ie8 fix
Click Here

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Google+ spurs margin worry, questions about ROI for search giant

By | July 11, 2011, 7:42am PDT

Google appears to have generated some social networking buzz with its Google+ effort, but Wall Street analysts are already wondering about return on investment and the hit to profit margins.

The drumbeat of concern isn’t all that surprising given that Google reports its second quarter earnings on Thursday. The search giant’s results will have the usual mix of opportunities and concern. Wall Street has been freaking out over Google’s penchant for hiring and there won’t be any letdown in spending on people and technology.

Indeed, Google+ will color the company’s conference call, but a few analysts are going to be asking where the money is. Google is expected to report earnings of $7.86 a share for the second quarter.

Morgan Stanley analyst Scott Devitt last week cut his earnings estimates and price target for Google shares to $600 from $645 based on the company’s big spending. Devitt noted that Google’s profit margins will decline because the company is hiring like mad, spending more on traditional advertising (TV, radio, outdoor) and betting on new businesses such as Google+ and Google Offers, two efforts designed to ding Facebook and Groupon, respectively.

On the Google+ effort, Devitt said:

Google’s approach to capturing markets is to grow users / market share first, and monetization (profitability) second. We expect them to take a similar approach with Google Offers and Google Plus, which should limit near-term financial contribution even if both products prove successful. Further, these businesses appear to be scale businesses whereby the highest margin profile accrues to the market share leader. If Google is not able to capture a leadership position in the market, it may not enjoy EBITDA margins as high as in its core business.

Other analysts are a bit more constructive about Google+, but also wonder about the investment and potential payoff. Google executives are expected to talk about social networking a good bit on the conference call. “Google+ is incredibly important to Google management and its long-term view of where Google is going. If it is so important to Google management, at its highest levels, we think investors must pay attention,” said Macquarie Capital analyst Ben Schachter.

Stifel Nicolaus analyst Jordan Rohan took a longer view. Google+ could position the search giant on a path for torrid growth in the future. Rohan said:

We believe the success of Google Plus is a big deal for Google shareholders. The beta launch of Google’s social sharing platform, Google Plus (G+), now counts users “in the millions”, even with invitations to the platform scarce. We believe Google’s social media effort, spearheaded by G+, will be more impactful for Google shareholders than the company’s 2Q11 results.

Rohan added that Google+ could be Larry Page’s first big hit as a CEO and turn the focus away from spending toward product results.

Related:

CNET: Google+ invites no longer so scarce

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

38
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Google spurs margin worry, questions about ROI for search giant
xobcooltorn 26th Dec
You appreciate, i think cell phone accessories looks answer, i site could extraordinarily befit appear in area of website or else website condition i was known the attempt accesorios para celulares
http://www.beebond.com/mobile-phone-accessories | http://www.beebond.com/mobile-phone-accessories/bluetooth-headset | http://www.beebond.com/led-lights/torch | http://www.beebond.com/es/cell-phones | http://www.beebond.com/es/mobile-phone-accessories
In my opinion, G+ will die. It takes it's own time to disappear. Google themselves will tell us when that time arrives; just like it did with Wave and Buzz. When it is time for G+ to die, they will release yet another going-to-fail product and divert wall street's attention. Search is the only thing they could do well (and should keep doing well).
@sandeeppolisetty@... Ever heard of Gmail, Google Reader, Google Docs, Android, Chrome? *sigh*
@jhudmon@... Then his comment still stands. "well" is a subjective experience. I do not consider a mail and calendaring solution that only works on-line to be "well". Same is true for a word processor. that is barely better than Wordpad. Android is already fractured in the marketplace and I consider Chrome to be broken. @sandeeppolisetty may also consider these solutions to not be "well".
Got an invitation. Tried it. Found nothing spectacular about it. About as unimpressive as Facebook. What's the big deal about social network really? Would much rather spend the weekend hiking or sth rather than wandering lifelessly on G+ or FB.
@jhudmon@... WebKit-based.

However, Google Maps and Google Earth should be probably added to the list of good products (privacy matters aside).
  • Flagged
@jhudmon Ever heard of Wave, Buzz, Goog-411, Answers, Lively, Google Video, Page Creator, Knol, or Google Health?
@facebook@... I didn't say "everything they do is great". I was just replying to him saying "Search is the only thing they could do well"
@facebook@... Goog411 lasted for 3 years, and I used it a lot until I had a smart phone. Now that more people have smart phones there's no reason to keep it... Google Video was replaced by Youtube (duh).
You appreciate, i think cell phone accessories looks answer, i site could extraordinarily befit appear in area of website or else website condition i was known the attempt accesorios para celulares
http://www.beebond.com/mobile-phone-accessories | http://www.beebond.com/mobile-phone-accessories/bluetooth-headset | http://www.beebond.com/led-lights/torch | http://www.beebond.com/es/cell-phones | http://www.beebond.com/es/mobile-phone-accessories
@facebook@... Tell that to the millions that use Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Docs, YouTube, Android, Chrome (increasing more rapidly in usage than any other browser). You've clearly never used Gmail and Google Calender if you think they only work online.

Gmail, Google Calendar, Google Docs and YouTube are even considered best in class.
@sandeeppolisetty@...

We'll see... I've already got 50 of my friends signed up as of today and I've only had it since last Friday.
0 Votes
+ -
@sandeeppolisetty@...
I share an office space with 5 colleagues.
One closed his Facebook account, one has an active account and another has an account for a project he is developing. The rest of us never had a Facebook account.
All 6 of us have Google+ accounts.
0 Votes
+ -
this is just FUD
Linux Geek 11th Jul
spread by M$ and Apple.
Google makes great FOSS and nobody beats them!
@Linux Geek
yeah, in stealing others idea and technology.
@owlnet How are they stealing ideas? Everyone praised Google when they conquered search. Does that mean they were the first search engine? They were trying to improve on what we currently have. Is there something wrong with that? Should we all just be happy with what we have now? Do you still use Word 97?
@Linux Geek
This has nothing to do with FOSS; and at the same time, who is M$?
0 Votes
+ -
Larry, have any more tripe?
Dietrich T. Schmitz, *~* Your Linux Advocate 11th Jul
Honestly, is this the best you can do?
"but Wall Street analysts are already wondering about return on investment and the hit to profit margins."

Has anything good ever come from analysts and shareholders??

All they care about is money. Frankly, it's a wonder why any corporation bothers to become public. Instantly it becomes "screw the customers, we want more money!"
search correctly. Money talks, and the money has allowed Google to branch out and expand. Google search would still be ranking as high as Ask.com or Lycos. Take the investment money away, and Google will die almost instantly. Investors are the owners, and every owner is entitled to see a return on their investments. Analysts are oftentimes correct in their analysis, as can be witnessed by the many dead or dying projects taken on by Microsoft and Google and Apple and many others. Shareholders cannot continue to risk their money on ventures that aren't productive, and they are the ultimate bosses.
Google + is still only for techies. Let it open for real people and watch the response.
@Raju Das The response I been getting is give me and invite and, I want to play on Hangouts.
@Raju Das

Most of the people I've invited so far are not techies and love it. It's just like facebook but the privacy settings are easier to use, it has better video chat, fewer bugs, and none of the annoying farmville crap.

The response I've gotten from everyone I know is "This is my gmail account, invite me NOW!"
@Raju Das I am a 'techie' and some 'non-techie' friends got an invite before me... I think Google managed a home-run here.

I expect Facebook to not die anytime soon though, the same way myspace is still out there.
This Google-haters are really boring, and I mean the posters here. Don't you guys have anything rational to say?

I don't have much love for Microsoft or Apple, but I don't waste time on the forums talking nonsense just because I don't like them. What you do is ridiculous.
They act as if they know everything regarding economics, and whether a company's value is increasing or not, yet 3 years ago, their ignorance caused the financial crisis.
How dare they ?
like in Venezuela or Cuba or North Korea.

The people running businesses are what makes an economy hum, and those that can't cut it or make mistakes, are always chewed up and spit out.

The problems with the economy are mostly from what government has imposed on them, such as the mortgage mess, which would not have even happened if government had not insisted on banks doing sub-prime loans to people who didn't qualify.

The Wall Street "guys" are holding on to their money until government gets out of the way and allows them to make intelligent and economy-growing decisions. Government is what collapsed the economy 3 years ago, but that was an event that was many decades in the making. Government intrusion has killed the golden egg, and what's happening in Washington right now is insuring that there will never again be a healthy economy or new jobs or new business investment.
@adornoe@... I don't think the government insisted on derivatives backed securities or insisted that Moody's cooberate with Goldman Sachs to package up crap-bonds as AAA bonds... The government's role goes as far as mandating that Fannie and Freddy buy mortgages from banks. The derivatives mess on the other hand, was an effort to dodge regulations. And deregulation in the 90s and 2000s was the result of the financial sector's lobbying.
@adornoe@...
Omg, someone who actually understands economics, a rare thing to see...
and you will learn that, the problems we face were mostly derived from government actions which forced the banks' hands.

Banks, like any other private industry, is in the business of making money, even if under the watchful eyes of the federal reserve and the government.

Government "forced" those banks to make the risky loans, and government was also the buyer which provided the incentives for those banks to make those risky loans. Government had 2 agencies which they backed fully when it came to buying those packaged mortgage securities, and the banks were encouraged to sell to Fannie and Freddie, and the people doing the encouragement were the leaders at Fannie and Freddie and in congress, mostly the liberals who wanted more than anyone else to get those risky loans out to "encourage" minorities to own their homes. Any business that sees that they have nothing to lose when the government is encouraging them to make risky loans, would be more than happy to unload their risky loans to a willing buyer that had "nothing to lose" because they were the government, and government was encouraging to sell to them so that the banks would have more money to make more risky loans. It was a vicious circle which would inevitably end with dire consequences, and many people did see the risk, including Bush who was advising that perhaps what was happening with banks and mortgages and Fannie/Freddie, needed to be stopped, but, the leading democrats in congress demonized the issue and Bush while saying that there was no problem. The problem was there and it had been building up for a long time, and when the housing bubble burst, the first thing that democrats did was to pass blame to Bush for not having acted, even though he was the one suggesting that action was needed.

The banks and Wall Street executives did in fact take advantage of the situation with easy money and risky lending, but, the culprit responsible for the problem was the U.S. government that forced the banks into the situation, and which encouraged the banks to sell those securities to the government via Freddie and Fannie. The regulations that forced the banks to make those risky loans came from government, and the regulations to stop the risky mortgage loans were prevented by democrats. There were no regulations to actually stop the risky lending and the risky practices on Wall Street. Those were prevented because it was more important to democrats to get minorities to own their homes than to pass regulations to reign in bad practices.

The fact is that, without the government meddling into the banking and mortgage industries, the mortgage mess and the bad securities packages would never have happened.
Bingo, you got my point. The issue I have seen within a day of my experience with G+ is the same, where is the "interest" for Google get out of this. They already have my data, and probably they will have few of my circles' personal, which could be already on Google. With this additional pack they may get another 5% to 10% newer contacts to their already existing user base (GMail, Picasa, Apps, Buzz etc.). Except for the fact that they would be throwing one more set of ads on this new site, I am not seeing any potential revene from this. I know this is still beta and Google Executives know how to make it "profitable", but still I can't find anything new there. Of course they could integrate the search results by polling G+ from my circles from me and integrating the results, but other than that, I am not seeing anything supposed to be "juice" of interest. One thing for sure, this may or may not kill Facebook, but definitely it will hurlde the growth of Twitter.
0 Votes
+ -
Or it could be like Google Earth a cool app but is a money loser. That is were my bet is. Only it will just be average app not a cool toy like Google earth that has useful business applications.
0 Votes
+ -
If anyone doesn't get the reference to Google being the McDonald's of IT, let me explain.

When McDonald's first started up it was a hamburger/fries/milkshake restaurant that made its fame selling these items at a low cost with ultra quick service. They did it so well, it didn't matter that the burgers themselves were hardly gourmet items, thats not why people went there. People went there because the price was low, and the service was quick and the product was consistent even if not stellar. They became famous, so famous in fact it soon became plain that people around the country, then continent and eventually world would spend money at such a place and as such thousands of them have been built.

Something happened on the way to the hamburger stand. It appears that someone at McDonald's suddenly realized that they were not the only restaurant in the world. And it also became apparent that these other restaurants were often selling different items then hamburgers fries and shakes. It wasn't long before McDonald's was pushing pizza, salads, muffins, chicken nuggets (they noticed chicken balls sold well at Chinese restaurants), chicken sandwiches, fish sandwiches, fried pies, and all kinds and sorts of food items that have come and gone over the years.

And its not that some of these things don't still sell well today, as many of them do. Its more along the line that McDonald's kind of lost sight of what did make them rich and famous. In the process, as they got more complex, the blazing fast service became less of a focus and as a result its not hard these days to find yourself waiting in a line at McDonald's for what feels like a very long time for a business that inspired the term fast food. And the increased complexity over the years doesn't appear to have done much to keep their prices down. The fact is that for quite some time its looked like McDonald's just couldn't stand the thought that there was someone out there running a restaurant that sold something they didn't sell. I really don't think thats the best business model to work by in most cases.

And now here we have Google. Is anyone getting the feeling yet that Google cant stomach the fact that there are other companies selling products in the IT market place that they don't???

Now McDonald's has plenty of competition, competition that many will tell you they prefer over McDonald's. It does make one wonder how well the competition would have done if McDonald's had of kept there nose to the grindstone on low prices and quick service for a consistently decent product instead of trying to compete with every other restaurant under the sun.

Google should really reevaluate what makes them tick.
0 Votes
+ -
Google is more like Sarah Palin
facebook@... 11th Jul
@Cayble It releases a product and quits halfway through its term.
0 Votes
+ -
That was actually a pretty stupid analogy.
adornoe@... Updated - 11th Jul
Perhaps your kind of thinking (and humor?) will go over better at a kindergarten somewhere.
@facebook@... Google approaches a product with a lifespan to make a profit. If it doesn't work, they kill it. They have plenty of products that have worked out very well, but not every product will be it. Every company fails in a business venture on occasion, it's just rare that we see a company willing to continue to ask "what if". Google has the capital to fund these business ventures, and some of them stick...
0 Votes
+ -
Is McDonald's a successful company?
adornoe@... Updated - 11th Jul
From the sounds of what you wrote, McDonald's sounds like a failure or a modest success. Last I checked, it was still the largest restaurant chain in the world, and still very successful and turning profits in just about everyone of their locations.

Google doesn't have to be profitable in each of their ventures in order to be successful.

One thing for sure: If they don't try, they'll never know if they would've been successful or not. It's better to have tried and failed, than to not have tried at all. There are lessons learned even with the failures.

Minor correction: Subway may have the most restaurants in the world for a chain, but I doubt they have the most profits.
0 Votes
+ -
@Cayble

McDonald's has always been the leader in this field - they lead, other's copy.

Google is more like Burger King, not McDonalds
@William Pharaoh Yeah, who's the number 1 search engine again? Bing? AltaVista? WebCrawler? AskJeeves? Oh wait, that's right it's Google.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix