Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 8th Dec 2016 23:42 UTC
Google

The architect of this reorganization - known as "Alphabetization" at the ever-sunny Google - was Ruth Porat, the new chief financial officer. Porat, who was born in England but grew up in Palo Alto, led Morgan Stanley's technology banking division during the first dot-com boom, served as an adviser to the Treasury Department during the bailouts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and became Morgan Stanley's CFO in 2010. She joined Google in May 2015 with a mandate to bring discipline and focus to a company so awash in cash that it never needed much of either. She instituted rigorous budgeting and, according to people familiar with Alphabet's operations, forced the Other Bets to begin paying for the shared Google services they used. Projects hatched with ambiguous timelines of 10 or more years in some cases had to show a path to profit in half the time.

At most big companies, such financial controls are standard operating procedure, and Alphabet's investors are pleased. Its stock is up 35 percent since Porat joined. But within the Other Bets, Porat's tenure has been controversial, earning her an unflattering nickname: Ruthless Ruth. "She's a hatchet man," says a former senior Alphabet executive. "If Larry isn't excited about something," the executive continues, referring to CEO Page, "Ruth kills it."

I love these stories of problems few of us will ever have to deal with.

Thread beginning with comment 638169
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: The end is nigh
by spudley99 on Fri 9th Dec 2016 16:29 UTC in reply to "RE: The end is nigh"
spudley99
Member since:
2009-03-25

That is part of the goal. Google had become bloated with pet projects, many of which they bought in.

Ok, the company was still printing money, but failed projects simply refused to die. Over time that would become a burden and Block innovation as new projects that compete with existing solutions weren't getting commissioned..


Google really needs to try selling or spinning off some of those projects rather than just killing them. Their habit of constantly killing off products that people still want to use is starting to get them a bit of a bad reputation.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: The end is nigh
by rft183 on Fri 9th Dec 2016 16:39 in reply to "RE[2]: The end is nigh"
rft183 Member since:
2005-08-11


Google really needs to try selling or spinning off some of those projects rather than just killing them. Their habit of constantly killing off products that people still want to use is starting to get them a bit of a bad reputation.

Definitely! I've found myself not wanting to switch to any of their services if there is a decent competitor at all. I'm afraid I'll start to rely on it, and then they'll kill it.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: The end is nigh
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 12th Dec 2016 14:15 in reply to "RE[2]: The end is nigh"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

While I understand the frustration, in most cases that isn't possible. Almost all in house google products use google libraries and technologies that aren't publicly available. They can't sell them off without revealing "trade secrets".

I think its better to have Google be more disciplined in its product offerings. Release less, and support more longer.

Reply Parent Score: 2