Hacker News Reader

Comment by aikinai | Hacker News Reader

"Google didn't take IP seriously, bidding silly numbers (such as pi billion dollars) for the Nortel patents."

Why does everyone keep rehashing this statement that was asinine the first time? How do the specific digits of their bids say anything about Google's stance towards IP? Pi billion is over 141 million more serious of a bid than the 3 billion that I guess would have made everyone more comfortable.

View on HN

In hindsight, it's easy to imagine the Google executives bidding fancy numbers while rubbing their hands in glee saying "Haha, lets drive up the costs for Apple/MS and waste their cash while we're anyway going to complain to the DoJ like we did with the Novell patents and the deal to buy Motorola is almost closed. Haha. What next, Planck's constant or the Avogadro number?".

Not that it actually happened, but certainly plausible given what we know.

Edit: New article supporting this theory:

Larry Page Just Made Apple And Microsoft Look Like Fools http://www.businessinsider.com/suck-it-applesoft-2011-8

Has Google wasted $12bn on a dud patent poker-chip?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/15/google_motorola_the_...

I've done so once before, but I've not seen in any other comments anywhere in these threads mentions of this notable insight, "Motorola Mobility held $5.5B in cash and deferred tax assets; this could put Google's (GOOG) real purchase price around $7B."[1]

[1]http://seekingalpha.com/article/278932-can-motorola-mobility...

“Google was bidding with numbers that were not even numbers,” one of the sources said. “It became clear that they were bidding with the distance between the earth and the sun. One was the sum of a famous mathematical constant, and then when it got to $3 billion, they bid pi,” the source said, adding the bid was $3.14159 billion. “Either they were supremely confident or they were bored.”

Google thought they were playing a game, lost, and has been crying about it ever since.

Pointing out the ridiculousness of a system isn't the same thing as crying. Neither is making a serious play in the space with the purchase of MMI. Google can simultaneously believe the system is broken and play the system until it is changed.

“Google was bidding with numbers that were not even numbers,” one of the sources said.

"We bid the sum of --" pinky to corner of mouth "-- NaN billion dollars."

I lol'd. Thank you.

> bidding with numbers that were not even numbers

What does this even mean?

That the numbers were not small multiples of large powers of ten.

I heard that's illegal in seven states.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com