A120 was never considered important to google innovation strategy.
In fact what did it accomplish for the business. Google would have a better roi giving the money to Google Ventures or a16z. Or starting a private equity like firm adding notable startups to the alphabet portfolio.
> Google would have a better roi giving the money to Google Ventures or a16z.
Is there any evidence that Google is better at managing money than its investors, say Warren Buffett? If not, they should raise their dividends instead.
Google is likely not better at managing their money than investors. But once you issue dividends there is an expectation the dividend amount remains. Google did do share buybacks which is generally a more efficient way to return money back to shareholders.
Alternatively if google is viewed as a growth tech stock. I think people would trust google to make investments into growth tech startups. Google ventures performance is pretty decent.
Very little. In fact, in my interactions with them when Google Ventures were looking at a possible investment in a company I worked for I would say they stood out as by far the least technically-competent VCs we spoke to, and we spoke with everyone you might expect from the valley as well as several family offices and other investors.
In fact what did it accomplish for the business. Google would have a better roi giving the money to Google Ventures or a16z. Or starting a private equity like firm adding notable startups to the alphabet portfolio.
A120 was a sinking ship for a while
reply