Google gets big company disease?

April 15, 2007 By

The two guys who started Dodgeball leave in a hissy fit. Google bought Dodgeball in mid-2005.

Dodgeball was the pre-cursor to Twitter and Jaiku (albeit a bit more focused on just cell phones than either of those newer services are). Last summer it was the rage with many of the San Francisco cool kids, er, influencers. I remember Irina and Eddie using it almost non stop on our trip to Montana.

So, why didn’t Google get it enough to give these two more resources? Easy. Same reason I couldn’t convince Microsoft to buy Flickr before Yahoo did.

It’s a small thing. A stupid thing. A lame thing.

Big companies have trouble grokking small things like Dodgeball. Heck, how many of you have called Twitter “really lame” in the past two months? Tons!

More evidence that Google is having difficulty getting small things? I heard a rumor that Google executive Marissa Mayer almost killed the Google Reader team because she didn’t think it would get popular. Feed readers are still “small things.” Seeing business value in them is difficult.

It seems that management is trying to get a handle on the chaos that is Google but in doing so is removing some of what made Google attractive to entrepreneurial developers.

What are you hearing from your Google friends?

Filed Under: 1
Newer Comments →
  • http://www.wakingideas.com/ Daniel Nicolas

    same comment I left for OM:

    these guys are entrepreneurs, not company men. There are plenty of happy people @ Google. Look at Jason Calacanis. entrepreneurs cannot stay put.

  • http://www.wakingideas.com Daniel Nicolas

    same comment I left for OM:

    these guys are entrepreneurs, not company men. There are plenty of happy people @ Google. Look at Jason Calacanis. entrepreneurs cannot stay put.

  • http://www.wakingideas.com/ Daniel Nicolas

    Also: I like that we are questioning Google here, and their possible ‘big’ disease.

    PS: thankfully, MS didn’t buy Flickr. =) In the order of people who we didn’t want to buy it, it was like this, Microsoft, Yahoo. :D

  • http://www.wakingideas.com Daniel Nicolas

    Also: I like that we are questioning Google here, and their possible ‘big’ disease.

    PS: thankfully, MS didn’t buy Flickr. =) In the order of people who we didn’t want to buy it, it was like this, Microsoft, Yahoo. :D

  • http://www.dariosalvelli.com Dario Salvelli

    Your post is correct: there isn’t the ability to guess the validity of a small plans.
    And If Google bought YCombinator ? ;)

  • http://www.dariosalvelli.com Dario Salvelli

    Your post is correct: there isn’t the ability to guess the validity of a small plans.
    And If Google bought YCombinator ? ;)

  • Christopher Coulter

    But see with all that recruiting-tool yabber talk of supposed 20% time, Google was supposed to be a hatching ground for all this entrepreneurial activity.

    But they aren’t the first to buy up things, that don’t digest, or that they slowly kill. Mergers usually don’t work at all, historically speaking. Big bank accounts, a religion posing as a company and high arrogance, well you are gonna miss the mark off and on.

    They all follow this pattern: bright and innovative, dot.com free Cokes, slave hours, but work play-things with a social set all work-based, then it settles down into churn (if it survives), and the exodus begins, esp. when the geeky kids start families. Happened to EA, happens to most techie companies, Flash flourish to mature slow-growth commodity. Google is no exception, free food notwithstanding.

  • http://www.psynixis.com/blog/ Simon Brocklehurst

    Agree with #1. Not a surprise – a company with ten thousand employees isn’t the right place for entrepreneurs to be. Sometimes, it takes a few years for entrepreneurs to realise that.

  • http://www.psynixis.com/blog/ Simon Brocklehurst

    Agree with #1. Not a surprise – a company with ten thousand employees isn’t the right place for entrepreneurs to be. Sometimes, it takes a few years for entrepreneurs to realise that.

  • Christopher Coulter

    But see with all that recruiting-tool yabber talk of supposed 20% time, Google was supposed to be a hatching ground for all this entrepreneurial activity.

    But they aren’t the first to buy up things, that don’t digest, or that they slowly kill. Mergers usually don’t work at all, historically speaking. Big bank accounts, a religion posing as a company and high arrogance, well you are gonna miss the mark off and on.

    They all follow this pattern: bright and innovative, dot.com free Cokes, slave hours, but work play-things with a social set all work-based, then it settles down into churn (if it survives), and the exodus begins, esp. when the geeky kids start families. Happened to EA, happens to most techie companies, Flash flourish to mature slow-growth commodity. Google is no exception, free food notwithstanding.

  • http://xlsgen.arstdesign.com/ Stephane Rodrigue

    I think it’s in Google interest to let those outside trends burgeon, reach critical mass, and only then do something with it.

    Scoble, Google could add a searchable index to Twitter index in no time. Which one would you pick as a user (not as an investor) : a relevant search from that indexer, or yet another Twitter clone?

  • http://xlsgen.arstdesign.com Stephane Rodrigue

    I think it’s in Google interest to let those outside trends burgeon, reach critical mass, and only then do something with it.

    Scoble, Google could add a searchable index to Twitter index in no time. Which one would you pick as a user (not as an investor) : a relevant search from that indexer, or yet another Twitter clone?

  • http://xlsgen.arstdesign.com/ Stephane Rodriguez

    Besides this, adding Twitter index to regular Google SERP is consistent with the strategy to keep the Google’s product dilution low.

  • http://xlsgen.arstdesign.com Stephane Rodriguez

    Besides this, adding Twitter index to regular Google SERP is consistent with the strategy to keep the Google’s product dilution low.

  • http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/paul/ paul

    Three years ago you could have asked your audience to sign-up as your friends on Messenger, so why is it so cool to Twitter this and that today?

    Do you still use IM now that your Twittering?

  • http://dotnetjunkies.com/WebLog/paul/ paul

    Three years ago you could have asked your audience to sign-up as your friends on Messenger, so why is it so cool to Twitter this and that today?

    Do you still use IM now that your Twittering?

  • http://scobleizer.com/ Robert Scoble

    Paul: It’s a rare day I use IM anymore. Why? The instant I pop open an IM client I get 40 messages. They all expect me to answer. I can’t close them without answering. Or, if I do, I feel guilty. Twitter doesn’t make me feel guilty and if I don’t answer people understand. Hence, I’m a lot happier using Twitter.

  • http://scobleizer.com/ Robert Scoble

    Paul: It’s a rare day I use IM anymore. Why? The instant I pop open an IM client I get 40 messages. They all expect me to answer. I can’t close them without answering. Or, if I do, I feel guilty. Twitter doesn’t make me feel guilty and if I don’t answer people understand. Hence, I’m a lot happier using Twitter.

  • http://home.infusionblogs.com/kguenther Kurt

    “Seeing business value in them is difficult.”

    But that’s not really the point – the point is that there has to be business value for a business to pursue this.

    I’ve read this point several times in your previous posts, Scoble, but without business value there is nothing. It could be hip, it could be cool, it could be the next 2.0 big fad, but that’s all something without business value is going to be: a fad.

    Fad + Business value = supportable company

  • http://home.infusionblogs.com/kguenther Kurt

    “Seeing business value in them is difficult.”

    But that’s not really the point – the point is that there has to be business value for a business to pursue this.

    I’ve read this point several times in your previous posts, Scoble, but without business value there is nothing. It could be hip, it could be cool, it could be the next 2.0 big fad, but that’s all something without business value is going to be: a fad.

    Fad + Business value = supportable company

  • http://augustinefou.blogspot.com/ acfou

    so we took matters into our own hands and built http://FlickrCash.com to enable anyone to use Flickr as a serious business resource for stock images — by archiving licenses for public inspection forever.

    Most sophisticated Flickr/CC mashup yet
    http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7390

  • http://flickrcash.com Augustine Fou

    so we took matters into our own hands and built http://FlickrCash.com to enable anyone to use Flickr as a serious business resource for stock images — by archiving licenses for public inspection forever.

    Most sophisticated Flickr/CC mashup yet
    http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/7390

  • http://www.venukb.com/blog Venu

    Few days back I was wondering what happened to the popular analytics site Measuremap. Probably its also one of the apps killed by Google !

  • http://www.venukb.com/blog Venu

    Few days back I was wondering what happened to the popular analytics site Measuremap. Probably its also one of the apps killed by Google !

  • Bob Goldstein

    How many Little Things grow up to Big Things? Very few.

    So it’s easy to look at the latest BT, and say,
    “So-and-so missed it when it was little”. However,
    it is very difficult to look at all the LTs and predict
    which will become Big. Those that do slightly better
    than the rest of us at this are called Successful VCs.

    No one entity, particularly a BigCo, can pay attention
    to all the LTs out there. Nor can they predict each one
    correctly. It’s not a BigCo disease, just statistics.

  • Bob Goldstein

    How many Little Things grow up to Big Things? Very few.

    So it’s easy to look at the latest BT, and say,
    “So-and-so missed it when it was little”. However,
    it is very difficult to look at all the LTs and predict
    which will become Big. Those that do slightly better
    than the rest of us at this are called Successful VCs.

    No one entity, particularly a BigCo, can pay attention
    to all the LTs out there. Nor can they predict each one
    correctly. It’s not a BigCo disease, just statistics.

  • http://www.bynkii.com/ John C. Welch

    There is a difference between “big” and “unfocused”. As of yet, I don’t see Google becoming “unfocused”, so the big is not really an issue.

  • http://www.bynkii.com/ John C. Welch

    There is a difference between “big” and “unfocused”. As of yet, I don’t see Google becoming “unfocused”, so the big is not really an issue.

  • http://jetsongreen.typepad.com/ Preston

    @#6 – that sounds a lot like Microsoft.
    Ipod –> Zune
    PS1 + Nintendo –> XBOX
    Mozilla –> IE7

    Big companies wait for innovation and try to take over where others have shown success. They throw money at it developing it in-house (could be difficult with patent issues), or they buy successful startups. But doing this still doesn’t fix the issues with poor innovation and bad culture at the big company. No one wants to be the big company anymore.

  • http://jetsongreen.typepad.com Preston

    @#6 – that sounds a lot like Microsoft.
    Ipod –> Zune
    PS1 + Nintendo –> XBOX
    Mozilla –> IE7

    Big companies wait for innovation and try to take over where others have shown success. They throw money at it developing it in-house (could be difficult with patent issues), or they buy successful startups. But doing this still doesn’t fix the issues with poor innovation and bad culture at the big company. No one wants to be the big company anymore.

  • LayZ

    How much money is Yahoo making off of Flickr? Scoble, what sort of business case did you present to Microsoft to buy Flickr? What was the revenue model? What was the proposed price? When did you see Microsoft paying off on that purchase? In how many years? Or did you simply present it as: “Hey, we should buy Flickr cuz I think it’s a cool service”?

  • LayZ

    How much money is Yahoo making off of Flickr? Scoble, what sort of business case did you present to Microsoft to buy Flickr? What was the revenue model? What was the proposed price? When did you see Microsoft paying off on that purchase? In how many years? Or did you simply present it as: “Hey, we should buy Flickr cuz I think it’s a cool service”?

  • Pingback: Exodus from DodgeBall - Google’s Growth Working Against Innovation? « TechFold

  • http://techfold.com/ rod

    When resourcing becomes an impediment to innovation at the web firm that was supposed live and breath innovation, you know they’re at least somewhat off course. From the outside, it looks like the hectic-ness and integration challenges of growth through acquisition are pulling Google away from what made them great and slowly turning them into the next IBM/EDS/Microsoft.

    http://techfold.com/2007/04/16/exodus-from-dodgeball-googles-growth-working-against-innovation/

  • http://techfold.com rod

    When resourcing becomes an impediment to innovation at the web firm that was supposed live and breath innovation, you know they’re at least somewhat off course. From the outside, it looks like the hectic-ness and integration challenges of growth through acquisition are pulling Google away from what made them great and slowly turning them into the next IBM/EDS/Microsoft.

    http://techfold.com/2007/04/16/exodus-from-dodgeball-googles-growth-working-against-innovation/

  • http://www.daivddalka.com/createvalue David Dalka

    People have documented the many recruiting errors that Google’s process has here is just one:
    http://tinyurl.com/24pe5q

    Last year, I had several internal contacts that thought I’d make a good Googler submit me. Some Google employees have privately expressed frustration with Mr. Bock’s rigid process that apparently gives the hiring manager little or no control in candidate pool choices.

  • http://www.webomatica.com/wordpress/ Webomatica

    There seems to be a point in many corporations where they get so big, they are in danger of being laden with bureaucracy, and employees start worrying about their share price more than innovating and staying competitive.

    If Google is showing symptoms of this, MSFT and YHOO may be well into the incapacitating, fever state.

  • http://www.daivddalka.com/createvalue David Dalka

    People have documented the many recruiting errors that Google’s process has here is just one:
    http://tinyurl.com/24pe5q

    Last year, I had several internal contacts that thought I’d make a good Googler submit me. Some Google employees have privately expressed frustration with Mr. Bock’s rigid process that apparently gives the hiring manager little or no control in candidate pool choices.

  • http://www.webomatica.com/wordpress/ Webomatica

    There seems to be a point in many corporations where they get so big, they are in danger of being laden with bureaucracy, and employees start worrying about their share price more than innovating and staying competitive.

    If Google is showing symptoms of this, MSFT and YHOO may be well into the incapacitating, fever state.

  • Brian

    As I alluded to in a response to your post about MS bidding up properties for Google to acquire, this may be another indication of a suits vs. propeller heads struggle going on inside the Googleplex. Redirect resources from a cool (but questionable from a business perspective) acquisition to more targeted opportunities…

  • Brian

    As I alluded to in a response to your post about MS bidding up properties for Google to acquire, this may be another indication of a suits vs. propeller heads struggle going on inside the Googleplex. Redirect resources from a cool (but questionable from a business perspective) acquisition to more targeted opportunities…

  • met

    So the easiest way to sell an idea inside Microsoft is to point out how much Google or Apple is raking in? Probably that is why we see them following others successes.

  • http://www.beercosoftware.com/ Chris

    It lost interest it would seem. That happens.
    I had an entire successful business sold and canned because of unknown circumstances just like Dodgeball.

    Of course, at least I didn’t get stuck being involved in what happened to it. But still. The same type of thing happened to me and a couple other people.

    Who cares, move on. That’s what I think. This sort of thing happens every day. Google has a lot of money to burn. So do others.

  • met

    So the easiest way to sell an idea inside Microsoft is to point out how much Google or Apple is raking in? Probably that is why we see them following others successes.

  • http://www.beercosoftware.com/ Chris

    It lost interest it would seem. That happens.
    I had an entire successful business sold and canned because of unknown circumstances just like Dodgeball.

    Of course, at least I didn’t get stuck being involved in what happened to it. But still. The same type of thing happened to me and a couple other people.

    Who cares, move on. That’s what I think. This sort of thing happens every day. Google has a lot of money to burn. So do others.

  • http://www.beercosoftware.com/ Chris

    If somebody buys your business, and you make money from it. Even if they bomb that business into the ground, you should be happy about it. That’s my take.

    If it keeps them from having to get a real job, then good. Good for Google. At least they did something good.

  • http://www.beercosoftware.com/ Chris

    If somebody buys your business, and you make money from it. Even if they bomb that business into the ground, you should be happy about it. That’s my take.

    If it keeps them from having to get a real job, then good. Good for Google. At least they did something good.

  • seshadri

    A different question – Why buy something when you don’t know what you are going to do with it? (or you know you won’t do anything with it)

    It must be thanksgiving all year round at Google…

  • seshadri

    A different question – Why buy something when you don’t know what you are going to do with it? (or you know you won’t do anything with it)

    It must be thanksgiving all year round at Google…

  • http://www.beercosoftware.com/ Chris

    “It must be thanksgiving all year round at Google…”

    Google isn’t the only company that does this.
    http://www.kiko.com/

    What happened to Kiko.com???

    Tucows bought it for 1/4M and promptly shut it down.
    They wanted to see the code base ect… and use the calendar internally. They probably re purposed the code base. I had this happen to one of our popular businesses as well. It happens all the time.

    The company figures it’s cheaper to buy the code base, than to pay coders to reprogram it. Coders regularly make 100k+ per year. Those that are worth anything anyways.

    It IS cheaper to buy at least some of the code ready made, even if that is not the whole solution.

    It happens a LOT.

    Photosynth at Microsoft was originally supposed to be based on Mozilla, and was OpenGL
    http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mozilla.jobs/page=2

    They were looking for coders for it that had skills with Mozilla server code.

    Why not just hire coders to do it, than repurpose?
    Because it actually takes longer and is far more expensive.

    We are now writing a patented SQL compiler and I’m sure some companies will be jumping all over that when it’s done. Why? Because people who write compilers regularly make 150k+ and up. And it takes forever to accomplish a stable product.

    It’s really that simple. Google probably re purposed parts of the dodgeball code all over it’s infrastructure. They have enough money though, that they probably didn’t even need to do that.

    Who knows. Dodgeball developers got paid and now they can do a new start up and not have to worry about getting a cubicle job. I think Google is a hero in this situation overall.

Newer Comments →