Skip to main content

Larry Page - it's going to get tough - I know, I've been there

OK so I haven't owned a $multi-billion corporation, but I was a co-founder of a search engine company more than 10 years before Google was started, and I did sell an internet business for several £millions, so I guess I'm closer to Mr Page than most people.

Larry's just become CEO of Google replacing wise old steady Eric Schmidt. And I know why, and he's heading for a big disappointment. Larry, like I did, wants everything that he thinks needs to happen, to happen. And happen fast. Everything's a priority. "We're fucked if this doesn't happen...".

Larry, it won't. In fact the bigger and more complicated you get, the less likely any of it will happen. All that will happen is you'll get a stomach ulcer. You'll start sacking people who don't deliver what you want. You'll surround yourself with sycophants and staff will become too scared to bring you bad news. You'll be made to think everything's on track, but you know it's not. Your development budget will get bigger and bigger. The products you launch will become fewer and fewer, and will take longer and longer to appear. You'll yearn for the good old days when a hundredth the number of programmers delivered twice the number of projects in half the time. It's common knowledge in the software world that by far the most effective development team size is 1 person.

Everything's got too big and ugly. Google is stuck is a spiral of confusion and panic. You will not get the products and services you believe you urgently need, and you will become frantic - and all because you have become paranoid about the competition. Groupon, Facebook, Apple, and most terrifying of all, some kid in a garage somewhere, probably China or India (by the way, that was what Bill Gates answered once to a question about who he feared most - at the exact time Larry and Sergey were starting Google - in a garage).

Falling out with Eric won't get you anywhere. You're not a leader, you're a brilliant inventor (at least most of the time.... but there have been some stinkers too). Google cannot remain on top. That kid in a garage will invent the next Google. Actually like me and my colleagues in a tiny company called Tome Associates in London in 1986. We built intelligent search agents. Google is not intelligent. It doesn't know WHY someone is searching, so it can't help them find better results than their keyword searches reveal. [Postscript note: It's why they bought Deepmind in 2014, a British (yeah) successor to Tome.] We developed semantic networks driven by expert systems to assist users to find better search results than they could achieve without help. Not much survives about Tome Searcher, the product we tried to sell, long long before most people knew online searching existed. We ran out of money in 1991. I'm too old and relaxed these days to restart Tome Associates, but bet your arse (by the way, that's how the English spell it - the other way is a type of donkey) intelligent search agents will become meta-interfaces in front of Google, thereby enabling the world to avoid 'sponsors' ads'. Ask yourself: If people had the choice, Better search precision with no ads or Poor precision and paid-for ads, which would they choose? You can trust expert searching, you can't trust ads. Bye bye Adwords.

From the ashes of Tome I went on to build a series of companies with varying degrees of success, so I know now what it takes. But it's taken me 25 years to work it out and you've only just begun. But what I do know is that kid in the garage WILL beat Google one day, just like Larry and Sergey beat Yahoo, Hotbot, Alta vista, Ask, Lycos etc.... and there's nothing, Larry, you can do about it.

My advice. Chill. Let the Eric's of this world run the fantastic business you've created, and then rent a garage or play golf....


Popular posts from this blog

Phillips screws - yes I'm angry about them too

Don't get me wrong. They're a brilliant invention to assist automation and prevent screwdrivers from slipping off screw heads - damaging furniture, paintwork and fingers in the process. Interestingly they weren't invented by Mr Phillips at all, but by a John P Thompson who sold Mr P the idea after failing to commercialise it. Mr P, on the otherhand, quickly succeeded where Mr T had failed. Incredible isn't it. You don't just need a good idea, you need a great salesman and, more importantly, perfect timing to make a success out of something new. Actually, it would seem, he did two clever things (apart from buying the rights). He gave the invention to GM to trial. No-brainer #1. After it was adopted by the great GM, instead of trying to become their sole supplier of Phillips screws, he sold licenses to every other screw manufacturer in the world. A little of a lot is worth a great deal more than a lot of a little + vulnerability (watch out Apple!). My gromble is abo

Addictions. Porn, Drugs, Alcohol and Sex. Don't prevent it, make it safer.

In 1926 New York, during Prohibition, 1,200 people were poisoned by whiskey containing small quantities of wood alcohol (methanol). Around 400 died, the rest were blinded. The methanol they drank was in the moonshine they had bought illegally. In fact it had been added by law to industrial ethanol in order to make it undrinkable. Prohibition existed to protect everyone from the 'evils of the demon drink'. However, people still wanted to enjoy alcohol. So bootleggers bought cheap industrial alcohol and attempted to distill it to remove the impurities the state had added, but the process wasn't regulated. The state was inadvertently responsible for the suffering - although it was easy for them to blame the bootleggers and to justify escalating the war. This didn't stop the bootleggers. In fact it forced them to become more violent to protect their operations, and even less cautious about their production standards. Volumes of illicit alcohol, and therefore proportionat

The Secrets of Hacker Golf

Social media is awash with professional golfers selling video training courses to help you perfect your swing, gain 50 yards on your drive and cut your handicap. They might help a few desperate souls, but the rest of us hackers already know everything we need to complete a round of golf without worrying the handicap committee or appearing on a competition winner's list. What those pros don't realise is that for us hacking golfers who very occasionally hit shots that if you hadn't seen how they were hit, end up where the pros might have put them, we already know everything we need to know - and more. Unlike pros who know how to time the perfect swing in order to caress a ball 350 yards down the centre of a fairway, we hackers need to assemble a far wider set of skills and know-how to complete 18 holes, about which pros have no comprehension, need, or desire to learn. Here are some of them: Never select your shot until after you've hit it. A variation on this is to alway