Google discloses Playboy text to SEC - comp.os.linux.advocacy

Google discloses Playboy text to SEC Dawn Kawamoto Aug 13 2004 The search firm has filed the full text of its founders' interview with Playboy magazine with the US Securities and Exchange Commission Google on Friday disclosed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission the full text of its founders' controversial interview with Playboy magazine and the potential concern by securities regulators over the timing of the article's release ... - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39163518,00.htm - unquote - I've never seen a company receive such a trashing before an IPO as Google is getting. What can be the reason for it. Can it be because Google choose to do the IPO through a public auction rather then the conventional channels on Wall St ? Have they broken some unwritten rule here and so have to be punished ? What do you think ?

Daeron wrote: > Google discloses Playboy text to SEC > Dawn Kawamoto Aug 13 2004 > > The search firm has filed the full text of its founders' interview with > Playboy magazine with the US Securities and Exchange Commission > > Google on Friday disclosed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange > Commission the full text of its founders' controversial interview with > Playboy magazine and the potential concern by securities regulators over > the timing of the article's release ... > > - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39163518,00.htm > - unquote - > > I've never seen a company receive such a trashing before an IPO as > Google is getting. What can be the reason for it. Can it be because > Google choose to do the IPO through a public auction rather then the > conventional channels on Wall St ? Have they broken some unwritten rule > here and so have to be punished ? What do you think ? Money has to be spent by someone to facilitate such a wide scale trashing. Probably M$. Need to find all the people involved, log them back to where they got their orders and money from and then sue the directors of that company for illegal business practices, and file further monopoly investigations all over again.

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:32:11 GMT, 7 wrote: > Daeron wrote: > >> Google discloses Playboy text to SEC >> Dawn Kawamoto Aug 13 2004 >> >> The search firm has filed the full text of its founders' interview with >> Playboy magazine with the US Securities and Exchange Commission >> >> Google on Friday disclosed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange >> Commission the full text of its founders' controversial interview with >> Playboy magazine and the potential concern by securities regulators over >> the timing of the article's release ... >> >> - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39163518,00.htm >> - unquote - >> >> I've never seen a company receive such a trashing before an IPO as >> Google is getting. What can be the reason for it. Can it be because >> Google choose to do the IPO through a public auction rather then the >> conventional channels on Wall St ? Have they broken some unwritten rule >> here and so have to be punished ? What do you think ? > > Money has to be spent by someone to > facilitate such a wide scale trashing. > Probably M$. More likely the large institutional investors who got dissed by Google, actually. That, and Google's IPO is the highest profile one since Netscape, so what do you expect?

Simon Cooke wrote: > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:32:11 GMT, 7 wrote: >> Money has to be spent by someone to facilitate such a wide scale >> trashing. Probably M$. > More likely the large institutional investors who got dissed by > Google, actually. That, and Google's IPO is the highest profile one > since Netscape, so what do you expect? To be quite honest I would never have suspected such a thing. Google selling *their* company on the open market is somehow dissing these large institutional investors. What claim, by any criteria, does these 'investors' have to Google ? How does that give them the right to orchestrate a negative campaign in the media ?

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:51:56 -0400, Daeron wrote: > Simon Cooke wrote: > >> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:32:11 GMT, 7 wrote: > >>> Money has to be spent by someone to facilitate such a wide scale >>> trashing. Probably M$. > >> More likely the large institutional investors who got dissed by >> Google, actually. That, and Google's IPO is the highest profile one >> since Netscape, so what do you expect? > > To be quite honest I would never have suspected such a thing. Google > selling *their* company on the open market is somehow dissing these > large institutional investors. What claim, by any criteria, does these > 'investors' have to Google ? How does that give them the right to > orchestrate a negative campaign in the media ? Google is not going the traditional route. They are auctioning their shares which tends to take power from the brokerage houses. If the Google IPO flops, they will again be assured of being able to dole out shares to CEOs at prices that guarantees returns and they keep their power, so it is in their interests to try to make sure the IPO flops. -- Rick

Rick wrote: > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:51:56 -0400, Daeron wrote: >> Simon Cooke wrote: >>> On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 12:32:11 GMT, 7 wrote: >>>> Money has to be spent by someone to facilitate such a wide >>>> scale trashing. Probably M$. >>> More likely the large institutional investors who got dissed by >>> Google, actually. That, and Google's IPO is the highest profile >>> one since Netscape, so what do you expect? >> To be quite honest I would never have suspected such a thing. >> Google selling *their* company on the open market is somehow >> dissing these large institutional investors. What claim, by any >> criteria, does these 'investors' have to Google ? How does that >> give them the right to orchestrate a negative campaign in the media >> ? > Google is not going the traditional route. They are auctioning their > shares which tends to take power from the brokerage houses. If the > Google IPO flops, they will again be assured of being able to dole > out shares to CEOs at prices that guarantees returns and they keep > their power, so it is in their interests to try to make sure the IPO > flops. You know something - I think you're absolutly right. So now at least there is a logical reason for all the google fudding. Here was I thinking it was just spleen and sour grapes. (yea I know mixed metaphor )

Daeron wrote: > Google discloses Playboy text to SEC > Dawn Kawamoto Aug 13 2004 > > The search firm has filed the full text of its founders' interview with > Playboy magazine with the US Securities and Exchange Commission > > Google on Friday disclosed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange > Commission the full text of its founders' controversial interview with > Playboy magazine and the potential concern by securities regulators over > the timing of the article's release ... > > - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39163518,00.htm > - unquote - > > I've never seen a company receive such a trashing before an IPO as > Google is getting. What can be the reason for it. Can it be because > Google choose to do the IPO through a public auction rather then the > conventional channels on Wall St ? Have they broken some unwritten rule > here and so have to be punished ? What do you think ? Maybe to thump the price down to a point where they can be inflated after the sale to maximise the initial profit? IE Make them a better buy.