Let the blogosphere explode… Google acquired YouTube

by

From TechCrunch:

In their largest acquisition to date, Google has acquired YouTube for $1.65 billion in an all stock transaction. Both companies have approved the deal, which should officially close in the fourth quarter. YouTube’s 65 employees will remain with the company at YouTube’s San Bruno headquarters.

I don’t understand spending well over a billion dollars for something that is positioned to get hammered in copyright-violation-related lawsuits, uses technologies that you, by and large, already have, and probably loses money. But, clearly I’m a simpleton.

8 thoughts on “Let the blogosphere explode… Google acquired YouTube”

  2. Right, just like a bank. You want change for a dollar, they’ll give you 4 quarters. Or 8 dimes and 4 nickels. Or 50 pennies and a 50 cent piece. The point is they dont make money on making change, but on VOLUME.

    You are so stupid T, seriously.

  3. I don’t know if it’s just the tech industry or the times we live in, but wasn’t it once commonplace to actually *compete* with another company? That is, try to make your product better and overtake them, or at least put enough fear into them that their investors get nervous, they start to implode, etc?

  4. Some companies still try to compete. Soapbox on MSN Beta http://soapbox.msn.com/ – you’ll see. It’ll all be different when Vista ships. (I’m mostly joking but it is a valid example.) I only use it because I’ve heard some people complaining that MS didn’t buy YouTube. Anyway I got in on the Soapbox beta. Will let you all know when I become famous…

  6. I’d love to try all that out, but unlike YouTube and Google Video, “soapbox” is either unable to detect Flash on Linux, or requires Flash version 8 which doesn’t exist for Linux.

    Don’t get me wrong though, I love the fact that Microsoft had to release a video product that use’s Adobe’s video technologies.

  7. Hmmm. I’m using Flash version 9. Must be tough being so many versions behind. Do you have a problem with Google and YouTube using Adobe technology or just Microsoft?

    If I could figure out how to get stuff from VHS tapes onto my computer, I could upload my old mock-rock videos. Too bad my computer doesn’t seem to take S-video inputs.

  8. Adobe is definitely to blame for not putting out Linux releases in a timely fashion, but I’m thankful that Google and YouTube don’t require the new versions.

    I don’t have a problem with anyone using Adobe Flash, but if Real Networks released a video site, I would expect them to use RealPlayer and all of the infrastructure they’ve invested so heavily in to distribute videos. If you go to Apple and play the videos on their site, they’re in Quicktime. Similarly, Microsoft developed a lot of infrastructure for streaming video. However, they seem to have chosen to use Adobe’s technology rather than their own to use for their video site.

    Since Google and YouTube didn’t build such infrastructure themselves, it makes sense that they’d just pick the best option available.

Comments are closed.