Nickname: Jaime Cham

Review: It stands to reason that they won't disclose how they might prevent click-fraud because: (1) it would defeat the purpose. If people doing it knew their algorithms they could work a way around them (2) it constantly changes, since it's an escalating war with said fraudsters

Date reviewed: Mar 13, 2006 5:38 AM

Nickname: Been Around

Review: Agreed. You can act like a team of college-aged dorm room kids when your target audience is a bunch of technophiles with no monetary interest in the product's results or team's inner workings. When, however, you are a public corporation with serious money on the table-- money coming from the pockets of investors--the Waynes World attitude has got to go because it's not just a fun game anymore. It's real world stuff and real families are impacted. One can still "have fun" and make a lot of money doing it, but the accountability needs to be sincere and transparent and consistent.

Date reviewed: Mar 12, 2006 4:39 PM

Nickname: CPCcurmudgeon

Review: It strikes me as odd that a company with the engineering talent of Google did not deal with the click fraud problem as part of the initial design of AdWords and AdSense.

Date reviewed: Mar 12, 2006 6:20 AM

Nickname: srinimax

Review: Google is stupidly arrogant. The stock market, as a whole, is a below-average intelligence community. The dot-bomb of the late 90s proved that big time. The current unrealistic valuation of Google proves that again. As far as revenues go, Google is an online text-based advertising company--extremely primative and a model that is still in its "stone-age" in terms of maturity. Except for a miniscule percentage, everyone else investing in the stock market does not have a clue about what constitutes a good company. Little wonder that it remains devoid of sense and logic.

Date reviewed: Mar 12, 2006 4:03 AM

Nickname: PJ Brunet

Review: I predicted this seven months ago. http://knowingart.com/89/implications-of-googles-click-fraud-problem/

Date reviewed: Mar 11, 2006 7:31 PM

Nickname: Edwin Jose Palathinkal

Review: I agree with Randhir Reddy. I think this article is simply some harangue by investors and marketing people about their need to feel more secure about investing in Google. If they don't like Google why don't they sell it? They won't because they know Google has a great future.

Date reviewed: Mar 11, 2006 7:11 AM

Nickname: KermodeBear

Review: These "experts" may say that Google needs to grow up, but I see it differently. Google is popular because it doesn't have the same old, stuffy crusty business culture that other companies have. That alone makes it stand out amongst competitors. After all, who wants to be like everyone else? What's the benefit to that? They have a different and, I feel, more personal and positive approach to doing business. Other companies may do well taking a few pages out of Google's playbook.

Date reviewed: Mar 11, 2006 12:42 AM

Nickname: Mr. Graham

Review: One really has to wonder about the CFO saying one day that earnings growth is declining, then two days later dismissing his own statement. Did something Enron-esque or Worldcom-esque happen during those two days? This should be a giant, red flag for investors and the SEC!

Date reviewed: Mar 10, 2006 10:57 PM

Nickname: Rocky

Review: Google's has not even reached its potential in the market and investors--if they can afford it--should be buying up shares. It is a great company that has not even come close to reaching its peak. It is not a stock for the faint of heart, but for serious investors, who have already made a lot of money.

Date reviewed: Mar 10, 2006 6:35 PM

Nickname: Sacs

Review: I think all this fuss about Google is unwarranted because this is created by analysts. Google should take a long-term view rather than updating analysts about everything it does. Most of the companies suffer from this-quarter mentality. Like somebody has said, we think about the next three months, the Japanese think about the next quarter of a century.

Date reviewed: Mar 10, 2006 5:58 PM