On: Groupon is a straight-up Ponzi scheme

[imjustatechguy]

Being part of Google changes things as (1) Google can finance a money losing operation for quite some time and (2) Google offers integration into its huge ecosystem, especially its existing robust advertising network.

Thus Google brought a lot to the table in such acquisition which would increase Groupon's value.

[raganwald → imjustatechguy]

This is the most insightful and concise thing I've read about the Google proposal so far. Google offering B$6 doesn't mean Groupon is worth B$6 on its own, it means it's worth B$6 to Google.

Google is not Warren Buffet investing in the hope of a passive but safe return on investment. Google was betting that Google + Groupon was worth more than Google + B$6.

[veyron → raganwald]

You mean

Google - B$6 + Groupon > Google

or

Google - B$6 + Groupon > Google - B$6 + investing in other ideas or companies

[raganwald → veyron]

I wrote something along those lines originally, but it seemed simpler to leave the details out. I trusted HN readers to fill in the rest :-)

[clobber → raganwald]

Have to keep in mind that the 40%+ that Groupon spends on marketing and customer acquisition largely goes to Google in the form of AdWords spend.

Google still wins because of all they make from Groupon from AdWords.