After the market closed today Google (GOOG), a stock we follow in our domain name stock index, reported earnings and they had a blowout quarter by any measure.
Shares of Google are already up over 7% on the news or $43 a share at $590 in after hours trading.
Google’s revenue was up 33%, Adsense Revenues were up 18%, paid clicks were up 28%, Cost per Click was up 5% and Google ended the third quarter with $42 Billion in the bank.
Google+, now has 40 million users, an increase from the 10 million users Google+ had at the end of Google’s last quarter.
“”We had a great quarter,” said Larry Page, CEO of Google. “Revenue was up 33% year on year and our quarterly revenue was just short of $10 billion. Google+ is now open to everyone and we just passed the 40 million user mark. People are flocking into Google+ at an incredible rate and we are just getting started!””
Revenues – Google reported revenues of $9.72 billion in the third quarter of 2011, representing a 33% increase over third quarter 2010 revenues of $7.29 billion.
Google Sites Revenues – Google-owned sites generated revenues of $6.74 billion, or 69% of total revenues, in the third quarter of 2011. This represents a 39% increase over third quarter 2010 revenues of $4.83 billion.
Google Network Revenues – Google’s partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $2.60 billion, or 27% of total revenues, in the third quarter of 2011. This represents a 18% increase from third quarter 2010 network revenues of $2.20 billion.
Paid Clicks – Aggregate paid clicks, which include clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 28% over the third quarter of 2010 and increased approximately 13% over the second quarter of 2011.
Cost-Per-Click – Average cost-per-click, which includes clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 5% over the third quarter of 2010 and decreased approximately 5% over the second quarter of 2011.
TAC – Traffic acquisition costs, the portion of revenues shared with Google’s partners, increased to $2.21 billion in the third quarter of 2011, compared to TAC of $1.81 billion in the third quarter of 2010. TAC as a percentage of advertising revenues was 24% in the third quarter of 2011, compared to 26% in the third quarter of 2010.
The majority of TAC is related to amounts ultimately paid to our AdSense partners, which totaled $1.83 billion in the third quarter of 2011. TAC also includes amounts ultimately paid to certain distribution partners and others who direct traffic to our website, which totaled $383 million in the third quarter of 2011.
International Revenues – Revenues from outside of the United States totaled $5.3 billion, representing 55% of total revenues in the third quarter of 2011, compared to 54% in the second quarter of 2011 and 52% in the third quarter of 2010. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the second quarter of 2011 through the third quarter of 2011, our revenues in the third quarter of 2011 would have been $53 million lower. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the third quarter of 2010 through the third quarter of 2011, our revenues in the third quarter of 2011 would have been $483 million lower.
- Revenues from the United Kingdom totaled $1.05 billion, representing 11% of revenues in the third quarter of 2011, compared to 12% in the third quarter of 2010.
- In the third quarter of 2011, we recognized a benefit of $1 million to revenues through our foreign exchange risk management program, compared to $89 million in the third quarter of 2010.
A reconciliation of our non-GAAP international revenues excluding the impact of foreign exchange and hedging to GAAP international revenues is included at the end of this release.
Other Cost of Revenues – Other cost of revenues, which is comprised primarily of data center operational expenses, amortization of intangible assets, content acquisition costs as well as credit card processing charges, increased to $1.17 billion, or 12% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2011, compared to $747 million, or 10% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2010.
Operating Expenses – Operating expenses, other than cost of revenues, were $3.28 billion in the third quarter of 2011, or 34% of revenues, compared to $2.19 billion in the third quarter of 2010, or 30% of revenues.
Operating Income – GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2011 was $3.06 billion, or 31% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $2.55 billion, or 35% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP operating income in the third quarter of 2011 was $3.63 billion, or 37% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $2.93 billion, or 40% of revenues, in the third quarter of 2010.
Interest and Other Income, Net – Interest and other income, net increased to $302 million in the third quarter of 2011, compared to $167 million in the third quarter of 2010.
Income Taxes – Our effective tax rate was 19% for the third quarter of 2011.
Net Income – GAAP net income in the third quarter of 2011 was $2.73 billion, compared to $2.17 billion in the third quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP net income was $3.18 billion in the third quarter of 2011, compared to $2.46 billion in the third quarter of 2010. GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2011 was $8.33 on 327 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $6.72 in the third quarter of 2010 on 322 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2011 was $9.72, compared to $7.64 in the third quarter of 2010.
Cash Flow and Capital Expenditures – Net cash provided by operating activities in the third quarter of 2011 totaled $3.95 billion, compared to $2.89 billion in the third quarter of 2010. In the third quarter of 2011, capital expenditures were $680 million, the majority of which was related to IT infrastructure investments, including data centers, servers, and networking equipment. Free cash flow, an alternative non-GAAP measure of liquidity, is defined as net cash provided by operating activities less capital expenditures. In the third quarter of 2011, free cash flow was $3.27 billion.
Cash – As of September 30, 2011, cash, cash equivalents, and short-term marketable securities were $42.6 billion.
Headcount – On a worldwide basis, Google employed 31,353 full-time employees as of September 30, 2011, up from 28,768 full-time employees as of June 30, 2011.
WoW… and over 208 domains with 4,002 unique hits they came off $1.24 to me yesterday. how do they stay in business? oh wait… they aren’t one of those standard oil monopoly type companies are they?
google is “the funnel”. the gateway to the web. in 1993 it was yahoo. today it’s google.
but google is even easier to use. step 1. type something in that little box (it’s the only thing on the page, how can you miss it? in fact, we put another copy next to the browser address bar, just in case. don’t worry, we got you covered.) step 2. hit enter.
beyond that it gets much more confusing. what is step 3?
it really doesn’t matter. as long as they control step 1, they will be a web superpower.
alas, ppc fans, most “direct navigation” is G-O-O-G-L-E or G-M-A-I-L… and that’s where the ad spend goes, too.
but let’s all fight over step 3. yeah, that’s what we’ll do. like pidgeons fighting over breadcrumbs.
while, Bing loses $4 billion per year …
yep.
all ms ever does is copy others and try to oust them by directing the windows userbase to the ms clone. iexplorer to counter mozilla was a very visible example. xbox to counter sony was another. and bing to counter google is yet another. generally, over the long term, as we see in all these examples and more that are less visible, they lose. they lose enormous amounts of money. but with the amount of cash they have they can fund loss leaders for a long, long time.
dennis ritchie RIP.
Rofl at these stats, meanwhile almost every domainers/adsensers earnings are down.. U’d swear these earnings don’t even get verified? And that they’re just made up on the spot??? Such a joke.
comment removed upon political second thoughts
but for those @traffic I will come to the mike and share then
Owen
Looking forward to it
Google enjoys protection of the US courts, yet shifts its patents rights business offshore to avoid US taxes. Google, Microsoft, other blue chips which enjoy the protection of US courts allocate income between units in different countries to minimize taxes. For instance,
“As of June 30, Google held $18.8 billion in cash in its foreign subsidiaries, almost half its total $39.1 billion in cash and marketable securities . . . Google reported an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent in the second quarter, less than half the average combined U.S. and state statutory rate of 39.2 percent.
”
– IRS Auditing How Google Shifted Profits Offshore to Avoid Taxes
They don’t pay taxes, they don’t pay dividends. They hog it all to themselves, and that is just the way business is done in the US. That’s it. And someone else in these comments remind us affiliate payouts are cut.
Google’s revenue is up. BIG DEAL! What does it do for the community? What is the cause for celebration? What does it benefit the average American? It’s just more of the pie they’re keeping from the government while sticking the average American with the bill of the justice system which supports them.
“as long as they control step 1, they will be a web superpower”
===
There will be more alternatives coming that use the Peer-2-Peer Architecture
If people are following the I* Control Freaks meeting this week in Philadelphia
it is ironic their lock-in strategies depend on Client-Server with central control.
The Internet Clerics quickly abandon their purity when money is on the table.
Google had 28% more clicks in Google.com than last year when they lost traffic. Now it’s Made for Adsense, all ads.
Hillary Clinton! Wow. I’m a huge fan. Had no idea you were a nerd at heart. Cool!
Big: The alternatives are already working great. No need to wait. Client-Server is an abused concept (ads, ads, tracking, ads, spying, ads, stupid blogs, twitter, facebook, more ads, etc.) that has seen it day. Enough already. Imagine if every telephone call was a party line that anyone could join? How long would that remain interesting? This is the supposed glory of web 2.0. Lame.
New networks, running on top of IP, will become more exclusive and shielded from abuse. Web-centricity, the kitchen-sink browser, will be exposed as a dumb way to keep people who want lots of services within an ad-laden, trackable box.
“Peer to peer”? What else is there? Multicast? 90’s fail. Publishing all your thoughts to the world? On its way to big fail.
“P2P” is the original internet design. We’re all peers. Today’s web-based, ad-hyped nonsense is a fad. Sell your domains, cash out and move on to the next thing. But not just yet.
The truth, the underlying simplicity of the internet’s design, shall be revealed, when users are ready. Not just yet. Keep pushing those ads until the levee breaks and users say “No mas.”
You are both a client and a server, or one or the other, or neither. You are a node on a network. Or on several networks. You choose who you want to connect with. Connection or connectionless. You choose. You. The internet is just a bottom layer. All the rest is optional and full of choice. IP is the only necessary common denominator.
The best stuff, the best software is free. But far from worthless. It’s the truth, waiting to be discovered outside geek circles.
dmr, RIP.
@Louise – Well said. The system will break. Greed gets them all. – Always!
“The truth, the underlying simplicity of the internet’s design, shall be revealed, when users are ready. Not just yet. ”
=============
Not just yet 🙂
It is too much fun watching “THEM” (TBLS) try to con everyone and now each other. They are even giving each other PhDs with no high-school diplomas or college degrees.
How about that .PHD Top Level Domain !!!
The maintainer of the web’s foremost (free) DNS software, with a storied history of insecurity and bloat (excuse me, “features”), the one who to this day can still be seen expending significant effort to influence the public’s understanding of DNS, and to maintain the software’s user base, including certain corporate clients who pay consultancies to handle their DNS needs… Did he ever attend university?
And then there the Computer Science PhD’s who do “research” on DNS. Is this “science”? Sniffing DNS packets is “scientific research”?
The USPTO still does not recognise most computer science degree programs, whether Bachelors, Masters or PhD, as meeting the degree requirement for becoming a patent lawyer.
Maybe there’s a reason for that.
And then there the Computer Science PhD’s who do “research” on DNS. Is this “science”? Sniffing DNS packets is “scientific research”?
=====
DNS is not the real interest of The.Big.Lie.Society – THEY want your WHOIS info
see DNA
DNA = DHCP = Client-Server
Useful. Convenient. But massive potential for abuse the more it becomes centralised.
If people were given the choice of who they wanted to be on the same network with, who would they choose? Total strangers? Strangers who might decide to deliberately crash the network, or some other misfeasance, for no good reason other than their own entertainment?
There was a time long ago when network users had to be more accountable for their behaviour. Time-shared systems. Recall TOPS-20. If someone crashed the server everyone knew who did it. Everyone suffered. There was potential embarassment.
Then you have people like Bill Gates who used to hack into people’s accounts on a time-shared system when everyone had gone home for the evening. Or someone like Mark Zuckerberg who snarfed all his classmates photos and email addresses then baited them to check out where he posted them. Is it any wonder these people went on to do what they do that is so morally bankrupt?
Are these the people you want to be on the same network with? Let alone the people who are running the servers? Facebook is not your network. It’s Zuckerberg’s. While he may have stopped breaking into protected systems like he did at Harvard, he continues to ignore basic notions of privacy and sell people out. But he’s only one example.
Technical ability to create something that is valuable (to enable people to connect with each other) and social responsibility are not necessarily mutually exclusive. This is bigger than just Facebook, they are just one example. This is about Client-Server, it’s obvious abuse and questioning long-held assumptions.
Maybe given the choice of running their own networks, the choice of who to invite and hence the decision of who to be on the same network(s) with, people might choose people they _already knew_. People whose contact info they already had.
And in that case, “WHOIS” info becomes moot.