<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[The next Google is ... Google!]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/forecasts/" rel="tag">Forecasts</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rants-and-raves/" rel="tag">Rants and Raves</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/goog/" rel="tag">Google (GOOG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/msft/" rel="tag">Microsoft (MSFT)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/yhoo/" rel="tag">Yahoo! (YHOO)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/csco/" rel="tag">Cisco Systems (CSCO)</a></p><p>My BloggingStocks colleague Jon Ogg <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/24/cramer-calls-for-1-000-on-google-well-600-00-anyway/">wrote a piece</a> stating that CNBC's Jim Cramer believes <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc-cl-a/goog/nas">Google</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/google-inc-cl-a/goog/nas">GOOG</a>) can go to $1,000, or at least $600. You know what? He is absolutely right. <strong>Google <em>is</em> the next Google.</strong> Let me explain.</p>
<p>Ever since Google went public in August 2004, two out of every three interviews with analysts or other talking heads, whether in print or television, have been pooh-poohing Google as "too expensive" or "it has to slow down" or "it's not sustainable." Get real. These talking heads come right back with their heads shaking after every quarterly report. "Yeah, but, but, it cannot continue..." and the same song plays over and over again. Or we hear about some sharp trader that made a quick $5-10 per share "being short Google." Yeah, the short lasted about 2-5 trading days because no one wants to be short Google heading into its quarterly earnings report. <br /></p>
<p>Google is a monster and it still continues to grow and grow. The parallels exist between <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/cisco-systems-inc/csco/nas">Cisco</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/cisco-systems-inc/csco/nas">CSCO</a>) and<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas"> Microsoft</a> (NASDAQ: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/microsoft-corporation/msft/nas">MSFT</a>) during their go-go days, but there are stark differences. Many a portfolio manager or other talking heads missed the major movements in both Cisco and Microsoft because they could not believe the growth rates were any where near sustainable. The growth rates defied gravity for almost 10-12 years running. The world was spending a fortune on technology infrastructure and these two were the leaders.</p>
<p>Google is in the same position -- only it's bigger. The world into which Google sells is virtual. Microsoft and Cisco sold and delivered physical products that needed to be installed and maintained, thus causing some limitation to unfettered growth. Google sells in the virtual world and its customer base is massively larger than Cisco's, and, arguably, Microsoft's. When Google came public many were saying "it might be the next Microsoft." Ladies and gentlemen, I have an announcement for you: Microsoft can only hope to be the next Google!</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>The next Google is ... Google!</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/">The next Google is ... Google!</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 25 May 2007 07:06:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/903760/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/05/25/the-next-google-is-google/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>blue chip</category><category>blue chips of 2017</category><category>BlueChip</category><category>BlueChipsOf2017</category><category>goog</category><category>google</category><category>microsoft</category><category>msft</category><category>the next</category><category>TheNext</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Georges Yared]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 07:06:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
