We need more detail in financial statements. "Operating loss of $859 million in Other Bets" is not enough disclosure for a public company.
It's not research that spends that kind of money. It's attempts to buy market share by selling at a loss that do. Or existing businesses with a high burn rate that aren't profitable. That number includes Nest and Google Fiber, both of which are in production but perhaps not doing too well. Does it include Android? Google's various attempts to build and sell phones? Motorola?
The article says revenue, not profit. Though you’d think it wouldn’t cost $100M per quarter to run an HN clone with little to no first party moderation.
I would be more surprised if HN didn't sprint to defend big tech, profit numbers are worthless because they can easily make those look however they want. Revenue is a much more useful indicator when looking at these giga corpos from the outside.
No the $6.3B is from the mobile division alone. Their chip sales also saw profits of about $1.9B which is double than same time last year, but the phone sales are still their #1 business.
Ah, yes, sorry. Still, nearly $2B revenue and funneling most of it into trying to break into the Chinese market; I don't think they're doing badly at all.
"Hopes to grow" revenues. Current estimates put hardware costs alone at $700k/day, so even if they hit $300M in 2023 that won't make them profitable. This isn't even counting the people costs and other operation costs required to run a company.
edit: order of magnitude was wrong on costs per day.
It’s worth pointing out that this isn’t profit share of the entire global market, but profit share of the space occupied by 8 competing phone companies. There is of course a lot to be gleaned from this chart, but I’d like to see the same with an ‘Other’ bracket too.
15ish billion isn’t profit. They still need to pay credit card fees, do customer service on low value transactions, actually review apps, run data centers etc.
reply