Why does it raise alarm? Pretty sure all this spending was planned.

▲ gonzalohm a day ago | parent | next [-]

I'm pretty sure they didn't plan to just spend cash without any return. It raises an alarm because there is no end in sight for the money burning

▲ FartyMcFarter a day ago | parent | next [-]

> they didn't plan to just spend cash without any return.

No return? Annual earnings have kept increasing at 20-40% for the last 4 years.

Plus there's this:

https://www.theregister.com/paas-and-iaas/2026/07/22/google-...

> Google Cloud is killing it

> It's Alphabet's fastest-growing business and now makes up more than a fifth of the juggernaut's revenue and operating profit

▲ dktp a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is pretty clear return as of now. And half a trillion in backlog

Also the ~4% drop is really not a big swing for earnings. This looks like a non story

▲ a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲ saberience a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Since when is investing in infrastructure burning money?

If there is a huge demand for shipping goods internationally, investing in ships and planes isn't burning money.

There is massive demand for compute in the world right now, Google is investing in that area. That's a good thing.

	▲	manarth a day ago \| parent [-]
		`> "If there is a huge demand for shipping goods internationally, > investing in ships and planes isn't burning money. > There is massive demand for compute in the world right now"` Emphasis on right now. CapEx makes sense if the demand is forecast to deliver enough profit over the expected lifespan of the investment to recoup the cost and margin. There's enough hype and exuberance in the AI market that it's likely some players are going to be left holding the bag with a write-down on assets.

▲ georgeecollins a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Serious investors look at balance sheets, less then what CEOs say. Elon Musk -- as an example-- says all kinds of things that don't really happen. Mark Zuckerberg is arguably less grandiose. When FB changed their name to Meta, said they were committed to the metaverse the stock didn't dump. When the really big investments in consumer VR hit Meta's balance sheet, there was a big drop.

Think of it as the difference between the waiter describing dishes with ingredients you don't really understand (or maybe even taste) vs presenting the bill for the meal.

	▲	vlovich123 a day ago \| parent [-]
		If a company’s value was completely representated within their balance sheet, you would just run a computer program and be done. The problem is 1) balance sheets can be manipulated in legal ways to support a specific narrative 2) growth is governed by vision + strategy + execution. For example, Apple the year before the iPhone got launched isn’t an attractive investment. They’re a one hit wonder with the iPod saving them from bankruptcy and the market has been fully saturated. The year the iPhone gets released their balanced sheet hasn’t really changed.

▲ dominotw a day ago | parent | prev [-]

thats how i justify my vacation spending