Google's quarter falls short of expectations; Social networking not monetizing well

Summary: Google on Thursday reported fourth quarter net income of $1.21 billion, or $3.

Google on Thursday reported fourth quarter net income of $1.21 billion, or $3.79 a share, on revenue of $4.83 billion, up 51 percent from a year ago. Excluding charges Google reported earnings of $4.43 a share. All of those figures missed Wall Street estimates.

According to Thomson Financial, Google was expected to report a fourth quarter profit of $4.44 a share on revenue of $3.45 billion. That revenue estimate excludes traffic acquisition costs. Excluding TAC Google had revenue of $3.39 billion, which was also shy of estimates.

Google shares were last trading at $512 in after hours trading. On a conference call with analysts CEO Eric Schmidt said he was pleased with the quarter and optimistic about 2008. Overall, Google said it wasn't seeing any major economic problems. Officials argued that a downturn would push customers to advertising techniques with good ROI (think text ads).

goog1.png

There were a few product nuggets on the conference call.

  • CFO George Reyes said social networking advertising is not monetizing as expected. When questioned further Sergey Brin, president of technology, said: "We don't talk about individual partners or anything like that." Brin noted some things were tried that didn't pan out. While Brin won't talk about partners it's fairly obvious that MySpace is an issue. Google is obligated to pay at least $900 million in minimum revenue guarantees to MySpace through 2010. Later, the question was revisited again. He noted that Google also has Orkut and other social networking partners. "We have an incredible amount of this inventory," said Brin. "I don't think we have the killer best way to monetize social networks yet. We have had a lot of experiments (and some disappointments)."
  • Google is tracking iPhone usage closely. The company said that usage of Google services on iPhone have doubled a month after the search giant launched optimized apps for the Apple's phone.
  • Google can't answer any questions about the 700 Mhz wireless auction by the FCC. Google couldn't talk about WiMax either.
  • Brin said new infrastructure was launched for Gmail. "This new infrastructure has made development easier and improved performance," said Brin.
  • Brin added that YouTube has had strong growth and touted the political debate partnership with CNN.
  • Google also signed a Google Apps deal with Genentech and Brin said the company is making headway with enterprise customers. Most of growth in licensing was due to the acquisition of Postini.

Among the notable figures (revenue figures include TAC) from Google's earnings report:

  • Google ended the fourth quarter with 16,805 employees, up from 15,916 at the end of the third quarter. Reyes said the new hires in the quarter were mostly engineers and sales and marketing.
  • Operating income for the fourth quarter was $1.44 billion.
  • Google sites revenue was $3.12 billion in the fourth quarter, or 65 percent of total revenue. Google's partner sites through AdSense generated revenue of $1.64 billion.
  • International revenue was $2.32 billion, or 48 percent of revenue during the fourth quarter. In the same quarter a year ago Google international revenue was 44 percent of total revenue. The weak dollar padded Google's international revenue. Schmidt talked up international opportunities. He noted that Google has a global team to execute a "global-local" strategy.
  • TAC is increasing. TAC was 30 percent of revenue in the fourth quarter, up from 29 percent in the third quarter.
  • Expenses were held in check (for Google). Google said "other cost of revenues," or data center expenses, credit card charges and content acquisition costs came in at $516 million, or 11 percent of revenue in the fourth quarter. That's up from 10 percent of revenue in the third quarter. Operating expense in the fourth quarter remained at 30 percent of revenue, on par with the third quarter.
  • Google had $14.2 billion in cash and equivalents at the end of 2007.
  • For 2007, Google reported revenue of $16.6 billion and net income of $4.2 billion, or $13.29 a share. In 2006, Google reported revenue of $10.6 billion with net income of $3.07 billion, or $9.94 a share.
  • R&D spending for 2007 was $2.2 billion, up from $1.3 billion in 2006.

Topics: Google, Banking, Enterprise Software

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

Talkback

30 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • it's because of the M$ illegal behavior

    M$ is trying to point the default IE search engine to its crappy msn and is not advertising through google, hence the shortfall.
    The courts should look into this.
    Linux Geek
    • just like Google being default search provider in Firefox

      Or Google's toolbar being a promoted option when installing Adobe Reader. Google is funding Mozilla for same reason Microsoft leverages IE.

      I avoid Google and Microsoft web resources, and prefer Yahoo's AllTheWeb.
      killerbunny
      • Oh come on

        Yahoo is crap; and they're losing marketshare because of it. I want a search engine, I
        don't want their so-called 'services' rammed down my throat. Half baked IT
        information, crappy and slow search with inaccurate result - no thank you. You can
        take you AllTheWeb and cram it.
        Kaiwai
        • (sigh) just another Google (or other) fascist

          .
          killerbunny
      • it is default

        But if I remember correctly, there is a choice of several other search engines that require just a click or two in order to change providor or turn it off entirely.
        An option is OPTIONAL, turn it off or don't install it and you're good.

        Options are something not provided in -MOST- MS apps.

        No, I'm not a Google fan boy, But I use google search occasionally.

        Ken.
        merc2dogs`
    • I agree

      The courts should force MS to advertise through Google. In fact all companies who have been deemed by the courts as monopolies should be forced to advertise through Google to keep MS from perpetuating their monopolies. Also all heads of state should be required by international law to have a [url=http://www.youtube.com/theroyalchannel] video channel on Google's YouTube[/url] to keep them from taking handing all the world's power to MS. Finally, MS should be forced to give Google the source code of MS Office licensed through the GPLv3 to give Google Docs a chance in the marketplace.
      Michael Kelly
      • Ever seen 1994?

        Be VERY careful what you wish for - asking your government to redress the balance in order to maintain Google's current monopoly of the online search and advertizing industry is a VERY VERY dangerous thing to do and one that the vast majority of thinking individuals would fight against.

        You think Microsoft is scary? Note that Google has the monopoly on online search and advertizing. Now imagine Google, a commercial business that now has to answer to shareholders, owning all your data ... and knowing more about you than you would ever feel comfortable with.

        Be scared.
        de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023
        • You know I was kidding, right?

          I would have hoped the heads of state thing would have tipped that off.

          I actually agree with you in a certain sense. MS doesn't scare me so much because they are being watched. It's the companies that aren't being watched that scare me more. The Worldcom debacle was far worse than anything MS ever did (I know I am going to get flamed for saying that, but it's the truth), yet who would have suspected any wrongdoing before that story broke out?
          Michael Kelly
    • I concur

      The courts should also check how M$ is sabotaging Linux, an OS Google depends on.
      Linux Geek
      • Really?

        How precisely does MS sabotage Linux? Linux is OSS, so Google can (and I am sure do) modify any part of it they want to.

        That we have ended up with MS owning the desktop OS world is a direct result of them creating a product that was simply better than the other available OS' during the early stages of PC growth. If you want to supplant the incumbant OS, then build a better one. One that my Mum can use without having to learn how to use archaic 40-year-old comment line tools and how to rebuild her kernel when she needs to update her graphics driver.

        Don't confuse competition with monopoly. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with strong competition. Without competition, there is little reason to advance and stagnation is likely. Just look at IE and the browser market before Firefox took hold.

        Don't expect MS to sit back on it's laurels when it comes to OS work though. They're fighting on several fronts - Linux, Apple, etc., as well as all the hackers out there trying to drill holes in their flagship platforms. Note that behind the scenes, while most of the world has been bitching about MS' inability to ship Vista on time etc., MS has been busily beavering away, scanning and analyzing its source of every product, patching known holes and planning re-implementations of portions of products that are inherently weak. The results are now just starting to appear. Watch out in 2-3 years time when the wave of work results in a crecendo of products that are massively improved over the current range of offerings.

        How will Linux step up to this challenge?
        de-void-21165590650301806002836337787023
  • Stuff like this makes me wonder

    are we REALLY heading towards a recession, or are these analysts simply trying to convince us we are?
    Michael Kelly
    • The US economy is run on debt

      The US economy runs on debt, and has been running on debt since Reagen; in the
      persuite of 'teh growth' - all conservative economic principles have been thrown
      out the window in favour of a 'debt doesn't matter' ethos. People's value of their
      house rising, leveraging the equity of their house to take on more debt, the debt to
      acquire more things which stimulate the economy - there is eventually a point
      where this sort of madness will have to stop.

      Oh, and as for the $145billion stimulus - reminder, Keynes died and he wants his
      fiscal stimulating back. People who still use it as a way to correct economic
      ailments don't have the slight clue as to how the economy operates.
      Kaiwai
      • Wrong!

        It started in 1913. It is a federally
        sponsored ignorant publicly accepted Wall
        Street Monopoly Game. The official title is
        The Federal Reserve Bank. It is commonly
        referred to as "The Fed" by the brainwashing
        broadcasters (TV) and the Wall Street
        Bankers, and swallowed wholesale
        by "Guppies", or "Sheep".

        it has absolutely nothing to do with the US
        Government, other than the comical prancing
        around by Congress in their meaningless so
        called "regulation" and "oversight".

        What????? You expect them to upset the
        applecart and cut off the Gravy Train they
        themselves are riding on? Have a nice trip!

        Happy daze are here again.

        http://news.goldseek.com/GoldSeek/1095269452.php

        The Federal Reserve - Its Origins, History &
        Current Strategy
        Ole Man
      • I never heard such BS

        The corporations would like you to think that they are losing money..
        well thats is just not true every company makes money or it would fold.. What is happening is they estimate how much money they will make and then if they exceed that its called profit even though they have already made a significant profit, and if they fall short they say they have a loss because they didn't reach their goal
        even though they did make money it was not as much as expected so it is classified as a loss
        there is no company that can run or operate in debt for any length of time. The suppliers to that company and the workers would expect to get paid or stop supplying or working for them
        so I say tell the real truth on how much google made and that there was no loss just an over expectation of income.
        skinsman61@...
  • Why doesn't your headline say...

    ... "Analysts fail to correctly predict Google quarter"???? Why are analysts treated as infallible gods when it's readily apparent to everybody and their grandmother that analysts can't predict the next sunrise?
    Vesicant
    • Vesicant hit the bull's eye -

      [b]Google[/b] performed better in 2007 than in 2006, but somehow ?failed to meet expectations?. [u]Whose[/u] expectations - the analysts who have presented the world with the invaluable financial tools that lie behind the so-called ?sub-prime crisis? ? Is attention paid to these people simply because their ?earn? (?) grossly inflated salaries and bonuses ?...

      Henri
      mhenriday
      • Precisely

        They make well over a BILLION DOLLARS in profits, and it's not enough? What's wrong with these people?
        masonwheeler
        • Actual vs. expectations

          I don't think that anyone is implying that google is not doing well. However, as a stockholder, potential stockholder, or owner of any company, it is important to understand what to expect from my investment. When that company does not do what is expected, it is important to know that as the price of my shares will be affected.

          As for all you GOOGLE vs. MICROSOFT folks... Get a grip. Businesses will always do whatever it takes to grow bigger and hopefully better (Not always). In any industry you are going to have a major player(s) that sets the rules. Both Google and Microsoft are going to offer competitive offerings as well as large minor players like Yahoo!. Consolidation generally leads to complacency. Which then leaves openings for new innovators. They either grow big or get bought. So goes the circle of life for businesses.
          eulkloss
    • and the analysts say.............

      "Why are analysts treated as infallible gods when it's readily apparent to everybody and their grandmother that analysts can't predict the next sunrise?"
      Analysts, 'self proclaimed stock and business experts', provide the information that many use in determining what stocks to purchase in their quest to become rich, famous, and perhaps one day, Professional Analysts.
      They provide a much needed service to those investors who are too lethargic to do their own research and, or, to timid to make decisions based on their own efforts.
      As an experienced business investment and money management expert, I can assure you that the next sunrise will occur prior to the next full daylight period in the central location that you may find yourself in at that time.
      For complete details and insider tips on the movement of the sun as it makes it's periodic journys around our planet, simply forward, to this address, $89.95 in small unmarked bills. Your Investors Guide To the Stairways to Heaven, will be sent to you
      before the next sunset.
      sonoffar@...
      • Are you sure you aren't poaching off Microsoft?

        Sounds like you are using their business
        model, there.
        Ole Man