Posts Tagged ‘Google’

Bing Copies Google

Thursday, February 3rd, 2011

On Tuesday Google revealed that it has been running a “sting operation” against its rival, Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Google says they began noticing Bing’s ability to display the same search results as Google even when words were misspelled. As the overlap in Bing and Google’s top 10 search results increased, Google set up a one time code to over ride it’s search algorithm, and instead manually rank a page for a particular code/term that had no connection with that webpage. They created about 100 “synthetic searches,” such as hiybbprqag, mbzrxpgjys, that previously had either no, or very few search results on both Google and Bing. After a couple of weeks, the pages Google had assigned for these synthetic searches began to appear on Bing. In response to this “sting operation,” Microsoft declared that it has not been copying Google. Stefan Weitz, director of Bing search engine at Microsoft, said in an interview that any similarities seen between the two search engines may be the result of “clickstream data,” information that the Bing toolbar and Internet Explorer users automatically share with the company. Mr. Weitz also said that clickstream data is just one of over 1,000 “signals” that Bing uses when creating its own search results algorithm.

Google Inc. accused rival Microsoft Corp. of copying its Internet search results, the latest salvo in the competition between the two technology behemoths.

Google made the claim Tuesday after releasing the results of a test it carried out purporting to show how Google’s results for search terms were copied weeks later by Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Amit Singhal, who helps oversee Google’s search engine algorithm, called Bing’s behavior “cheating.”

In response, Harry Shum, a Microsoft corporate vice president, wrote in a blog post that Google’s claims were misleading and amounted to a “spy-novelesque stunt to generate extreme outliers.”

“We do not copy Google’s results,” a Microsoft spokesman said.

The verbal volleys are the latest in the ongoing rivalry between Microsoft and Google, which for years have battled on multiple fronts including online advertising and Web browsing, among other things.

In its claim Tuesday, which was first published on a tech blog called Search Engine Land, Google said it ran a “sting” by altering its results algorithm in order to see whether Bing would do the same.

For example, Google changed its algorithm to show a link to the website for BlackBerry maker Research In Motion Ltd. if users searched for “mbzrxpgjys.” Later, the same result showed up on Bing, Google said. It found such copying in about seven to nine out of 100 different search queries it tested, according to the blog post.

Access thousands of business sources not available on the free web. Learn More

Late Tuesday, Mr. Singhal posted a detailed post on Google’s official blog describing how the company came to the conclusion that Bing was copying the Google search engine, adding that he wanted to see that practice stop. Google wants to compete with “algorithms built on core innovation, and not on recycled search results from a competitor,” he wrote.

Stefan Weitz, director of the Bing search engine at Microsoft, said in an interview the company studies how certain users interact with Google in order to improve Bing. It does this by looking at “clickstream data,” or information that users of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer or the Bing search toolbar voluntarily share with the company. But Mr. Weitz added such data is just one of more than 1,000 “signals” that Bing uses for its own search results algorithm. That’s the reason why Google only found a handful of alleged copies, he said. “Competitors are all trying to see what the best ideas are out there,” Mr. Weitz said.

Google in the past has been accused by some technology observers of copying Bing’s user interface, including its home page, a left-hand navigation bar on the results page, and the look of its image search feature, among other things. Google didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment about whether it copies Bing.

Goldman Values Facebook at $50 billion, Digital Sky Technologies Makes 400% on its Investment Since 2009!

Monday, January 3rd, 2011
The New York Times announced today that Goldman Sachs and Russian Investor Digital Sky Technologies are investing $500 million into Facebook at a valuation of $50 billion.   According to Second Market, some private investors have bid up the Company’s shares to imply a value of $56 billion.  This bid comes soon after Google announced a $6 billion bid for Groupon a couple weeks ago.  Some call the Facebook valuation astronomical, and it theoretically doubles the net worth of founder Mark Zuckerberg to approximately $14 billion.  Two years ago Microsoft attempted to purchase a stake in Facebook at $15 billion, which at the time was deemed too high.  Digital Technology’s original 2009 stake in Google, which valued the company at $10 billion has since quintupled.  While Goldman is purchasing shares, VC firm Accel Partners is selling very aggressively at much lower valuations.  When examined more closely, with this purchase, Goldman may have bought it’s right to the Facebook IPO.  If Goldman is able to IPO shares of the company at a higher price, it could eventually simply divest of its shares in the open markets at a higher valuation and make a fat fee in the process.
According to Reuters, “Goldman Sachs is investing $450 million of its own money into Facebook and that it’s bringing along $50 million from Digital Sky Technologies and as much as $1 billion more from its high-net-worth clients — all at a valuation of $50 billion.

The enormous sums of money involved here clearly ratify the valuation: this isn’t a handful of shares trading in an illiquid market, it’s an investment substantially larger than most IPOs.

It’s worth remembering here that only two years ago, when Microsoft bought into Facebook at a $15 billion valuation, that sum was described in the NYT as “astronomical”. But that said, Facebook’s multiples have clearly shrunk from those heady days: in 2007, Facebook could actually use Microsoft’s $240 million to fuel its expansion. Today, it’s reportedly earning $2 billion a year, which implies to me that this is a cash-out rather than a dilutive offering. Facebook has raised, in total, about $850 million to date, and there’s no obvious need for a massive new round of funding which would dwarf that entire sum.

If Goldman is leading the buyers, then, who are the sellers? VC shop Accel Partners has been selling Facebook shares quite aggressively of late, at lower valuations than this. They could easily provide all the shares that Goldman is buying and still be left with a stake worth some $3.5 billion. And it’s entirely conceivable that some early employees might well want to diversify their holdings and have maybe a little less than 99% of their net worth in Facebook stock.

As for Goldman, it has probably bought itself the IPO mandate, which could easily generate hundreds of millions of dollars in fee income. It has also become the only investment bank which can give its rich-people clients a coveted pre-IPO stake in Facebook: the extra cachet that brings and the possible extra clients, make this investment a no-brainer. Facebook doesn’t need to stay worth $50 billion forever — Goldman just needs to engineer an IPO valuation somewhere north of that, then exit quietly in the public markets. And that is surely within its abilities.

According to Dealbook, “the deal could double the personal fortune of Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s co-founder.

Facebook, the popular social networking site, has raised $500 million from Goldman Sachs and a Russian investor in a deal that values the company at $50 billion, according to people involved in the transaction. The deal makes Facebook now worth more than companies like eBay, Yahoo, and Time Warner.

The stake by Goldman Sachs, considered one of Wall Street’s savviest investors, signals the increasing might of Facebook, which has already been bearing down on giants like Google. The new money will give Facebook more firepower to steal away valuable employees, develop new products and possibly pursue acquisitions — all without being a publicly traded company. The investment may also allow earlier shareholders, including Facebook employees, to cash out at least some of their stakes.

The new investment comes as the SEC has begin an inquiry into the increasingly hot private market for shares in Internet companies, including Facebook, Twitter, the gaming site Zynga and LinkedIn, an online professional networking site. Some experts suggest the inquiry is focused on whether certain companies are improperly using the private market to get around public disclosure requirements.

The new money could add pressure on Facebook to go public even as its executives have resisted. The popularity of shares of Microsoft and Google in the private market ultimately pressured them to pursue initial public offerings.

So far, Facebook’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, has brushed aside the possibility of an initial public offering or a sale of the company. At an industry conference in November, he said on the topic, “Don’t hold your breath.” However, people involved in the fund-raising effort suggest that Facebook’s board has indicated an intention to consider a public offering in 2012.

There has been an explosion in user interest in social media sites. The social buying site Groupon, which recently rejected a $6 billion takeover bid from Google, is in the process of raising as much as $950 million from major institutional investors, at a valuation near $5 billion, according to people briefed on the matter who were not authorized to speak publicly.

“When you think back to the early days of Google, they were kind of ignored by Wall Street investors, until it was time to go public,” said Chris Sacca, an angel investor in Silicon Valley who is a former Google employee and an investor in Twitter. “This time, the Street is smartening up. They realize there are true growth businesses out here. Facebook has become a real business, and investors are coming out here and saying, ‘We want a piece of it.’”

The Facebook investment deal is likely to stir up a debate about what the company would be worth in the public market. Though it does not disclose its financial performance, analysts estimate the company is profitable and could bring in as much as $2 billion in revenue annually.

Under the terms of the deal, Goldman has invested $450 million, and Digital Sky Technologies, a Russian investment firm that has already sunk about half a billion dollars into Facebook, invested $50 million, people involved in the talks said.

Goldman has the right to sell part of its stake, up to $75 million, to the Russian firm, these people said. For Digital Sky Technologies, the deal means its original investment in Facebook, at a valuation of $10 billion, has gone up fivefold.

Representatives for Facebook, Goldman and Digital Sky Technologies all declined to comment.

Goldman’s involvement means it may be in a strong position to take Facebook public when it decides to do so in what is likely to be a lucrative and prominent deal.

As part of the deal, Goldman is expected to raise as much as $1.5 billion from investors for Facebook at the $50 billion valuation, people involved in the discussions said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the transaction was not supposed to be made public until the fund-raising had been completed.

In a rare move, Goldman is planning to create a “special purpose vehicle” to allow its high-net worth clients to invest in Facebook, these people said. While the S.E.C. requires companies with more than 499 investors to disclose their financial results to the public, Goldman’s proposed special purpose vehicle may be able get around such a rule because it would be managed by Goldman and considered just one investor, even though it could conceivably be pooling investments from thousands of clients.

It is unclear whether the S.E.C. will look favorably upon the arrangement.

Already, a thriving secondary market exists for shares of Facebook and other private Internet companies. In November, $40 million worth of Facebook shares changed hands in an auction on a private exchange called SecondMarket. According to SharesPost, Facebook’s value has roughly tripled over the last year, to $42.4 billion. Some investors appear to have bought Facebook shares at a price that implies a valuation of $56 billion. But the credibility of one of Wall Street’s largest names, Goldman, may help justify the company’s worth.

Facebook also surpassed Google as the most visited Web site in 2010, according to the Internet tracking firm Experian Hitwise.

Facebook received 8.9 percent of all Web visits in the United States between January and November 2010. Google’s main site was second with 7.2 percent, followed by Yahoo Mail service, Yahoo’s Web portal and YouTube, part of Google.

For Mr. Zuckerberg, the deal may double his personal fortune, which Forbes estimated at $6.9 billion when Facebook was valued at $23 billion. That would put him in a league with the founders of Google, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, who are reportedly worth $15 billion apiece.

Even as Goldman takes a stake in Facebook, its employees may struggle to view what they invested in. Like those at most major Wall Street firms, Goldman’s computers automatically block access to social networking sites, including Facebook.”

Google Gets Away with Paying 2.4% Tax Rate Overseas!

Thursday, October 21st, 2010

Google only paid 2.4% taxes on its overseas income last year using a strategy called “Double Irish,” where it legally used a tax loophole allowing it to move income to tax shelters in Ireland, while shifting expenses to countries with high corporate taxes, like the United States and Europe.  In the U.S., the corporate tax rate is 35%, and in Britain, its 28%, so how exactly does Google do it?  Well, after shifting income into Ireland, it effectively moves funds from Ireland to Bermuda, where funds become difficult to track for the U.S.  This type of tax avoidance is common amongst Fortune 500 companies, and even more common for the large technology players, including Microsoft and Facebook.  Google was able to lower its overall tax rate to 22% last year using these tactics.  If it had paid 35% in taxes on all its income, the company’s stock price would fall about $150, according to stock analysts.
According to Bloomberg writer Jesse Drucker, “Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda.
Google’s income shifting — involving strategies known to lawyers as the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich” — helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4 percent, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries.
“It’s remarkable that Google’s effective rate is that low,” said Martin A. Sullivan, a tax economist who formerly worked for the U.S. Treasury Department. “We know this company operates throughout the world mostly in high-tax countries where the average corporate rate is well over 20 percent.” The U.S. corporate income-tax rate is 35 percent. In the U.K., Google’s second-biggest market by revenue, it’s 28 percent.
Google, the owner of the world’s most popular search engine, uses a strategy that has gained favor among such companies as Facebook Inc. and Microsoft Corp. The method takes advantage of Irish tax law to legally shuttle profits into and out of subsidiaries there, largely escaping the country’s 12.5 percent income tax. (See an interactive graphic on Google’s tax strategy here.)
The earnings wind up in island havens that levy no corporate income taxes at all. Companies that use the Double Irish arrangement avoid taxes at home and abroad as the U.S. government struggles to close a projected $1.4 trillion budget gap and European Union countries face a collective projected deficit of 868 billion euros.
Countless Companies
Google, the third-largest U.S. technology company by market capitalization, hasn’t been accused of breaking tax laws. “Google’s practices are very similar to those at countless other global companies operating across a wide range of industries,” said Jane Penner, a spokeswoman for the Mountain View, California-based company. Penner declined to address the particulars of its tax strategies.
Facebook, the world’s biggest social network, is preparing a structure similar to Google’s that will send earnings from Ireland to the Cayman Islands, according to the company’s filings in Ireland and the Caymans and to a person familiar with its plans. A spokesman for the Palo Alto, California-based company declined to comment.
Transfer Pricing
The tactics of Google and Facebook depend on “transfer pricing,” paper transactions among corporate subsidiaries that allow for allocating income to tax havens while attributing expenses to higher-tax countries. Such income shifting costs the U.S. government as much as $60 billion in annual revenue, according to Kimberly A. Clausing, an economics professor at Reed College in Portland, Oregon.
U.S. Representative Dave Camp of Michigan, the ranking Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, and other politicians say the 35 percent U.S. statutory rate is too high relative to foreign countries. International income-shifting, which helped cut Google’s overall effective tax rate to 22.2 percent last year, shows one way that loopholes undermine that top U.S. rate.
Two thousand U.S. companies paid a median effective cash rate of 28.3 percent in federal, state and foreign income taxes in a 2005 study by academics at the University of Michigan and the University of North Carolina. The combined national-local statutory rate is 34.4 percent in France, 30.2 percent in Germany and 39.5 percent in Japan, according to the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The Double Irish
As a strategy for limiting taxes, the Double Irish method is “very common at the moment, particularly with companies with intellectual property,” said Richard Murphy, director of U.K.- based Tax Research LLP. Murphy, who has worked on similar transactions, estimates that hundreds of multinationals use some version of the method.
The high corporate tax rate in the U.S. motivates companies to move activities and related income to lower-tax countries, said Irving H. Plotkin, a senior managing director at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s national tax practice in Boston. He delivered a presentation in Washington, D.C. this year titled “Transfer Pricing is Not a Four Letter Word.”
“A company’s obligation to its shareholders is to try to minimize its taxes and all costs, but to do so legally,” Plotkin said in an interview.
Boosting Earnings
Google’s transfer pricing contributed to international tax benefits that boosted its earnings by 26 percent last year, company filings show. Based on a rough analysis, if the company paid taxes at the 35 percent rate on all its earnings, its share price might be reduced by about $100, said Clayton Moran, an analyst at Benchmark Co. in Boca Raton, Florida. He recommends buying Google stock, which closed yesterday at $607.98.
The company, which tells employees “don’t be evil” in its code of conduct, has cut its effective tax rate abroad more than its peers in the technology sector: Apple Inc., the maker of the iPhone; Microsoft, the largest software company; International Business Machines Corp., the biggest computer-services provider; and Oracle Corp., the second-biggest software company. Those companies reported rates that ranged between 4.5 percent and 25.8 percent for 2007 through 2009.
Google is “flying a banner of doing no evil, and then they’re perpetrating evil under our noses,” said Abraham J. Briloff, a professor emeritus of accounting at Baruch College in New York who has examined Google’s tax disclosures.
“Who is it that paid for the underlying concept on which they built these billions of dollars of revenues?” Briloff said. “It was paid for by the United States citizenry.”
Taxpayer Funding
The U.S. National Science Foundation funded the mid-1990s research at Stanford University that helped lead to Google’s creation. Taxpayers also paid for a scholarship for the company’s cofounder, Sergey Brin, while he worked on that research. Google now has a stock market value of $194.2 billion.
Google’s annual reports from 2007 to 2009 ascribe a cumulative $3.1 billion tax savings to the “foreign rate differential.” Such entries typically describe how much tax U.S. companies save from profits earned overseas.
In February, the Obama administration proposed measures to curb shifting profits offshore, part of a package intended to raise $12 billion a year over the coming decade. While the key proposals largely haven’t advanced in Congress, the IRS said in April it would devote additional agents and lawyers to focus on five large transfer pricing arrangements.
Arm’s Length
Income shifting commonly begins when companies like Google sell or license the foreign rights to intellectual property developed in the U.S. to a subsidiary in a low-tax country. That means foreign profits based on the technology get attributed to the offshore unit, not the parent. Under U.S. tax rules, subsidiaries must pay “arm’s length” prices for the rights — or the amount an unrelated company would.
Because the payments contribute to taxable income, the parent company has an incentive to set them as low as possible. Cutting the foreign subsidiary’s expenses effectively shifts profits overseas.
After three years of negotiations, Google received approval from the IRS in 2006 for its transfer pricing arrangement, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The IRS gave its consent in a secret pact known as an advanced pricing agreement. Google wouldn’t discuss the price set under the arrangement, which licensed the rights to its search and advertising technology and other intangible property for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to a unit called Google Ireland Holdings, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Dublin Office
That licensee in turn owns Google Ireland Limited, which employs almost 2,000 people in a silvery glass office building in central Dublin, a block from the city’s Grand Canal. The Dublin subsidiary sells advertising globally and was credited by Google with 88 percent of its $12.5 billion in non-U.S. sales in 2009.
Allocating the revenue to Ireland helps Google avoid income taxes in the U.S., where most of its technology was developed. The arrangement also reduces the company’s liabilities in relatively high-tax European countries where many of its customers are located.
The profits don’t stay with the Dublin subsidiary, which reported pretax income of less than 1 percent of sales in 2008, according to Irish records. That’s largely because it paid $5.4 billion in royalties to Google Ireland Holdings, which has its “effective centre of management” in Bermuda, according to company filings.
Law Firm Directors
This Bermuda-managed entity is owned by a pair of Google subsidiaries that list as their directors two attorneys and a manager at Conyers Dill & Pearman, a Hamilton, Bermuda law firm.
Tax planners call such an arrangement a Double Irish because it relies on two Irish companies. One pays royalties to use intellectual property, generating expenses that reduce Irish taxable income. The second collects the royalties in a tax haven like Bermuda, avoiding Irish taxes.
To steer clear of an Irish withholding tax, payments from Google’s Dublin unit don’t go directly to Bermuda. A brief detour to the Netherlands avoids that liability, because Irish tax law exempts certain royalties to companies in other EU- member nations.
The fees first go to a Dutch unit, Google Netherlands Holdings B.V., which pays out about 99.8 percent of what it collects to the Bermuda entity, company filings show. The Amsterdam-based subsidiary lists no employees.
The Dutch Sandwich

Inserting the Netherlands stopover between two other units gives rise to the “Dutch Sandwich” nickname.
“The sandwich leaves no tax behind to taste,” said Murphy of Tax Research LLP.
Microsoft, based in Redmond, Washington, has also used a Double Irish structure, according to company filings overseas. Forest Laboratories Inc., maker of the antidepressant Lexapro, does as well, Bloomberg News reported in May. The New York-based drug manufacturer claims that most of its profits are earned overseas even though its sales are almost entirely in the U.S. Forest later disclosed that its transfer pricing was being audited by the IRS.
Since the 1960s, Ireland has pursued a strategy of offering tax incentives to attract multinationals. A lesser-appreciated aspect of Ireland’s appeal is that it allows companies to shift income out of the country with minimal tax consequences, said Jim Stewart, a senior lecturer in finance at Trinity College’s school of business in Dublin.
Getting Profits Out
“You accumulate profits within Ireland, but then you get them out of the country relatively easily,” Stewart said. “And you do it by using Bermuda.”
Eoin Dorgan, a spokesman for the Irish Department of Finance, declined to comment on Google’s strategies specifically. “Ireland always seeks to ensure that the profits charged in Ireland fully reflect the functions, assets and risks located here by multinational groups,” he said.
Once Google’s non-U.S. profits hit Bermuda, they become difficult to track. The subsidiary managed there changed its legal form of organization in 2006 to become a so-called unlimited liability company. Under Irish rules, that means it’s not required to disclose such financial information as income statements or balance sheets.
“Sticking an unlimited company in the group structure has become more common in Ireland, largely to prevent disclosure,” Stewart said.
Deferred Indefinitely
Technically, multinationals that shift profits overseas are deferring U.S. income taxes, not avoiding them permanently. The deferral lasts until companies decide to bring the earnings back to the U.S. In practice, they rarely repatriate significant portions, thus avoiding the taxes indefinitely, said Michelle Hanlon, an accounting professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
U.S. policy makers, meanwhile, have taken halting steps to address concerns about transfer pricing. In 2009, the Treasury Department proposed levying taxes on certain payments between U.S. companies’ foreign subsidiaries.
Treasury officials, who estimated the policy change would raise $86.5 billion in new revenue over the next decade, dropped it after Congress and Treasury were lobbied by companies, including manufacturing and media conglomerate General Electric Co., health-product maker Johnson & Johnson and coffee giant Starbucks Corp., according to federal disclosures compiled by the non-profit Center for Responsive Politics.
Administration Concerned
While the administration “remains concerned” about potential abuses, officials decided “to defer consideration of how to reform those rules until they can be studied more broadly,” said Sandra Salstrom, a Treasury spokeswoman. The White House still proposes to tax excessive profits of offshore subsidiaries as a curb on income shifting, she said.
The rules for transfer pricing should be replaced with a system that allocates profits among countries the way most U.S. states with a corporate income tax do — based on such aspects as sales or number of employees in each jurisdiction, said Reuven S. Avi-Yonah, director of the international tax program at the University of Michigan Law School.
“The system is broken and I think it needs to be scrapped,” said Avi-Yonah, also a special counsel at law firm Steptoe & Johnson LLP in Washington D.C. “Companies are getting away with murder.””

Google Launches Trading Floor to Manage $26.5 Billion in Cash Reserves

Sunday, May 30th, 2010

According to Google Treasurer Callinicos, the firm has started a trading team and is currently hiring for entry level and experienced trading positions.  Callinicos is very well respected in the finance and technology industries, after serving as Treasurer of Microsoft at a time where the company was generating 7% cash returns.  In 2004, the company was able to pay out a one-time $32 billion dividend.

Specifically, Google is looking for bond traders and portfolio analysts.   The firm currently has the 3rd largest cash reserves of any company, after Microsoft and Cisco.  The trading team will also be used to buy back shares after Google purchased AdMob in a $750 million stock transaction recently.  The transaction was cleared on May 21st.  Surprisingly, Google has been public about not returning cash to shareholders, and instead internally generating value.

The trading floor at Google opened up in January.  Traders at the firm have a primarily role of preserving capital and generating reasonable returns, so that Google has adequate capital to continue to make acquisitions.  The investment team has grown from six people at the outset to 30 people as of today.  Many of the traders at Google are from Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan.  Google’s technology allows traders to see 98% of positions in real time, whereas most bank can only monitor 60-70% of transactions in real time.

Google has pulled away from U.S. government notes and has moved $4.9 billion into corporate bonds and agency mortgage-backed securities.  The company has also invested in emerging market sovereign debt.  Unfortunately, Google’s trading salaries are not as lucrative as those on Wall Street, but the company culture is much more laid back and focused on capital preservation.

The firm is currently looking for risk analysts, sovereign debt traders, and MBS traders.  A recent hire, Ranidu Lankaj, had a full ride at Yale, worked for 2 years at Lehman Brothers, and published his first Sri Lankan rap record at age 19. (Source: Bloomberg Businessweek)

China Censorship Laws Go Overboard, Ongoing Dispute with Google, Inc.

Sunday, May 9th, 2010

China’s “Great Firewall” has been around for too long.  It blocks websites for various sensitive topics and has been forcing U.S. based Google to abide by its censorship laws.   Many believe that the views of the Chinese government with respect to censorship  should be reassessed, especially after the country’s recent altercation with Google over what began as a mining incident in Vietnam (more details below).

The country screens through thousands of blogs and articles a day to hide literature regarding democracy, the treatment of the Dalai Lama, and other topics.

Officials now require a photo ID to create a domestic website.  The influence of online media is greater than ever, as internet users in the country have jumped from 30 million to over 400 million from 2000 to 2009.

According to the NYT, “Google, fresh off a dispute with China over censorship and intrusion from hackers, says it has identified cyber-attacks aimed at silencing critics of a controversial, Chinese-backed bauxite mining project in Vietnam.

In attacks it described as similar to but less sophisticated than those at the core of its spat with China, Google said malicious software was used to infect “potentially tens of thousands of computers,” broadly targeting Vietnamese speaking computer users around the world.

Infected machines had been used to spy on their owners and to attack blogs containing messages of political dissent, wrote Neel Mehta of the company’s security team in a post late Tuesday on Google’s online security blog.

McAfee, the computer security firm, said in a separate blog posting that it believed “the perpetrators may have political motivations and may have some allegiance to the government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.”

It added: “This incident underscores that not every attack is motivated by data theft or money. This is likely the latest example of hacktivism and politically motivated cyberattacks, which are on the rise.”

Google said that while the malware itself was not especially sophisticated, “it has nonetheless been used for damaging purposes.”

“Specifically, these attacks have tried to squelch opposition to bauxite mining efforts in Vietnam, an important and emotionally charged issue in the country.”

Bauxite is a key mineral in making aluminum and one of Vietnam’s most valuable natural resources. Plans by the Vietnamese government to exploit bauxite in the Central Highlands region, in partnership with a Chinese state-run company, have generated much local criticism, including from a well-known war hero, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap.

General Giap and other opponents say the project will be ruinous to the environment, displace ethnic minority populations and threaten the south-east Asian country’s national security with an influx of Chinese workers and economic leverage.

The role of China in the bauxite project also has stirred up anger in a nation that still fears its bigger neighbor: Vietnam was a tributary state of China for 1,000 years and was invaded by China in 1979, and the two countries continue to joust for sovereignty in the South China Sea. ”

Google Alumni Fund Angel Investment Deals

Saturday, March 20th, 2010

Google’s founders are funding 200 startups as angel investors.  These investors are using $170 billion in capital Google has generated for employees over the last decade.  More than 40 ex Google employees funded over 200 firms since 2005.  These deals have very high IRR hurdles, but high risk for their financiers.  Google alumni have backed Twitter, Tesla Motors, and Tapulous Inc. Senkut is the name of a middle aged product manager of Google who had made investments between 20-200,000 in 65 startups.  Chris Sacca is another successful angel investor who put in $50,000 into Twitter in 2007 as it was starting.  He has backed 31 startups since then.

According to Mr. Ante of Bloomberg, “during the holidays last year, Aydin Senkut and Elad Gil gathered 50 of their friends at a health- food restaurant in Palo Alto, California. Over turkey burgers and tofu wraps, they talked about technology trends and how to get rich. Or, more precisely, how to get richer.

Senkut, Gil and their dining circle are alumni of Google Inc. Since going public six years ago, Mountain View, California-based Google has generated more than $170 billion for its employees and investors. Many of the millionaires the company has produced are active angel investors, attempting to add another zero to their bank accounts and another company to their list of accomplishments, Bloomberg BusinessWeek reports in the March 8 issue. “I feel like we have such a strong network, it’s almost like we’ve recreated Google outside of the Google walls,” says Andrea Zurek, a 39-year-old backer of 26 startups and, until 2007, regional sales manager at Google

More than 40 ex-Googlers have invested in about 200 fledgling companies since 2005, according to the research firm YouNoodle Inc. and reporting by Bloomberg BusinessWeek. At least a half-dozen current Google executives, including Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt and co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, are also financing young companies. YouNoodle defines people as Google angels if they’re investing their own money, investing out of a firm that uses only their money, or investing out of a firm in which a majority of partners are ex- Googlers.

‘Very Risky Deals’

Numerous angel-watchers say the Google group has more in common than just pedigree. The alumni are getting into “very risky deals that can be extremely rewarding,” says Jeff Clavier, a venture capitalist who founded Palo Alto-based SoftTech VC in 2004. “They have been very active as a group over the past two to three years.”

Companies backed by Googlers include Twitter Inc., Tesla Motors Inc., and gamemaker Tapulous Inc. “As Google matures, its alums are continuing to have a huge impact on Silicon Valley and the tech industry,” says Ron Conway, one of the Valley’s most active angel investors, who has backed 190 companies, including Google, Facebook Inc. and Twitter.

One reason for the Google angels’ success, say entrepreneurs, is that they have more to offer startups than just money. Bart Decrem, a 42-year-old Stanford University law grad, says he turned to the Google network when he was starting Palo Alto-based Tapulous in 2008. The company’s Tap Tap Revenge game requires players to tap on-screen balls to the beat of a song — not exactly a sure thing of an idea.

Tap Tap

Decrem says he thought the game might become a substantial business by selling it on Apple Inc.’s iPhone. He says he raised $500,000 from a dozen angels, including Senkut and Zurek, who advised on strategy, connected the company with new partners in Asia, and helped it explore platforms for mobile phones that use Google’s Android software. Today, Tap Tap games have been downloaded more than 25 million times and Tapulous is profitable, says Decrem, without providing specifics about the company’s finances.

Google’s angels dabble in a wide variety of businesses. Zurek says she has money in a premium vodka maker and a South Korean frozen yogurt emporium. Yet the angels tend to concentrate their cash in what they know — search technology, mobile computing and the consumer Internet. Twitter, backed by former Google executive Chris Sacca, is pioneering a new field of real-time communications. The online personal-finance service, with money from Senkut, was bought by Intuit Inc. last year for $170 million. Search provider Powerset, backed by Senkut, was acquired by Microsoft Corp. in 2008, and its technology became a part of the Bing search engine, according to a post on a Microsoft blog.


Senkut, a 40-year-old native of Turkey, has made investments of between $25,000 and $150,000 in 65 startups, by YouNoodle’s reckoning. Senkut joined the company in 1999 as a product manager. He left in 2005 and promptly took his mother to Paris for her 60th birthday — and treated himself to a Lamborghini.

With that out of his system, he set about becoming a full- time angel. Eleven of the companies he has invested in have been acquired by Google, AT&T Inc. and Microsoft, according to his Web site.

Senkut also organizes two regular networking events for fellow alums, one for angels and entrepreneurs, and another for all ex-employees, at spots such as the Calafia Café in Palo Alto, owned by Google’s first in-house chef.


Senkut is raising money for his firm, Felicis Ventures LLC, according to two angel investors, and declined to comment on his investments for this story. (Securities laws prevent the public solicitation of funds.) In an interview last October, after he had sold seven of his companies, Senkut said his investments had produced double-digit annualized returns and that he was being pitched new business ideas several times a day.

If Senkut is the established star among the Google angels, Chris Sacca is the up-and-comer. The 34-year-old Georgetown University law grad joined Google in 2003 and left in 2007. Of the 31 startups he says he’s backed, his biggest hit is Twitter, in which he invested $50,000 just as it was getting started in 2007. Sean Garrett, a Twitter spokesman, declined to comment on the company’s finances.

Working out of a 3,000-square-foot home in Truckee, California, a ski town near Lake Tahoe, Sacca hikes and snowshoes most mornings before breakfast and commutes to San Francisco for three days every two weeks. It’s an unconventional way to supervise investments — Sacca has an unconventional approach to investing, period.


One Friday night in December 2008, he posted a message on Twitter asking if any startups were working late.

“We tweeted back, ‘We’re FanBridge and we work hard every Friday night,’” says Spencer Richardson, its 25-year-old co- founder. New York-based FanBridge makes software that helps musicians manage marketing and relationships with their fans.

A few weeks later, Sacca flew to New York and met with the company’s founders. “They had day jobs and built this site that had 20 million users, adding 100,000 users a day,” says Sacca. “It was a no-brainer.”

Sacca invested $50,000 and pulled in several hundred thousand dollars from other angels. Last year, FanBridge’s founders say they considered offering their products to authors, comedians and other artists; Sacca advised them to stay focused on the music industry. Today, FanBridge is profitable and used by 55 million music fans, according to the company. “The feedback from him was, ‘Start by being the best at something, then branch out,’” says Richardson.

Breakout Companies

The Google angels may have several more breakout companies developing in their portfolios. Sacca has invested in San Francisco-based Lookout, a developer of security software for mobile phones. According to YouNoodle, several ex-Googlers and current Vice President Marissa Mayer are behind San Francisco- based Square Inc., which aims to displace credit-card swiping machines with a cheaper payment system that works through smartphones. And current Google engineer Joshua Schachter helped finance Foursquare, a New York-based mobile-phone service that lets friends share tips on local hotspots and is being used more than a million times a week, according to YouNoodle.

“There is an ecosystem for capital in the Valley, and Google is a part of it,” says Schachter.

Paul Graham, who co-founded the Mountain View-based startup incubator Y Combinator, says the tech industry has just begun to appreciate that Google’s wealthy ex-employees may have not just a single innovative second act, but potentially hundreds of them. “When people write the history of Silicon Valley 20 years from now,” says Graham, “the true impact of Google could come more from all the things that Google people go on to do after they leave Google.”

Google to Leave Footprint on Mobile Ad Space

Tuesday, November 10th, 2009

Google Logo v2

On Monday, Nov. 9th, Google announced a definitive agreement to acquire AdMob, a mobile display ad provider, giving the search giant inroads to the growing mobile advertising market.

“Mobile advertising has enormous potential as a marketing medium and while this industry is still in the early stages of development, AdMob has already made exceptional progress in a very short time,” said Susan Wojcicki, Vice President of Product Management at Google, in a company press release.

Wojcicki praised the Silicon Valley startup, founded in 2006 by Omar Hamoui in a quest to build traffic for his mobile site, for its “impressive year on year revenue growth.”

According to Google, the deal to acquire AdMob for $750 million in stock is expected to provide significant benefits to advertisers looking to connect with mobile users, publishers trying to monetize their content, and users who will receive and view more relevant ads resulting in an enhanced mobile experience.

The Wall Street Journal reports Collins Stewart analyst Sandeep Aggarwal as predicting that Google could ultimately reap $4 billion annually from mobile advertising as soon as 2012 or 2013 given consumer trends showing increased internet usage via cell phones.

~Lauren K.

Please see Wall Street Journal for full news update…