Loading...
Symbols:
Get Seeking Alpha Free Stock Alerts by Email!
Get Free Stock Alerts by Email!
Transcripts
- Pacific Sunwear F3Q08 (Qtr End 11/1/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Mad Catz Interactive, Inc. F2Q09 (Qtr End 09/30/2008) Earnings Call Transcript
- Provectus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Wall Street Analyst Forum Call Transcript
- Point Blank Solutions, Inc. Q3 2008 (Quarter End 9/30/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Navios Maritime Holdings Inc., Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Gran Tierra Energy Inc. Q3 2008 (Qtr End 09/30/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc. The Wall Street Analyst Forum Call Transcript
- ArvinMeritor, Inc. F4Q08 (Quarter End 9/28/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Saks Incorporated Q3 2008 (Qtr End 11/01/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Omega Navigation Enterprises, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
-
Editors' Picks
-
Most Popular
- My Reconsideration: Why Share Buybacks Are Pointless
- GM Could Benefit from Bankruptcy
- Throwing in the Towel on This Market?
- General Electric: Genuine Risk of Collapse?
- Food: Against Self-Sufficiency
- The Fed: Now the World's Largest Private Bank
- Full list of Editors' Picks »
- General Electric: Genuine Risk of Collapse? »
- Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor? »
- Memo to Warren: AmEx Preferred at 15%, Warrants at $12 »
- Jim Rogers on China »
- Peak Oil's Bell Is Ringing »
- UltraShort ETFs: At a Tipping Point? »
- The Pickens Plan Changes Its Strategy »
- The Biggest Problem Detroit's Big Three Face »
- Tech May Be a Wreck, But This Isn't 2001 »
- 11 Stocks Selling Below Cash »
- Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News »
Hedge Fund Jobs
Job Seekers: Search jobs by category, get job alerts by email or live feed, apply online See full list of jobs »
Employers: See all recruitment options, get applications online or by email Post a job »
Trading Center
- Free E-Newsletters
- About Seeking Alpha
- About Us
- Contact Us
- What's New
- Readers Feedback
- Advertise With Us
- Contributors
- Contribute an Article
- Feature Your Book
- Our Contributors
- Anonymous Contributions
- Dispute an Article?
- Legal
- Terms of Use
- Privacy
- Copyright
GRiddick
30 Comments
Google to Distribute YouTube Ads; Shares Top $600
I think I represent a minority of folks out here who have an entirely different view of Google than you, and most other financial journalists and analysts, I follow these days.
You see, you continue to report on all the phenomenal upside of this thing they call "google" ... yet you completely ignore the more predictable downside. This misleads investors in my view, and leads to the type of things that happened back in 2000.
The little old ladies in Omaha end up holding the bag.
Google, for years, has written its own rules. Its rocket scientists invented a new moral compass owned and operated exclusively by a select few inside Google .. and several of their lawyers, investment bankers, and venture capitalist friends as well.
They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and others in the middle class .. and to the rich ... and to themselves. Over and over again. Google is one of the most flagrant copyright infringers on the planet. Day in and day out ... millions of times a day ... every day.
Not everyone plans to sell out and settle with Google, as they apparently see all of this "shaking out". Wait and see.
And if you don't think a misguided moral compass, unethical business practices, corporate arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can bring down someone as mighty as Google, you might want to think again.
Can you spell ENRON?
Steven, I would never make such a claim without substantial proof of what I say. I'd be happy to review our research, and our extensive documentation, with you in more detail if you ever decide to tell your readers the flip side of the Google story. The true side.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Google: The Emerging Media Mogul
I think I represent a minority of folks out here who have an entirely different view of Google than you, and most other financial journalists and analysts, I follow these days.
You see, you continue to report on all the phenomenal upside of this thing they call "google" ... yet you completely ignore the more predictable downside. This misleads investors in my view, and leads to the type of things that happened back in 2000.
The little old ladies in Omaha end up holding the bag.
Google, for years, has written its own rules. Its rocket scientists invented a new moral compass owned and operated exclusively by a select few inside Google .. and several of their lawyers, investment bankers, and venture capitalist friends as well.
They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and others in the middle class .. and to the rich ... and to themselves. Over and over again. Google is one of the most flagrant copyright infringers on the planet. Day in and day out ... millions of times a day ... every day.
Not everyone plans to sell out and settle with Google, as they apparently see all of this "shaking out". Wait and see.
And if you don't think a misguided moral compass, unethical business practices, corporate arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can bring down someone as mighty as Google, you might want to think again.
Can you spell ENRON?
Carl, I would never make such a claim without substantial proof of what I say. I'd be happy to review our research, and our extensive documentation, with you in more detail if you ever decide to tell your readers the flip side of the Google story. The true side.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Is Google's Price Breakthrough Justified?
I think I represent a minority of folks out here who have an entirely different view of Google than you, and most other financial journalists and analysts, I follow these days.
You see, you continue to report on all the phenomenal upside of this thing they call "google" ... yet you completely ignore the more predictable downside. This misleads investors in my view, and leads to the type of things that happened back in 2000.
The little old ladies in Omaha end up holding the bag.
Google, for years, has written its own rules. Its rocket scientists invented a new moral compass owned and operated exclusively by a select few inside Google .. and several of their lawyers, investment bankers, and venture capitalist friends as well.
They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and others in the middle class .. and to the rich ... and to themselves. Over and over again. Google is one of the most flagrant copyright infringers on the planet. Day in and day out ... millions of times a day ... every day.
Not everyone plans to sell out and settle with Google, as they apparently see all of this "shaking out".
And if you don't think a misguided moral compass, unethical business practices, corporate arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can bring down someone as mighty as Google, you might want to think again.
Can you spell ENRON?
Valuecruncher, I would never make such a claim without substantial proof of what I say. I'd be happy to review our research, and our extensive documentation, with you in more detail if you ever decide to tell your readers the flip side of the Google story. The true side.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Google's Inflated Market Cap Not THAT Amazing
I think I represent a minority of folks out here who have an entirely different view of Google than you, and most other financial journalists and analysts, I follow these days.
You see, you continue to report on all the phenomenal upside of this thing they call "google" ... yet you completely ignore the more predictable downside. This misleads investors in my view, and leads to the type of things that happened back in 2000.
The little old ladies in Omaha end up holding the bag.
Google, for years, has written its own rules. Its rocket scientists invented a new moral compass owned and operated exclusively by a select few inside Google .. and several of their lawyers, investment bankers, and venture capitalist friends as well.
They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and others in the middle class .. and to the rich ... and to themselves. Over and over again. Google is one of the most flagrant copyright infringers on the planet. Day in and day out ... millions of times a day ... every day.
Not everyone plans to sell out and settle with Google, as they apparently see all of this "shaking out".
And if you don't think a misguided moral compass, unethical business practices, corporate arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can bring down someone as mighty as Google, you might want to think again.
Can you spell ENRON?
David, I would never make such a claim without substantial proof of what I say. I'd be happy to review our research, and our extensive documentation, with you in more detail if you ever decide to tell your readers the flip side of the Google story. The true side.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Jim Cramer's Mad Money In-Depth, 10/10/07: Google Banishes the Bears
I think I represent a minority of folks out here who have an entirely different view of Google than you, and most other financial journalists and analysts, I follow these days.
You see, you continue to report on all the phenomenal upside of this thing they call "google" ... yet you completely ignore the more predictable downside. This misleads investors in my view, and leads to the type of things that happened back in 2000.
The little old ladies in Omaha end up holding the bag.
Google, for years, has written its own rules. Its rocket scientists invented a new moral compass owned and operated exclusively by a select few inside Google .. and several of their lawyers, investment bankers, and venture capitalist friends as well. They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and others in the middle class .. and to the rich ... and to themselves. Over and over again. Google is one of the most flagrant copyright infringers on the planet. Day in and day out ... millions of times a day ... every day.
Not everyone plans to sell out and settle with Google, as they apparently see all of this "shaking out".
And if you don't think a misguided moral compass, unethical business practices, corporate arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can bring down someone as mighty as Google, you might want to think again.
Can you spell ENRON?
Jim, I would never make such a claim without substantial proof of what I say. I'd be happy to review our research, and our extensive documentation, with you in more detail if you ever decide to tell your readers the flip side of the Google story. The true side.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Microsoft vs. Google: The New Battle for Your Network
But I did work for IBM when they were "the King". I have seen invincible "empires" come and go in this technology industry. I know what arrogance, hypocrisy, and greed can do to a company. Once your customers, and formerly loyal business partners, start to turn on you, all the accounting maneuvers in the world won't save your ass.
Thought you and your readers might enjoy the article I wrote a month or so back on these two corporate giants. As you can see, in my view, unless some major changes are made at the top, I don't expect either one of them to win this game in the long haul.
Wanta bet me a billion or so on that one?
George
**********************...
It's the "Battle of the Titans" on 5 simultaneous fronts ... but the outcome of this "war" may surprise you
That's the way I see it, anyway ... perched comfortable on my deck ... Blackberry and laptop in hand ... watching the birds chirp away and wondering why everyone doesn't come to see Virginia in the fall. It's absolutely beautiful!
"They're probably afraid they'll catch one of our 'high humidity holdover' days from August", I say to my new Cardinal friend.
Anyway, I read a few interesting articles this morning and it occurs to me that this intra-industry technology "war" is quickly coming down to two major players. I call them the "titans" ... and everyone else is trying to choose their sides.
Look at some of the recent news:
* IBM now supports OpenOffice more aggressively and is throwing Lotus Notes into the mix
* Microsoft officially introduces its "live online" Office Suite in late September
* Google teams up with Sprint and is testing their own set of "advertising supported" mobile phones
* Novel essentially sells out to Microsoft at the expense of many of its long term allies
* Brazil applies to become an official subsidiary of Google, any spreads piracy throughout South America
* Microsoft takes over half of India ... both here and there .. and sponsors it own international cricket tournament in the process
* Google continues romancing China like a teenage boy in a French Class
* Apple sits back and enjoys the battle knowing full well its market value will sharply increase with controversy
* Google's market valuation shoots past IBM, and starts to close in on Wal-Mart ... in just 3 years!
* Sun, IBM, and Google seem to be having a new and interesting "affair"
* Microsoft and AT&T sign up to testify in Washington against Google as a monopoly
If this were a conventional war, "Poor little Google" wouldn't stand much of a chance. But those folks from Mountain View have changed the playing field and they have Microsoft running scared. They're fighting this one out in the jungles, across the sandy deserts, in outer space, as well as in the dark corners of Main Street, Wall Street, and Madison Avenue. They are also well aware of the unique blend of greed and "techno-hype"... that drives both Wall Street and Washington. And a few thousand rocket scientists don't hurt their cause much either ... except perhaps when "common sense" comes into play.
The Googlelites are street fighters. They know how to align themselves with the gullible masses. They are excellent at attracting third world cultures and emerging markets. They sponsor elections. They rob from the middle class and give to the poor ... and "donate" to select members of the middle and upper class as they see fit, as well. They make virtually all of their money by selling advertising on web sites, many of which are nothing more than willful piracy sites talking advantage of our youth and our underprivileged ... let alone the undereducated.
They anointed themselves as the organizer of all the worlds' information ... and that includes everything and everyone who don't want the Googlelites to touch their private information or property, as well. Google apparently held a public forum on the issue, but no one showed up to vote other than their senior scientists, CEO, departing CFO, General Counsel, a few members of their Board, half the lawyers in California, and, of course, all of the venture capitalists and investment bankers who helped develop the Google war plan in the first place.
Microsoft has a decided advantage in armament and in size. Problem is, too many of the plain citizens don't like them. Their expense structure is so large they have lost forever what it might take to stay nimble and adjust to changing tides ... let alone lead the innovation train. Doesn't look like the federal and state governments care too much for Redmond, either ... except perhaps some of those who have accepted free software and other bribes along the way.
Another problem is some (let's make that "many") people still believe monopolistic business practices are evil in this country ... especially when they have to pay more for software than is logical and are forced to upgrade in order to use many new hardware devices and software features that might actually help them improve their position on both the economic and self-esteem totem polls. This silent majority is becoming "no so silent" anymore these days.
Case in point. Microsoft had the perfect opportunity to do what was right this fall and modify its "image search" engine functions to comply with the long standing copyright laws in this country ... and guess what? ... they chose not to do so. I know. I brought it to their attention in May and was politely told to "pound sand". Perhaps they thought honesty from Microsoft would give Google an even further marketplace lead. And don't these folks from Redmond depend on the adequate protection of copyrights for their own survival?
I, for one, can't stand hypocrisy. It's probably the only business practice I hate more than piracy.
So, Microsoft has the bulk of the soldiers, all dressed up meticulously in their corporate colors and standing at their guard posts all around the world ... but Google has the guerrilla warriors hiding behind semantic shells and bricks and mortar as well ... let alone innocent women and children who blindfully follow their lead ... and, all the while taking full advantage of the anonymity of the Internet.
So who is going to win this "Battle of the Titans"?
Here's my view. Microsoft will win some battles and Google will win some battles, but NEITHER one of them will ultimately win the war. A new player, or set of players, will emerge. I am almost certain of that. Players who respect honesty and fair play. Players who will not sell out our morals and business ethics for all the oil in the Mid-east, or all the toys in China. Players who respect copyrights and the hard work of the hundreds of thousands of artists, songwriters, musicians, writers, photographers, journalists, illustrators, cartoonists, and poets, who make our country so unique and so wonderful. Players who believe in both the "fair use" of copyrighted works for research and innovation, and the honesty of the "Public Domain" ... but only within the confines of what is legal and what is not.
People who respect the law of the land. Even if they wish some laws would change faster than they do.
People who shoot straight with their customers, their suppliers, government regulators, members of the legislature ... and the judiciary ... and with their shareholders. A new set of players. A new breed of business ethics, honesty, and fair play. A culture that can once again be respected around the world. It will come about. I'm convinced of that. It's simply a matter of how long it will take to evolve.
If the gourmet free lunches and cricket tournaments have to bite the dust in the process, then so be it. The rest of us deserve an honest shake in all of this Web 2.0 excitement as well. And we expect our leaders to have some class, be honest, and set the proper examples for our kids.
Not these two Titans!
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Microsoft and Vista: Trying To Turn Around A Supertanker
I, too, have followed Microsoft closely for years. I also worked for IBM when they took some of these same arrogant approaches to obvious market-driven trends.
From what I've seen in the last year or so, I see nothing but trouble looming ahead for the folks from Redmond. Microsoft's only salvation may turn out to be the weaknesses of their opponents (more on this in another post).
Here are just a few of the MS activities that have gotten my attention:
1. Large scale discounting. Rarely are market leaders heavy discounters. Microsoft recently discounted the price of Works, certain Office versions, and of both the X-Box and their game software from I can see. Do you really think they will make up those profits with volume ... especially when they have already had to take a huge hit due to manufacturing flaws with the X-Box?
2. Zune. Why does the market want, or need, Zune? I personally think its branding is awful, and I've been in the technology branding business for years. Now another round of discounts for Zune as well?
3. Vista. I know several friends and business associates who have tried to buy a Dell, or other computer of their choice, only to find it only available with pre-loaded Vista. This was/is an old business model squeezed into a modern day bottle. It is not going to float. All of these changes you talk about create absolute market confusion, and market confusion leads to a lowering of profit margins ... We should all know that by now.
4. Online Advertising. What do the polls say about the average consumer's trust of Microsoft? Need I say more. Regardless of what Ballmer says he wants, major advertisers will not follow Microsoft blindly into the darkness. Advertisers react to performance, not simply hype or the FUD factor (that's Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt ... one of the few things Microsoft did learn from IBM back in the 80's).
5. Consumer products and games. Sure Halo 3 is off to a good start, but do people really associate the Microsoft brand with consumer innovation, creative or ethical leadership, and market dynamics. I don't think so.
6. Office Suites. Most of the people I know are not shelling out any real bucks for the Microsoft Office Suite 2007. I think its sales will be too closely associated with Vista to break the bank. Let alone the new competitive offerings coming out from Apple, Adobe, IBM, Sun, and others ... and, oh yeah, Google.
7. Servers. I really think this is still a strong and profitable suite for Microsoft (FUD works on many of our IT departments these days, who use some of the same techniques when dealing with their own internal executives and management), but it also has a reverse affect to a certain extent. Server tachnologies are not exactly what I call end-user friendly. In fact, I have been in this industry for over 25 years and I have never taken the time to learn how these servers really work. Why? I find it boring. It certainly is not the same market who buys creative advertising, plays games, searches the Interent for relevant topics and world news, or listens to music. Who, exactly, is Microsoft's target market? I can't name any company that has ever become "all things to all people" when "things" change this quickly.
7. Below the "tip of the iceberg". I write about this topic frequently, Roger, so I want to tell you up front I have a bias. But I'm not wrong. I have studied this VERY closely for the past 8-9 months, and even had some discussions with senior level folks from Redmond on the subject. Microsoft supports flagrant, and willful, copyright infringements through its image serach and Windows editing facilities, as well as through AdCenter. The magnitude of the problem is almost unquantifiable. We are talking about hundreds of millions of infringements .. occurring on a routine basis ... and with full knowledge of Microsoft executives. Unfortunately, the exact same thing is happening at Google, so you won't see them testifying against Microsft up in D.C. on this issue.
Once disclosed, a time that is rapidly approaching us (did you see the recent "ethics" report on Google at nlpc.org?), these piracy issues will shake the confidence of Microsouls and Googlites everywhere. Average consumers, across all markets, will be concerned ... and negatively impacted. In fact, many of them may also become liable themselves due to their close association, and usage, of the software, content, service, and download tools provided to them by Microsoft and Google.
I could go on and on about this, but keep your ears and eyes wide open on this one. You saw Viacom fire the first significant shot, but there are many, many others waiting in the wings. Some even biger than Viacom.
Once computer users lose confidence in the leadership, business ethics, morals, hypocritical positions, and corporate scandals and greed supported by the executive teams at Microsoft and Google, who knows what might happen? I, for one, have my eyes wide open looking for the next shining stars.
Please let me know what you think. Thank you.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Google Should Outperform On Broader Ad Market Weakness
I read somewhere recently that it's a battle between Google and Microsoft to determine who will be the next great advertising company in this country. Get serious ... who is buying this garbage?
I say ... run for cover ... and protect your hind side along the way. Microsoft now claims that 25% of its revenue will come from advertising in just the next few years. And Google gets virtually all of its money from its advertisers already! We're in big trouble
I have been in and around the advertising business for my entire life. In fact, I am a third generation graphic arts designer ... only my specialty is digital. My grandfather started making a living in the ad industry in 1918, at the age of 19. His son followed. Both of my brothers and my sister have spent most of their life in advertising as well. My nephew is now attending one of the most prestigious advertising graduate degree programs in the world ... and is knocking them dead. Even my 16-year-old daughter has the knack.
The advertising industry demands perfection ... and vision. It tries to strike the perfect balance between super creative people, media experts, business people, ethics monitors, and account executives. While it sometimes stretches the norm and produces an ad campaign like the infamous Apple attacks on IBM, or the new sexy GoDaddy models trying to host your web site accounts, it always plays within the rules. If it doesn't, you, the consumers, will let them know. You don't see laws being violated every single day by these advertising agencies ... whether they relate to smoking prohibitions, pornography, blatant racial prejudice, or generally offensive materials of any sort. You make a mistake like Don Imus and "pow", you're taken off the air. Your advertisers dump you.
And you certainly don't steal other people's work. Words ... images ... music. The industry has for the most part learned how to protect its own.
Social responsibility, respect for individual creative skills, and copyright protection have become an accepted way of life in the advertising industry. And now targeted online advertising can be delivered to us on the device of our choice (mobile or static) and exactly when we might want to see, or hear, it. How exciting!
But it's not all about the bucks, folks. Advertising requires a degree of class ... sophistication ... social responsibility ... customer sensitivity ... and an understanding of what is visually appealing and what is not. How many flashing, hopping, beeping, or honking pop up ads can someone watch before the viewing device ends up in the bottom of the lake in a fit of rage, anyway?
How much stolen property is the average person willing to download before they say "enough is enough!"
What advertisers in their right mind are looking to recruit Michael Vick these days ... or Mike Tyson ... or even the guy who won the Tour de France a year or so back. Even the slightest hint of cruelty, or lawlessness, can set a concerned advertiser, and its clients, into an uproar. The established rule in the advertising community has always been to avoid controversy at all costs. Let the journalists do their job on that front ... not the ad agencies.
So, what could be crueler, or more lawless, than tens of thousands of small businesses, and hundreds of thousands of hard working individuals, routinely being driven out of business each year because of the theft of their intellectual property by companies like Microsoft, Google, or Apple? Songs, artwork, photography, videos, short stories, poems, cartoons ... you name it. They are all infringed on a daily basis by these so-called technology industry visionaries ... and delivered to innocent consumers who then accept liability as well.
The technology industry is entirely different than the advertising industry. It thrives on controversy. It steals routinely. Whether it's Microsoft stealing its original ideas for Windows from Apple, or Apple stealing its interfaces and designs from HP, or Google stealing clipart illustrations and videos from everyone, they are all roughly the same. It's always been that way. Try to get away with anything you can until the government authorities threaten to shut you down ... or, worst yet, put you behind bars. And if you accumulate enough cash money in the process, you can even fend off the government if you choose.
I know. I went to work for IBM in the mid-70's. Almost got disinherited by my "advertising"... family in the process, but there I went anyway. We weren't taught creativity much at all in those days. It was more FUD than anything else. For those of you new to the industry, that's Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. "If you don't pay three times as much for this IBM system, you are likely to lose all of your data ... and then your wife ... and eventually all of your children." IBM finally met its match in the 80's and took a dive from grace. They fell asleep at the wheel. I call it "we're #1 syndrome".
Then Microsoft took over. Predatory business practices ruled the roost. "Bundle this or we'll squash you. License us your ideas for pennies or we'll steal them anyway. Antitrust issues be damned. We are much better pitch men then you folks will ever be." Never had we seen a company make so much money so quickly. "Hey, this controversy stuff isn't all that bad, now, is it?", Microsoft executives and shareholders would say.
Then came the 90's. The decade started off with a strong rumor that a guy named McAfee had invented a cure for the computer virus (Michelangelo) that many thought he invented in the first place. And both the disease and cure spread like wildfire. When I saw him being interviewed by Bryant Gumbel on the Today Show I knew we were in for big trouble. The technology industry has never been the same. These software engineers are sure smart, but should they really be allowed to operate outside the law of the land? I don't think so.
By the end of the 90's, the Internet had taken hold. And every two-bit pirate wannabe in the world was now an official publisher. You could go public by selling air, but stealing other people's property, selling polluted air, and then recruiting an audience to your party, or new community as they called it, was much more exciting. Business ethics be damned. Just look into TheGlobe.com, NBC Internet, or Xoom.com if you want to see what I mean. The advertising industry was supposed to attend and sponsor these new technology feasts as well, but few quality firms participated at this early stage. Something didn't smell right. Tell me again why "eyeballs" are more important than "profits"?, a few from the old school would quietly whisper their concerns to each other for fear of being heard and considered to be behind the times. No riches were reserved for dinosaurs in this new technology game.
I found it almost too sad to watch as many of our modern day business "heroes", like GE Chairman, Jack Welsh, and NBC Chairman and CEO, Bob Wright, got completely snookered by some of these new Internet visionaries, and convinced their advertisers to tag along. They weren't about to miss out on this new "zero gravity" wave ... whatever the heck that meant anyway. They both "retired" shortly thereafter.
And so began the hypocrisy of the technology industries ... an hypocrisy that still haunts us all today. In fact, today the problem has worsened to close to the point of no return. If you're Goliath, you steal from David. If anyone questions you, you overwhelm them with FUD.
So now, the dust is finally settling and Web 2.0 has brought about a new world order. Power to the people. Controversy brings eyeballs and is sought after now, not avoided. Social networking is hot, buying goods via auctions over the Internet is in vogue, pornography is everywhere, and user supplied content is virtually uncensored ... all of our norms are starting to change. Our ethics have evaporated into greed. And the software engineers and scientists out at Google and Microsoft have finally figured out how to dupe Madison Avenue, not just Wall Street, out of its money ... let alone the poor small business out there on Main Street!
Need more proof?
Google refuses to follow the standards of objective and straightforward journalism and guess what ... journalism has started to die. Google unilaterally decides to digitize every single book they can get their hands on around the world without the copyright owners' permission ... and guess what ... the book publishing industry turns into a steep downward cycle ... if not a tail spin. Newspapers are all selling out, if not giving up. Google pays $1.65 billion for a start up company called YouTube, that, by and large, uses stolen video properties to attract its customers. Google claims modern day clipart illustrations, cartoons, photographs, and animations are all in the "public domain". Technology companies agree to censor content in China while the Chinese government applauds the fact that its piracy rate is now only slightly above the 82% level. Kids get thrown out of fraternities, or social networks, if they are found actually paying for music or movies they download online ... let alone using e-mail. These are no longer socially acceptable practices ... or hip. Obnoxious, deceptive, and intrusive advertising smears all of our online lives. Who produces these pop-up and banner ads anyway? The whole advertising industry has caved into the "science" of it all ... and it's supposed to strike a delicate balance between both science, ethics, and art. Always has.
Hey, I'm not against progress. I love these search engines and what they can do. I use them every single day. Used fairly, they can really enhance our lives. But I don't want to be exposed to stolen property every time I turn around. Are there really 147,645 companies out there giving away original graphic arts content that is part of the "public domain" as Google claims? I don't think so. I'm aware that I, too, have potential liability even as an innocent user of this digital "stuff" I download online when the property is stolen.
I don't believe the average person in this country is a crook. Far from it. I believe they are being deceived by the billionaire executives out there at Microsoft, Google and Apple. It's as simple as that. Those that have steal. Those who don't have assume the liability.
I just want to hear the truth. Who owns the content on your website anyway? Why are you delivering me stolen goods? Who will pay my legal bills when I am caught? Never had to worry about this sort of thing before. Responsible advertisers would provide me with a shield. I just like being told when I'm about to get hoodwinked. "Bend over ... we realize that there's no water in the shower, but our engineers are working on that one as well." Semantic water.
Go ahead, technology companies. Take all of the money. You might as well before another country like Brazil, Russia, India or China (the so-called emerging BRICs) starts to dominate the game.
But please don't call yourself an advertising company. You're a delivery medium. You're a technology company. You're a copyright infringer ... a pirate. Stick to your knitting. We've had to solve enough problems over the years in the advertising community ... dealing with our own unique blend of green hairs and greenbacks ... on our own!
Long live the power of the honest pitch! Wake up responsible advertising companies ... we need you now more than ever!
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Microsoft's $154 Billion Question: Accounting For the Unaccountable
I am not a financial analyst, investment banker, or lawyer, but I do have a few years experience in common sense, in general, and in the technology industries, in particular.
I also have watched Microsoft closely now for the past 25 years.
It is my view that "brands" are not nearly as important to long term value in the software and Internet worlds as some people would want you to think. Why? It's simple. It's like branding the weather, branding air, or even trying to brand the "perfect storm".
The "unaccountable&qu... value in a market cap such as Microsoft's stays undocumented, in my view, because of the toll it might take on if the company's market perception becomes vulnerable. We saw it in the glory days of IBM. We've seen it time and time again in the technology and Internet industries. Branding an easily replaceable service is far more risky than establishing a worldwide tangible brand for something like Coca Cola, or GE light bulbs.
What are the Lotus, WordPerfect, Netscape, or even AOL brands really worth these days?
When corporate arrogance, greed, deception, theft, piracy, and/or unethical business practices start to wear on a brand, the value can drop lightning fast, and even faster than that if your brands are based on "air", or "promiseware"... or "unending beta tests", or "required cultural changes", like so many of the Microsoft, Apple, and Google brands seem to be these days.
Every once in a while the "perfect storm" does come around and I, for one, feel certain aspects of our new technology-based global economy are very, very vulnerable to some of the fastest brand erosion we have witnessed in this country in quite some time.
I appreciate you bringing all of this to our attention. It would be interesting to me to see the same analysis done on the market caps of Google, Apple, and a few other "overnight" success stories.
Thanks for "listening".
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Misleading Chart of the Day: RIM and GOOG in WSJ
The WSJ is not the only group who continues to promote the Google hoax and spin machine. Willful copyright infringement will be Google's Waterloo. The only real remaining question is whether their new home base on the moon will be ready by then.
From what I know, the Blackberry folks do not suffer from this same sense of corporate arrogance and unethical business practices.
Your charts reflect more reality in my view. Can't wait to see the charts a year from now.
George Riddick
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Microsoft Banks $170 Million in First Day of Halo 3 Release
What if I could figure out how to deliver Halo 3 to everyone for free and be protected from attacks by Microsoft based on the "safe harbor" or "fair use" provisions of the DMCA (that's the Digital Millennium Copyright Act for those of you new to copyright law in this country)?
What if I could make it run on any game console you had, or sell you a really cheap new one I'm having made in China? We're thinking about calling it the X-Boxx.
What if I could then sell advertising on the web pages where Halo 3 was displayed for downloading and keep most of the money for myself?
What if I could keep records of everyone who downloaded or used Halo 3 and then send them e-mails and other solicitations for hardware and software (maybe even travel and food!) owned by companies other than Microsoft?
Waht if I could bypass the standard distribution channels, like Best Buy, Game Stop, and Wal-Mart and keep all of the money for myself?
What if all Halo 3 users could then join my new social networking community and I could sell even more advertising for every minute they surfed or "stuck around" on the Web?
Well, don't fool yourself. There are only a few things stopping this scenario from happening. It's called "the companies with all the money". It is also sometimes called a "monopoly", or certainly at least an "oligopoly". Some call it "truckloads of lawyers", probably even more dangerous than all of the other three combined. Years ago it used to be called "Japan".
Microsoft routinely steals other people's copyright-protected property every single second of every single day. And so does Google. I know. My small graphic arts development company is one of the victims. We have had to lay off more talented people in the last few years than we have hired.
Let me give you a specific example of how this illegal activity occurs routinely at Microsoft:
1. Microsoft chose to copy Google's illegal image search approach rather than make some simple changes to make their's legal. Again, I know. I pointed this out to senior Microsoft executives and lawyers earlier this year and was politely told to pound sand.
2. I showed senior Microsoft officials a specific example. They claimed they were somehow protected by the DCMA. NONSENSE!
3. At the time, the N.Y. Yankees were 8 games behind the Boston Redsox. Their playoff chances looked "iffy" at best.
4. I found several web site publishers, one called Freefever and the other called Lunapic, that had been infringing our electronic clip art illustrations for some time, AND who had removed the infringing images after receiving an official notice from my company, Imageline.
5. I showed Microsoft exactly how they could still retrieve the Yankees clip art illustrations we had produced and registered with the U.S. Copyright Office many years ago from the Microsoft servers. AFTER they were removed from the infringing web sites. You see, top quality electronic graphic arts content actually increases in value over time. It's not like an old version of WordPerfect or Microsoft Works.
6. Try it now yourself if you want to watch these ongoing infringements in action. Go to Microsoft Live image search and key in "Yankees clipart". You can do the exact same thing on Google if you'd prefer. The cartoon image with the fans in Yankee caps and the "Go Yankees" banner is one of ours.
7. You might also notice the official logo of Major League Baseball, several original Yankees' logos as well, and some other copyrighted works that are displayed by Microsoft on the exact same page with the Imageline clip art. Do you think Microsoft has a license to display and download any of these images?
8. Microsoft claims it is retrieving the Imageline clip art illustrations from Lunapics or Freefever or other infringing web sites, but they are NOT. They are stored in the Microsoft servers. The infringing web sites took the images down long ago!
9. Microsoft encourages you to place the infringed image into the Microsoft Scratchpad. From there, you can a) copy it to your computer, b) re-size it for use in other applications, c) e-mail it to a friend or business associate (or even a Boston fan), d) use it for your computer background as I have done here in Virginia, e) put it into a tiled background for a more dramatic impact, f) create a customized screen saver, or g) use readily available Windows software tools to modify, combine, or animate the copyrighted image. All EXCLUSIVE rights of the copyright holder.
10. We're talking about using the infringing images in the exact same size and resolution as they are stored in the Microsoft servers. This is not "indexing" or "framing" folks ... this is DIRECT copyright infringement.
11. If ALL of the above are not flagrant examples of willful copyright infringement, I do not know what is. And I have been in this technology copyright game for over 25 years now. Remember, all of these infringements occur as a direct result of Microsoft instructions, Microsoft tools, and Microsoft trying to make extra billions of dollars from the hard work of others.
12. How long do you think it would take Microsoft's army of lawyers to ascend on Central Virginia if we tried the the exact same stunt with Halo 3 as referenced above? This is simply corporate hypocrisy at its highest and most dangerous level. And the reason I personally do not believe that the government should take any pressure off of Microsoft for complying with the anti-competitive restrictions placed on them years ago. In many areas, I think they've made a turn for the worse, even while under the government scrutiny.
13. In addition, Microsoft is now selling advertising on the exact web pages where all of this infringing activity occurs. Just like Google, Microsoft's new wicked twin sister in the copyright infringement "evil empire".
14. Neither Microsoft nor Google pay the original copyright holders a dime. While their five top so-called "executives" and "visionaries"... have accumulated an astonishing $115 billion+ of wealth. What has happened to the morals and ethics of this country? And why aren't the existing copyright laws enforced against the largest violators in the land by far? Surely, lobbyists cannot be THAT powerful.
15. Until Washington politicians, the judiciary, and the business community as a whole, decide to enforce our laws evenly, and follow the rules of decency and fair play, there will be NO END to the damages caused by willful copyright infringement activity in this country. Let alone any chance in hell of lowering the copyright, trademark, and counterfeiting violations abroad.
How long do you think it's going to take before pirated copies of Halo 3 are everywhere? Does Microsoft really deserve protection of its copyrights while they routinely infringe the copyrights of others?
This is a national crisis, folks. And I haven't heard a single candidate for president mention it even once. Nothing that is happening today could have the negative consequences on both the reputation and the pocketbook of hard working Americans like this issue.
Once our morals and standards are gone, we may as well choose which other country we want to "follow". Who knows, maybe Microsoft and Google will form their own country by then. Why not, they are allowed to play by their own set of rules already. What a shame!
And I hear there's a guy named Gates who might be without a job this time time next year and would love to be "president".
Mark my words on this one!
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Microsoft Management Needs A Major Strategy Reset
I started noticing this trend with Microsoft about the same time that Bill Gates announced he would officially step out of operations next summer. Not sure if there is any connection between the two or not.
I will tell you this, however. Once the leader of the pack starts to become too concentrated on defense, they always falter. Not just in business. The Dallas Cowboys were knocked off their perch as well, when they became arrogant, "media focused", and "more important" than everyone else.
In my opinion, Microsoft runs scared these days. Why? I'm not sure. I agree with you, however, their "game plan" is simply too disjointed for the bulk of us to understand. Games, servers, healthcare, operating systems, clip art, office software, game consoles, templates, image search, online advertising, touch screens, desktop publishing, animated graphics, media players ... all things technology to all people.
Here's my view. They have the high end corporate and government folks over a barrel. Combinations of IBM ... and Sun ... and Cisco and ... and Oracle ... and Intel ... and a few key others could start to change that, however.
Office is well entrenched in mid-size businesses, and I don't see any major movement underway to change that. These businesses usually don't have the internal IT resources, or financial ability, to take a chance on the new software solution of the month.
Apple gives them a fit in small businesses and in individual computer installations, especially where graphics are king. I also see this group as willing to try new solutions as they come along. The new HP and Dell decisions to bundle Linux could make a difference over time as well.
Where I feel Microsoft has gotten out of its league is in the consumer markets. This appeqars to be Ballmer's primary focus. Google and Yahoo outpace them in virtually all personal productivity, entertainment, and other Internet usage categories. They seem to be running scared of Nintendo and Sony as well... even with cash cow franchises like Halo in the wings.
The leader of the pack usually only makes steep price reductions for a strategic reason (look at how the Japanese did it with electronics and some other key indsutires). Defensive price cuts almost always signal management or manufacturing weaknesses from my experience. XBox, Office, Halo ... they all seem defensive to me.
Finally, you have to be on one side of major industry issues (like copyright protection) or the other. Microsoft has joined forces with the CCIA yet they publicaly disavow any connection to the recent "embarrassing&quo... report made by CCIA supposedly pointing out the market significance of "fair use" indsutries compared to copyright industries ... waht a joke!. And the total waste of taxpayer dollars as the Google-led CCIA filed a complaint against the copyright industries through the FTC for improper copyright warnings. What?!
Try to figure out what side of this important industry-wide debate Microsoft is on, Kris. No wonder they appear to have no long term strategy.
"We're # 1 Syndrome" is a desease. Once you contract it, it takes over your culture and requires an awesome management team, market leading products in all key target markets, and a focused strategy to get rid of it. I simply do not see any of these at Microsoft these days.
Waht do you think?
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
Bernstein Advises Yahoo To Outsource Search To Google, Cut Staff
I don't know about you, but I think this recommendation by Bernstein is not as well researched as one might think. Sure, it is possible that the out-sourcing could boost Yahoo earnings in the short haul, but, over time, I do not see this strategy working well for them, or Internet users in general, for that matter.
Here are my thoughts:
1. Search is becoming a commodity, yet the people who control search do get first refusal rights on most of the eyeballs. From what I can see (after some extensive research I might add), Google "pads" its search results with so many duplicates and irrelevant "hits" that users like me are getting very frustrated.Yahoo may start to gain market share if it can stay clean and focused.
2.The battle field is now headed to display ads, graphical ads, animated ads, and video. Some of Yahoo's work here has improved significantly in just the past few months. I see Google struggling here, DoubleClick or no DoubleClick.
3. Google is now getting the solid, and well deserved, reputation that it is "anti-copyright&q... An anti-copyright company cannot continue soar in this country like Google has done over its first three years as a public company. Google is not just anti-copyright, it is as hypocritical as you can possibly get.
4. Google's top three business "executives"... as well as their leading venture capital investor/advisor, dumped enough of their personal stock holdings into the market in the past 6-8 months (over $2 billion) that the four of them can spend the next twenty years personally building that new "moon rover", taking turns riding it around the "complex", and chasing it around Mountain View in the testing process. They don't even need to have Google succeed in its next phase. Some of the new Yahoo executives are different ... in fact, they may be hungrier to prove some of their points.
5. Turning this search game into a 2-way battle between the titans - Google and Microsoft - will be bad for all of us who want to see innovation continue in this industry ... and greed, and ruthless predatory business practices to wane.
6. Finally, I cannot see this to be in Yahoo's best interest in their international operations. In many countries, Yahoo actually has a lead over both Google and Microsoft. Once this lead subsides due to search, I personally believe the other Yahoo services would be at greater risk of decline as well.
Please remember, I an not a financial analyst. I am not a journalist ... and I am certainly NOT a lawyer ... I'm simply a small graphic arts content development company owner who wants to see this game played "fair and square". With Yahoo remaining in the game, I think we all stand a far better chance against some of the shameful business practices we have seen demonstrated by both Google and Microsoft over the years.
I guarantee you that many of your small business, entreprenuerial, and individual readers will agree. I can't speak for the "anti-copyright&q... crowd or the IT departments in large corporations.
But I'm not sure those folks are not Yahoo's primary targeted markets anyway.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...
RBC Thinks That Google Is Nearing “Must-Buy Levels”
Don't you know how to spot a public company in crisis? New 3-year agreements with CNN, social networking success in Brazil, and minority investments in China, could all be smokescreens.
How about these traditional signs?
- Corporate Officer suddenly resigns. No apparent succession plan is in place;
- Company CEO is dumping the maximum amount of shares that law will allow into the market as fast as he possibly can;
- New products are rushed to market without adequate testing and none come close to the one product line that makes ALL of the money;
- Unable, or unwilling, to settle massive copyright infringement cases around the world against the comapny;
- So arrogant that computers answer all inquiries while humans dine on gourmet meals, give and get massages, and tell each other how smart they are;
- and on .. and on ... and on
Want to see what axe we have to grind. Check out the New Release we sent out Tuesday at imageline2.com.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
Trial By Fire: Google Suddenly Needs A New CFO
I was wondering how long it was going to take for some of the technology journalist I follow to sit up and take notice.
How about this one? Google has already met its match and its opponent is called "Copyright". I wouldn't bet against Captain "C" if I lived in this country.
Our economy, and future positioning in a global market, is far too dependent on the "C" brigade for that.
Take a close look at the News Release we sent out on Tuesday (posted at imageline2.com) and you'll see what I mean.
Thanks for opening some eyes. Things like this simply DO NOT HAPPEN in a company that is on a positve roll.
George P. Riddick, III
Chairman/CEO
Imageline, Inc.
griddick@imageline2.co...