Digg It |   Del.icio.us |   Printer Friendly |   PDF |   Email

QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Should you be all Ga-Ga for Google?

Friday, November 26, 2004 | Dylan Jovine

Rating:

IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY, I've answered the Google question recently in this very same column.

But it seems that a recently published "BUY" report, issued by the illustrious firm of Goldman Sachs, has many of you bent out of shape. That's right. I've recieved over 20 questions this week asking whether I think Google, in light of this "new information," is now a "buy."

So I've decided to answer the question again and for the last time. Why not? I just finished stuffing my Thanksgiving-day face. And I've just snuk into the private office in my folk's house. So before I slip into a turkey-induced meat coma, I'll say what I have to say.

But One Caveat Before I Go Forward: Normally, I give the person who asks the question credit for the question. I can't do that this time. There are too many of you. So, while you won't see your name illuminating the pages of this column, at least you'll know where I stand once and for all.

Here we go:

Whenever Goldman Sachs writes a big report touting a company it pays to read it. Especially if you're in need of toilette paper. Yes, you heard me correctly - Toilette Paper. While Goldman Sachs is very adept at making money for it's

Check this out: http://www.google.com/press/pressrel/ipo.html

It will show you that Goldman was one of the underwriters that took Google public. An investment banking relationship doesn't end when a firm like Goldman Sachs takes you public. It just begins. For example, Google currently has 40 million shares in the float. Appx 225 Million more are now free trading. What that means is that all of the insiders who own stock real cheap are going to be selling it to the market.

Put yourself in Goldman Sach's shoes. They want all the Google insiders to sell the stock through their firm so that they can get commissions. In addition, they want to prove to the insiders who are going to reap millions that they can help them make many more millions if they let Goldman Sachs handle the sale.

If Goldman does this well, they not only get commissions for managing the sale, but they get the first phone call when Google needs an investment bank. Therefore, I would be VERY WARY about any reports issued by any of the underwriters for the next 12 months.

I'm not saying there is anything crooked going on. I'm just saying that if you don't know who the patsy at the card table is than you're it! In all seriousness, thanks to everyone who sent their questions. It was well worth the heart burn. 



(Please let us know what you think about Dylan Jovine's article.)
Rate his article here »



Dylan Jovine
Chief Investment Officer
The Tycoon Report


Rate this article
Thank you for your vote!

7 Comments

Post your own comment
  • Most recent
  • 1
  • Oldest
  1. Sally (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    This may be an old piece, but the advice to consider the source of recommendations is timeless. Brokers who work on commmissions and investment banks that have an interest in a stock issue have built-in conflicts of interest. I personally consider analyst recommendations only after I have done most of my individual research, and only for confirmation. "Professional" doesn't mean "omniscient"!
  2. joyce (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    I THINK DYLAN HAD TOO MUCH TURKEY IF HE PUTS THIS OUT TO US FROM 3 YRS AGO. ALOT HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN AND GOOGLE IS A #1 "OF A KIND!" GOOGLE HAS GROWN INTO A GIANT SINCE THEN. DYLAN, HAVE YOU BEEN SLEEPING SINCE THAT "TURKEY DINNER?"
  3. Jerry (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    I just read this article(12-2-2007)and it was in the 11-30-2007 Tycoon Report as a relevant article to the $41 Billion Bomb on Citi Bank.



    My point is maybe it is relevant to how some firms on wall street sets us up to fleec us sheep.



    I think that if I was considering GOOGLE as a buy, I would think long and hard, (meticously) about it.
  4. earlmchu (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    There is something weird about publishing a 3-year old piece. Does the author just hate GS or GOOG or both? The investment world changes a lot in 3 months, let alone 3 years. This is not just as if GS is pushing some hidden treasure. Goog is well known and heavily traded. People may debate what it is worth ( I do not own it ) but it is remarkably foolish to do this sort of thing - which I think is beneath this site.
  5. MAXX (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    wish there was more
  6. james (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    I notice the date of this article is 11-26-04. Is this information still considered relevant to Google? It is three years old.
  7. Nhan (1 year ago) Is this Spam?

    I tried to give this article a 5-stars, but your program did not let me do so...

    Thank you for the informative article! It is a 5 stars!
  • Most recent
  • 1
  • Oldest

Add Your Comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed.

Please fill in the missing field(s).

Important: To comment on Tycoon Report articles, you must first log in. If you are a paying customer of Tycoon, you may use the same login and password that you use normally. If you do not yet have a login, please take a moment to register below. It’s free, and you only need to do it once.

Register

(email address and password information will NOT be displayed publicly)

Name *

Email *

Password *

Subscribe to The Tycoon Report
By registering, you agree to our terms of service.

Already a member? Log in!

(you will not be taken away from this page)

Email *

Password *

Remember?

Forgot Password?




Important Notice to all stock spammers, scammers and penny stock pump-and-dumpers: You will get no respect here. Don’t bother submitting fraudulent or misleading information in the guise of an article, because we will remove it. Any piece of content submitted on this site can be removed at the sole discretion of the Tycoon staff.