I’ve tried to start this post a few times now, trying to frame it appropriately, with very little success.
So I’m just going to ramble on, and hope you follow me.
Comprehension is so over-rated.
Anyway, here goes…
Early this morning, I read that Google’s stock took a nose dive in the wake of an unauthorized press release.
The press release, which was incomplete, was to have been issued after the trading day.
But a screw-up at the printer had this unauthorized, incomplete release go out, triggering a massive sell-off of Google’s stock.
Apparently, the release said that Google lost 20 percent of its profit from a year ago.
I’m no mathematician, but 20 percent seems like an awful steep dip for one of the world’s largest
And traders agree, costing Google $24 billion in a matter of minutes.
It was so bad that Google had to suspend the trading of its stock, hoping the market would adjust – aka they stopped the bleeding.
The reason I’ve been having such issues writing this post was the reason many analysts attributed for Google’s losses.
Article after article specifically referenced the fact that the search giant’s bread and butter, advertising, has taken a massive hit, as advertisers shift their spending to mobile.
Now I’m no Nostradamus, but I’ve been extolling the virtue of mobile for years.
I didn’t predict the fall of Google, but I did say that advertisers were going to shift spending to mobile, as they started to understand the platform.
Fact: Mobile browsing has over taken desktop browsing.
Fact: Folks spend more time with their mobile devices than their computers.
Fact: Mobile is ubiquitous.
Fact: There are almost as many mobile devices in the world as people.
I just made that up.
But you understand my point.
Mobile is the future.
And advertisers have spoken…
Loud enough for Google – GOOGLE – to buckle.
Why do you think they’re tried to make a mobile phone?
Why did the just buy (the flailing) Motorola?
Why are they scrambling to acquire app-development start-ups?
Because Google needs some skin in the mobile game.
Unlike advertising with Google, which has been a staple for businesses for years, spending in mobile yields immediate results.
If I click on a link on my mobile device, it’s because I want to go to that destination.
I’m not hoping that what I find on the other side might be what I wanted.
The conversion rates are astronomically higher with mobile.
It’s a 1:1 proposition.
Meaning with mobile you reach your target directly, versus online advertising, where your impact (and efficacy) is much more diffuse.
I’ve been preaching from the mobile pulpit for years to no avail.
But with the fall of Google, maybe more folks will start to listen.
I’m no (insert name of established tech commentator or analyst here) but I know mobile bitches!
2 responses to “You know why Google lost billions? Mobile b*tches!”
A little off topic however didn’t see another place to propose this. I’d really like to see an article on how green energy technologies are coming (or aren’t). What big companies are currently doing to help with the new energy programs, etc. Thanks.
Levi, this is a perfect place to pose that question if you feel that green energy technologies may have contributed to Google’s loss of dominance. I, for one, believe that green energy technologies haven’t fully arrived, but will be the direction of companies intent on communicating with their constituents (internal and external) and eliminating the need for (reliance on) paper correspondence. As more and more brands look to mobile to integrate loyalty programs, it may become the dominant form of brand to individual communication.