Recent orders

Google Inc financial performance

Name:

Tutor:

Course:

Date:

Introduction

Rapid advances in technology have greatly influenced the operations of the internet providers in the search industry. Such organizations have witnessed tremendous changes in the recent past and have therefore adopted new operational strategies to not only guarantee their survival in the market but also improve their profitability and subsequent performance. To begin with, the management strategies so far adopted by the various organizations in this industry are based on innovations and technological advancements as exemplified by Google Inc. Since its inception as BackRub by two computer science students from Stanford University, Google search engine has maneuvered through a highly competitive market to become the best search engine in the world (Gamble, 2008). Initially, Sergey Brin and Larry Page developed the BackRub search engine in 1996 which later expanded and captured the world market. BackRub later transformed to Google Inc. in 1998 following its acquisition by an investor who paid up $100000 for the search engine. Since then, Google has undergone comprehensive changes to dominate the search industry (Porter, 1998). It has a sound financial background including revenue base and net income that has grown courtesy of strategic management approaches adopted by the firm including acquisition and technological innovations.

Google Inc has displayed a commendable financial performance in the search industry since its inception. To begin with, Google Inc. recorded a massive revenue growth in 2007 to about $16.5 billion hence increasing its competitive potential against Microsoft and Yahoo companies. It therefore overtook Yahoo Co. which had been in the business many years before Google Inc. Yahoo Inc had a revenue base of about $6.9billion in the same period. However, Microsoft had the strongest revenue base of slightly above $50billion in the year 2007 (Gamble, 2008). It is worth mentioning that Microsoft Live demonstrated poor performance in the online business as it recorded losses in 2008. Its $17.1 billion net income accrued from the Microsoft office and Window vista alone. The two business sectors also contributed to almost one third of Microsoft’s revenues of $60.4billion in 2008. The figures therefore demonstrate Google’s competitive ability in the light of the two aforementioned rival companies given the fact that Microsoft indulges in a variety of businesses other than internet provision. The aforementioned revenue base was generated by the company as a result of the loyalty of internet users that Google Inc. had ever since enjoyed in the market thereby dictating the huge market share. In 2008, Google Inc took leadership in offering mobile and internet advertisements by controlling over 63% of the market share (Gamble, 2008).

Google Inc had demonstrated a steady growth since its inception and could not be dislodged from the leadership position in the internet advertisements within the industry by either Yahoo or Microsoft Live. It out-competed all the business rivals in the internet industry including AOL, Ask, Yahoo, and Microsoft among other firms in the industry by controlling more than 40% of the market share (Gamble, 2008). Moreover, the company adopted a strategy of acquiring other business ventures in an attempt to increase its revenue base, net cash as well as earnings since the 2004 IPO. Such approaches further stabilized Google Inc against its close competitors in the market. Besides, the venturing into cloud computing technology is believed to enhance the company’s growth to $95 billion by 2013 (Gamble, 2008).

Google inc. recorded commendable profits in the online business in 2008 by recording a profit of about $4.2billion in the aforementioned period up from %3.08billion in the previous year compared to Microsoft’s net income of $14.0billion in the same year. This income was generated from other business sectors notably Microsoft office 2007 as well as Windows vista and not online business as expected. The company’s online business however recorded net sales of about $3.2billion in 2008. In the process, Microsoft suffered a $1.2billion operating loss in the year in review (Gamble, 2008). Yahoo Inc. on the other hand recorded a meager $6.6 million net income in the same period thereby lagging behind the two companies in the online business. The above statistics on Google’s profitability demonstrates a positive financial performance of the firm during the year in review.

Google also had quite a commendable quantity of assets compared to its liabilities thereby demonstrating its financial worth compared to the other two rival companies. For instance, in 2007, Google had asset value worth about $25 billion against meager total liabilities of approximately $2.6billion in the same period. The assets recorded in the aforementioned time period increased from $18.5billion in the previous year. This is more than $6billion increase in one year which is a commendable performance by the firm. However, the liabilities increased from approximately $1.3billion in 2006 to $2.6billion in subsequent year. Yahoo on the other hand had total assets of about $12billion against long-term liabilities of approximately $0.4billion compared to Microsoft’s total assets value of about $63billion in the same period. It is noteworthy that Yahoo Company had recorded a slight increase of $0.5billion in the total assets which is far below the records shown by Google Inc. However, Yahoo’s record of reducing long-term liabilities from $0.8billion to $0.4billion is encouraging. Microsoft on the other hand had a decrease in the value of total assets from $69billion in the previous year of 2006 thereby demonstrating its sluggish performance compared to the two aforementioned business rivals.

Besides, Google recorded an increase in its stockholder equity from $17billion in 2006 to approximately 22.6billion in the subsequent year. The assets acquisition is growing against the reduction in liabilities recorded by the firm. This therefore meant that the company is showing growth through acquisition of assets during its period of operation. Microsoft on the other hand had a tremendous decrease in its stockholder equity from approximately $40billion in 2006 to about $31billion in 2007. Yahoo Inc however recorded slight increase in the stockholder equity from about $9.2billion in 2006 to approximately $9.5bilion in the subsequent year (Gamble, 2008). Generally, Google Inc demonstrated a commendable performance given the statistics on the stockholder equity during the aforementioned time period compared to the two close rivals in the search industry (Warren, Reeve, & Duchac, 2008).

Google Inc. has also shown positive performance through the constant increase in its net income per share between 2004 and 2007. Notably, the net income per share increased from $0.77 in 2003 to a staggering value of $13.53 in 2007. This is reflects a total increase in the net income of the firm from a meager $6.9million in 2003 to the $4.2billion in 2007. This is more than sixty nine thousand percent increase. It is without doubt that the company has recorded the best growth in the net income in the search industry so far (Warren, Reeve, & Duchac, 2008). Yahoo Company on the other hand recorded a slight increase in the net income growth from $0.24billion in 2003 to $0.66billion in 2007 thereby posting a growth of $0.42billion in four years. Microsoft Live recorded an increase in net income too from $8.2billion in 2003 to $17.7billion in 2007. This is about $9.5billion increase which translates to 54% increase. Once again Google tops the two rival companies in the annual increase ion net income as shown in the above statistics.

Generally, the balance sheet of Google Inc has shown commendable improvement in 2007 compared to the previous year in all the aspects of financial performance including changes in current and fixed assets, short and long-term liabilities, stockholder equity, as well as net income among other financial facets (Warren, Reeve, & Duchac, 2008). The company has out-competed its close rivals notably Microsoft Live as well as Yahoo Inc. in the growth prospectus as shown in the financial statements of the aforementioned organizations. The sound financial performance of the firm is attributed to the suitable management strategies adopted by the firm during the period of study.

Conclusion

Search industry has witnessed rapid changes in the recent past to acquire a new outlook that is not only appealing but also admirable. At the outset, these changes may be attributed to a variety of factors including advances in technology currently witnessed. These changes impact on the performance of an organization. Since its official commencement of operations under the brand name of Google in 1998 Google Inc, has demonstrated commendable performance in the highly changing and competitive market to become the best organization in provision of online services. By analyzing all the aspects of financial growth, it s worth noting that Google Inc. has shown tremendous changes in its financial worth compared to any other business in the search industry. For instance, Google Inc. recorded $6.9million in net income in 2003 and four years down the line, its net income grew to approximately $4.2 billion. Such financial performance is hard to achieve in the current world business market characterized by a lot of uncertainties. The company’s performance is attributed to the faith its customers have grown in its services. Moreover, the firm’s expansion strategies including acquisition of other business ventures too contribute to its heightened performance in the search industry. As mentioned earlier, Google’s financial performance is far beyond its closest rivals notably Microsoft and Yahoo Companies.

Reference List:

Gamble, J. (2008). Google’s strategy in 2008. John E. Gamble.

Porter, M. (1998). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance: with a

new introduction. London: Simon and Schuster.

Warren, C., Reeve, J. & Duchac, J. (2008). Corporate Financial Accounting. 10th Ed. Florence:

Cengage Learning.

Google Developers

Google Developers

Name

Institution

Google Developers

Google developers are an initiative of Google Inc., an international company dealing with Internet-based products. They include platforms such as Android, Google Chrome, and App Engine, and products such as YouTube API, Maps API, and Google Calendar API. Their main aim is to develop existing technology and devise new ones based on technical content.

The developers enable users to add robust Google features to their devices such as maps, cloud messaging, sign-in, and mobile payments to enhance the app features. They also help in adding new revenue streams, tracking app utilization, and managing app distribution. Android is the most common example of Google developer. It is an operating system based on the Linux kernel specially designed for touch screen gadgets such as smart phones and tablets (Yang, 2011).

Google developer apps such as My Class Schedule and ClassDojo are essential tools in the classroom. Students can use My Class Schedule to manage their busy school lives since the app informs them of upcoming classes and serves as a reminder for unfinished assignments, and scheduled examinations and tests. The app also has a timetable feature that gives details on the day’s or week’s schedule and activities. Other helpful features of the app include a grade overview that gives the average grades of the students, and a feature to mute the phone automatically when in class. Thus, the app helps a student keep track of all relevant class matters even when away from school (Mayer, 2013).

ClassDojo app is beneficial to teachers since they can monitor the behavior of their students in the class. The app captures data on behavior and teachers can use it to improve the behavior since they can share the information with administrators and parents. Parents also monitor their child behavior in class by liaising with the teacher via email or parent code on the app. In addition, teachers can also give real-time feedback to students because the app is linked to the ClassDojo website.

References

Mayer, S. (2013). My Class Schedule: Timetable. Google. Retrieved on 19 Nov. 2013 from https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.rakuun.MyClassSchedule.free&hl=en

Yang, S. (2011). How to use the Application object of Android. Intridea Inc. Retrieved on 19 Nov. 2013 from http://www.intridea.com/blog/2011/5/24/how-to-use-application-object-of-android

Google ADwords

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Google ADwords

Google ADwords is a service provided by Google to allow businesses display advertisements about their products for sale on the search engine page and its advertising network (Holdren 2). The advertisement scheme works with a very spontaneous concept where businesses set a budget that they will only pay after their advertisements gain recognition atoned by clicks that their ADword gets after appearing in a category specific to the user want. Keywords that describe the advertisement enable it appear on user Google page containing results of the search (Holdren 13).

The client business website for “Pizza Queen” offers no appeal to the client as it only contain details of what the business entails with no incentives out rightly depicted at the top of the page to compel users visit or prefer services from the business. To remedy this problem, Google ADword presented a formidable solution that would generate traffic to the site through highlighting key words that complement the business activities and attract a user to visit the site with emphasis laid to locations US and Canada (Holdren 127). The campaign AD group “Specially Pizza” creates awareness especially by using the keyword “pizza” guaranteed to generate clicks to the AD with “Specially” connoting quality. We used a manual bidding strategy by setting bid to $2 with a daily budget of $125 dollars per day to narrows the budget to $875 per week. This leaves a deficit of $1500 for insurance in case cost-per-click exceed daily quota. Example of two successful AD groups “Logo Design *SALE* $49” and “Make $7487 a month?” both use different themes but ultimately achieve the goal of convincing users click on the advertisement. The first uses numbers “$49” enable the ad stand out from others. The text below the stating “100%” emphasises on quality guaranteed for service provided. The second ad uses a story theme of an American mom attesting to the credibility of the business. This appeals to the customers because they compel users click on the advert out of curiosity.

Work Cited

Holdren, Anastasia. Google Adwords. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, 2012. Internet resource.