In a typically idiosyncratic break with tradition, the [Google] S1 application starts with a plea from the company fathers to make the world a better place."We'd like to build the world a home," write co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. "And furnish it with love. Grow apple trees and honey bees, and snow-white turtle doves....We'd like to teach the world to sing," they plead. "In perfect harmony."
No, the Google SEC filing didn't actually use those words, but The Register (via Infothought) can always be counted on to deflate any egos and poke good fun at everyone. If you can't laugh at yourself, you are taking yourself way too seriously.
I do love Google founders' idiosyncratic nature and ability to fly in the face of "convention". There has been a strong need to shake up the whole IPO process and staid, unchallenged assumptions behind what a public company should look and feel and be like. That is what I'm applauding -- their audacity to have their own convictions rather than following Wall Street blindly. I have all but given up on public companies. But I am watching (with some hope) how Google manages the transition.
Will the ability to search and find information really make a huge difference on the world in the bigger scheme of things? No it's probably not #1 on my list of compelling societal needs. But it was probably something that Larry and Sergey excelled at and they found a way to use their own unique talents where they could.
What is making a bigger impact (in my view) is the way that Google operates. They set up an example -- a role model -- in their style of leadership, in the way they treat employees, their innovation process (I've heard first-hand explanations and it's very inclusive of all Googlers and external customers' ideas), and shaping a mentality of abundance. (I describe the innovation process to other companies that appear enthusiastic to hear about a new approach and they are loathe to try any of it -- the resistance seems to be with the democratic idea collection and feedback process and iterative interaction with employees and customers.) I can only imagine that Google will treat shareholders with the same respect.
Does that mean I'm the first on the block to buy Google stock? Maybe. Maybe not. (Although I'm personally not really up on stock ever since March 2000;-) )
I respect Google's desire for long-term shareholders rather than short-time flippers. I like the way they level the playing field for investors by making the Wall Street "insider" rewards of flipping shares effectively undoable. This was not a random side-effect but something they intentionally thought out.
I think anyone that looks at buying stock will have to look at least 3 factors 1) long-term leadership of the company 2) product/services market leadership and sustainable competitive advantage 3) brand and marketing.
In terms of #1, I think they have good leadership in place now. My only hesitancy would come in terms of the nature of dual-class structure of stock. This means they better have some solid succession plans in place and that they are thinking about training their replacements well before Schmidt, Page or Brin departs. If they are a really good company, they'll be training leaders all the time anyway.
As much as I want to, unfortunately cannot comment on #2 whatsoever because of a few NDAs that have outlived their usefulness (not a mutually shared opinion) but have not legally expired. Remind me never to sign NDAs again. (The topic of NDAs and associated intellectual property handcuffing alone could be a week-long rant in itself.) So I leave this as an exercise for the reader/potential investor.
And in terms of #3, they have a pretty good brand now. They need to take this seriously and not assume that their intentions ("do no evil") are always so obvious externally. The recent publicity fiasco around Gmail and privacy has certainly eroded their stellar brand. All joking aside, The Register seriously questions Gmail: "Spyware as liberation?" I think Google is bright enough to realize the importance of staying authentic and transparent in their communications with customers, the public at large, and shareholders to sustain their mostly positive goodwill. Trust is important in any business, but increasingly so for Google as they transition even further into the public fold.
Comments