Google is now Alphabet (Sorta)

[netmeg]

What is Alphabet? Alphabet is mostly a collection of companies. The largest of which, of course, is Google. This newer Google is a bit slimmed down, with the companies that are pretty far afield of our main Internet products contained in Alphabet instead. What do we mean by far afield? Good examples are our health efforts: Life Sciences (that works on the glucose-sensing contact lens), and Calico (focused on longevity). Fundamentally, we believe this allows us more management scale, as we can run things independently that aren’t very related. Alphabet is about businesses prospering through strong leaders and independence. In general, our model is to have a strong CEO who runs each business, with Sergey and me in service to them as needed. We will rigorously handle capital allocation and work to make sure each business is executing well. We'll also make sure we have a great CEO for each business, and we’ll determine their compensation. In addition, with this new structure we plan to implement segment reporting for our Q4 results, where Google financials will be provided separately than those for the rest of Alphabet businesses as a whole.

[googleblog.blogspot.com...]

[Leosghost]

No mention of Eric..

[Shepherd]

Alphabet... not a monopoly.

[johnhh]

For a moment there I thought they had got a patent on the alphabet .. close call.

[pageoneresults]

Alphabet... not a monopoly.

0 thru 9 is next on their list - somehow.

[Robert Charlton]

https://abc.xyz [abc.xyz]

This is why they became a registrar. ;)

[lucy24]

0 thru 9 is next

Dibs on _ lowline; it's the last remaining \w character.

[Dymero]

0 thru 9 is next on their list - somehow.

They already have it. Google is an intentional misspelling of googol, or one followed by a hundred zeros.

[Ebuzz]

Big corporate restructuring. With huge implications in the future. So this guy Sundar Pichai is now CEO of Google?

[Robert Charlton]

So this guy Sundar Pichai is now CEO of Google?

To put this in context, this is what Page said about him...

A key part of this is Sundar Pichai. Sundar has been saying the things I would have said (and sometimes better!) for quite some time now, and I’ve been tremendously enjoying our work together. He has really stepped up since October of last year, when he took on product and engineering responsibility for our internet businesses. Sergey and I have been super excited about his progress and dedication to the company. And it is clear to us and our board that it is time for Sundar to be CEO of Google.

Earlier this evening I did some searching on his background, and several of the top Google results on a search for his name more or less leaped off the page at me. There was last year a lot of favorable buzz about him, so much so it's clear that his almost universal popularity and string of successes helped make this move possible for Page and Brin.

Two results in particular precede the current news by quite a bit, coinciding with the "October of last year" that Page mentions....

The incredibly fast rise of Google's Sundar Pichai - Fortune
Oct 27, 2014
[fortune.com...]

...and a series of Quora answers, many by ex-Googlers, roughly from the same period or earlier....

What did Sundar Pichai do to get promoted up to the highest ranks at Google?
[quora.com...]

I get the sense from the Quora answers that Fortune 'got at least some of the details wrong'... but all sources seem to agree that Pichai is an incredibly nice guy who was instrumental in getting some key products launched, has a "'warm, easygoing rapport' with Page", and works well with almost everyone.

Seems that for Page and Brin, having someone they could entrust with their baby presented an opportunity to expand the horizons of the company.

To paraphrase Captain Marvel, the company that controls the Alphabet will control the universe... etc.

[Shaddows]

No mention of Eric..

The BBC's Report [bbc.co.uk] says Eric is Executive Chairman of Alphabet.

So Alphabet's many chefs at the top table is
Larry: CEO
Sergey: President
Eric: Executive Chairman

So, who's in charge?

[Leosghost]

So, who's in charge?

With that sructure, I'd say it's Eric , as in reality ( Larry and Sergey being the "cuddly fluffy nerd faces" for PR purposes ) it was before at G ..

[diddlydazz]

i did submit my CV but it must have been lost in the post - only explanation i can think of for not even an offer of an interview

i even photo-shopped myself with a black and white furry costume for the CV pic

sometimes i really think that google does not check their mail consistently

i am going to stop eating bamboo in protest and go and play that penguin flash game (you know the one?)

[engine]

The company has grown into a massive business, and the range of other business services and developments mean that it cannot go on with the same management structure.

Clearly, Larry and Sergey can now continue to be forward thinking in the new operations without being hampered by the day-to-day running of Google, and all the other side businesses.

From a financial perspective, I can see how that would work, too. They can now look at making each business standalone, as and when required, or retain it within the Google Alphabet family.

I also wonder if there's something in the back of their minds about whether there may have been calls for the company to be broken up over antitrust. It makes it easier now, should those calls become a reality.

[Shepherd]

I also wonder if there's something in the back of their minds about whether there may have been calls for the company to be broken up over antitrust.

This move will make it easier to avoid antitrust issues all together.

[Shepherd]

Love Bing's answer:

[abc.wtf...]

[Shaddows]

This move will make it easier to avoid antitrust issues all together.

You'd think. But all their anti-trust issues are still wrapped up in Google.
So Search may distort markets in
- Video (blended)
- Maps
- Advertising
- Mail

All these are still running under Google.

It looks like they are just moving their non-internet stuff away from the core. Or, equivalently, focusing their core technologies more clearly in an undiluted entity. If anything, this will increase the scope for anti-trust issues.

[jambam]

Wow what a bland and boring new name...

[Robert Charlton]

Wow what a bland and boring new name...

It's likely to grow on you.

[keyplyr]

Wow what a bland and boring new name...

It's likely to grow on you.

Like Google... and the Beatles.

[jambam]

Yes it will grow on me like a fungus hehe. Do you think that this rebranding is because so many people now dislike the google brand? What do you think this new brands slogan will be?

[keyplyr]

IMO the one of the motivations for this was that Page & Brin want to focus on forward technologies and have grown tired of the day to day running of the businesses. Pichai has shown great talent in this.

[Shepherd]

If anything, this will increase the scope for anti-trust issues.

I don't see that, IMO one of the biggest issues that google had was the investing in and acquisition of vertical businesses and then promoting those businesses above all others in search. Now that the Investment arms, such as google Ventures and google Capital are spun off from google search they can argue "legally" that they are arms length.

[netmeg]

The stockholders might have waning patience for non-revenue projects like Google Glass and driverless cars.

[smilie]

Finally they come out with their truest , core value. And it isn't "to organize the world information".

Alphabet agency.

>> one of the motivations for this was that Page & Brin want to focus on forward technologies and have grown tired of the day to day running of the businesses.

They weren't running the business. Operations of this scale is impossible to put on shoulders of two geeks (sorry guys, rich geeks) that aren't really qualified.
I remember that about 8-10 years ago this realization hit me square in the face. When Google did a presentation of something major (forgot, maybe Gmail?), and a bunch of very tough articulate guys (that I would expect to see at a Defense Contractor) were giving presentations way before Brin, and Brin in the end was doing "how to retain talent" no-issue.

It was not their decision to bring in Keyhole , which is part of CIA's portfolio. Which became Google Maps.

It was not their decision and they had no knowledge on how to build scalable data centers to hold all this data they collect from the web and do data analytics on. Data retention and data analytics on this scale is wanted by you know who. There may have been an original profit center there, I don't doubt, but again...

>> Shadow: So, who's in charge?

Good question that I hopefully answered above and won't be banned for the answer that isn't very cute-and-cuddly and PC.

[EditorialGuy]

The reorganization makes sense to me. The new organization sounds a lot more scalable than Google Search with other businesses tied on like tin cans on a "Just Married" car.

[SEOPTI]

Why not retire and close Google? They own enough. Their greed will never find an end.

"For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also", so where is their treasure?

[mcneely]

Heh ... Google ;) ... Considering what's all involved here, I'll venture to guess that we might one day be calling *Alphabet ....


wait for it ......





Soup ...





... for short

[elguiri]

A friend of mine finally fulfilled his ambition to become a Googler. It'll really piss him off. Alphabeter.

[Lapizuli]

Why would they choose a name they can't trademark? Or am I missing something?