Is Google hypocritical?
A recent column on TheStreet.com accuses Google of being hypocrtical. The general gravamen of the accusation is that Google doesn't disclose enough information, which, according to the column, conflicts with the famous dictum in the Google IPO filing to "do no evil": "Let's name Google's holy trinity for what it is: a bunch of hypocrites. Genius hypocrites. ...Revolutionary hypocrites. But hypocrites all the same."
The column is a little skimpy on specifics, but one is that Google Prez Eric Schmidt couldn't (or wouldn't) answer the question of how much of its ad revenue was coming from old-time Internet advertisers versus "offline advertisers," presumably new to pay-for-click. In addition, according to the column, Google is stingy about disclosing financials, didn't mention a top-level consulting strategist in its SEC filings, and expects investors to buy Google on faith.
Personally, I find Google's unwillingness to put speciously precise numerical values on speculation about the future refreshing. Investing in Google does require a leap of faith, so why not present it that way?
But what lies behind this rather loud, and somewhat ad-hominem, attack? I think it is a continuation of the investment community's upset with Google over the company (successfully) going around the investment banks in the IPO process (they did it their way!), and irritation at Google's continued expression of utopian idealism and big ambitions. Wall Street wants everyone to believe that profits, delivered in the way Wall Street wants them, are all that matters. Google is living proof that sometimes this just ain't so.
Posted by Harold Davis at March 7, 2005 5:02 PM
