Google likely benefits hugely from providing the service for free. The massive amount of data it provides about user behaviour across the public Internet must be hugely valuable to them.
I always thought the real goal of Google Analytics was to upsell me into using Adwords, and to prove once and for all that there's no point in optimizing for any search engine except for google.
the real goal of free Google Analytics is to get people to place the javascript tracking snippet on their webpages so they can collect data for Ads and now paying customers.
Andreesen pointed out recently, it was pretty common ten years ago for startups to sink tons of cash into Oracle
And Andreessen should be listened in this field because.... ? Serious corporations go for IBM, Oracle, SAP and the likes. They want stability and someone to show up and fix when things go wrong. Most of the 'startups' Marc is talking about, will be not be here 5 years from now.
What was Marc's last good investment? Ning or Groupon?
Skype, Facebook, Zynga, Twitter, Jawbone and Box.net are all in the Andreeson Horowitz portfolio. He seems to be doing fine.
He bought FB way too late than most others. What valuation did he buy in Zynga, Twitter etc than we'll talk? Jut because they're 'hot' now doesn't mean that they'll make him money later.
Google, Apple, Facebook are all using Oracle albeit not for their main consumer-facing product but more for internal systems that performs e-Commerce functionality.
I don't know, but based on your statement, I'd guess that they each probably have a few licenses for enterprise-grade apps. I don't think that changes the analysis that the market is moving on from what Oracle is selling.
Should have said brand-able, sorry. But my point still remains, names are extremely important and $250 is relatively nothing. Fix a script for someone and you'll get that much.
True to a point but there is no love lost between Google and Microsoft. Google tried to drive Microsoft out of business with the Google Pack, Chrome OS etc. No serious company would turn $5 for each Android.
Apple is no fan of Google either, nor are the content and publishing companies and the list can go on.
Yes, we are. The numbers can work in a couple of different ways in a couple different markets. It's neither hype, nor press, but thanks.
I'm surprised Google is able to make residential PV contracts make sense: my guess is that the consumers here are either paying more than the prevailing market rates, or they are locked into a very long contract (20+ years?), or both.
By contrast, we target the commercial market, have shorter contracts (10 years), and guarantee a discount relative to the utility co's.
Residential is the most profitable part of the solar market because residential rates are by far the highest, so your PPA or lease revenue, even at a discount to grid, is still fairly high. Sure it costs more to install residential than commercial or utility scale, but the higher revenue more than offsets this. Also all PPA or leases are long term arrangements where the provider includes an escalator of at least 2% a year. If utility rates don't rise at least that fast, the long term contract is a bad deal for the buyer.
Yeah the article said that they charge on a variable price for the electric and say that it's on average cheaper than the electric company. I imagine that they probably have either long contracts, or high interest to cover the cost. Would it be feasible that the provider of the panels is willing to take an upfront loss that they'll recoup in maintenance?
Those that sold shovels during the gold rush, made money too.
There's a video of Bill Gates making a mathematical case why solar will not solve our problems. We need another nuclear plant, the name escape but I think it uses all the nuclear waste.
I believe you're referring to thorium reactors. Though I remain optimistic about future developments in solar (particularly if we can capture it in space and beam it back to earth), I agree that building next-gen nuclear is clearly the best plan for humanity's energy future.
That scenario always makes me think back to simcity (2000?) where as you'd advance, you could build these microwave beam powerplants, and occasionally they'd lose tracking and start burning down your city...
I do wonder how RF power transmission is progressing, and what issues will come with it, as I imagine that's the most feasible way to transport energy from space to earth, although wikipedia also mentions laser transmission - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_energy_transfer
