Google=Dow component??

When will we see this, I doubt they’ll ever split their shares, maybe that is what keeps it back. But I mean, it’s plausible in the next few years isn’t it?

I would find that totally unacceptable.

Why is that Joey? Willy

Microsoft is, a decade ago that would have seemed dicey. I’m not aruging for or against it, just wondering why? I’m still new to this stuff I guess.

It would be stupid to add such a volatile stock to the Dow especially since it is a price weighted index and not a cap weighted index. Also, Dow companies are typically companies that are time-weathered which at this point GOOG is not.

That is not a valid reason. What about a stock like Eastman Kodak that went from a peak of $90 to $30 when it before it was replaced in 2004? In between there were several double digit down days. The Dow has had many “volatile” stocks throughout its history and that should not be a criteria for inlcusion or exclusion of a name.

good discussion. I think it will be something that needs to be asked at least, especially if Google starts building phones and other hardware. Many Dow companies are an iconic part of everyday life in America. Drive a GM to work, fill up the SUV at Exxon and pick up some McDonald’s which comes with Coke. Login to your IBM computer built with an Intel processor and Microsoft software etc.

RAwannabeCFA Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It would be stupid to add such a volatile stock to > the Dow especially since it is a price weighted > index and not a cap weighted index. Also, Dow > companies are typically companies that are > time-weathered which at this point GOOG is not. I’d guess the WSJ profits from market volatility. What line of business are you in?

DarienHacker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I’d guess the WSJ profits from market volatility. > What line of business are you in? Darien, I like the way you’re thinking. In fact, if there were no market volatility, what fraction of jobs in finance would disappear? 95% ?

That was odd.

I agree, Joey, that was odd.

The two of us should get together and have a good bridge game.

equity_analyst Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That is not a valid reason. > Says you. Take a look at GOOG’s beta compared to EK’s during the time it was included in the Dow. It is more than double. Or did you just arbitarily state that EK was volatile because during one period of time it went down a lot? There are actually several reasons why aat this point in time it doesn’t make sense to include GOOG in the Dow, which is probably why no one is really talking about it. Also, who are you to say what is a valid or invalid reason for inclusion? I don’t think that has been defined.

If Google becomes a component of the Dow in the near term, I may have to pack up my marbles and go home…not that anyone would notice seeing as how I’m not a big shot :slight_smile:

So your saying you would be ok to adding a $700 dollar stock to the dow if it only had a beta of .5?

good thing we didn’t do this maybe…

Joey, Are you your own constant?

Is that a LOST refererence…LOVE IT!!!

I love LOST. That was one of my favorite episodes of all time. This guy Faraday is a good character “Mmm. No, this is not amnesia” was an excellent line. So there are apparently lots of clues about what’s going on in LOST from the books that people read. Alas, I couldn’t see what book Locke brought Ben but it must be important. Anyone know? Also, that little tete a tete between Miles and Ben was code. “I want 3.2 Million. You have two days”. So something big is happening in two days,but I can’t figure out the 3.2 M reference. Miles is Ben’s mole on the boat.

Wow Joey. Miles is the mole, eh? That makes a lot of sense. I thought it was that dude strapped to the bed. I hope Im not the only one thats getting annoyed at the fact that every episode will answer 1 question but will introduce 10 more. I know its supposed to be suspense but come on…