njohnw

For those of you that weren't able to make it through the entire report, there's this gem:

"90% of Google's revenues come from advertising. We expect Alphabet’s share price to go down by 75%. We get this number by revising its earnings down by 30%, stripping its 30x PE off its "growth premium" down to 15x, and factoring in the reputational damage."

The authors clearly assume that most of Google's ad revenue is from advertisers who don't track how much they spend on media relative to how much they earn -- when in fact their entire business model and the ad auction model they created is predicated on this. If the cost of driving a user to your site from a Google search results exceeds the expected value of that user, advertisers can adjust their bids accordingly.

1. It's reasonable that shoppers (with the help of a mobile app routing them) can complete multiple deliveries / hour. 2. They won't have to increase prices but are negotiating better pricing from the stores they work with (most of ICs profit comes from the items themselves, not the delivery fee they charge). 3. Compensation won't go down, but perhaps it won't rise as quickly as courrier utilization does.

This is Uber creating incentives aimed at growing its base of drivers while also weakening the Lyft driver network.

It's difficult to reconcile the Flurry stats with the fact that most blogs / publishers are seeing a higher percentage of their traffic come from mobile web (>50% in many cases).

One reason could be that their stats don't include mobile web usage within apps (i.e. FB / Twitter). That discounts a lot of my own browsing behavior.

They also invested ~$50m last year at a ~$1B valuation, so their stake is worth even more. Probably closer to $3B.

In what context?