So now Google's about to spend 1.7
Good for Apple? (Score:3, Insightful)
Mark Cuban eat your heart out (Score:2)
Google likely just wants YouTube's name (Score:2)
If Google did buy out YouTube, it could simply rebrand its Google Video site with YouTube icons and the MySpace kids wouldn't even notice.
Google faces significant risks from rushing in behind YT, because Google has money and is eminently suable. They can't afford to simply let copywrit
I don't think this is a smart move... (Score:2)
A few reasons why:
1. When was the last time Google spent a billion dollars on any takeover -- the answer, I think, is never. They've made small purchases here and there of $50-200M, but this would be the largest and most complex by far. (Unless the price being rumoured is wrong too, which is possible). Why rock the boat with large outsid
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair... (Score:2)
They have been removing a lot of the propaganda/snuff vids, but users have to find and flag them first. And they quickly get resubmitted under different names. From the NYT article linked on the blog:
Re: (Score:2)