If they still own a controlling stake, then why should they even care about someone else's opinion?

Any company that starts with a goal of doing something will lose that goal as soon as it goes public, because majority of shareholders do not care about the goal, or making the world a better place. The only thing they care about is profit. So if you really want to change the world, never make your company public.

As a former Googler, Sergey was always a friendly guy. Larry just wanted to focus on building cool things and tried to see if he could do that as CEO. Ultimately it wasn't the right job for him. They still retain the majority of the voting shares. One day at TGIF - (weekly all hands when company was still small) one of the employees asked Larry and Sergey if they missed coding and they both said "yes..." before elaborating on lessons they learned in management.

I visited Google in 2013, and I think it was the last era of true Googleyness and growth before things started to fall. That Google is definitely not the same Google that exists today. I don't know what happened, but the little girl in me who dreamed of working for Google had to give it up because that Google I dreamed of working for no longer exists.

The most searched word on Bing is "Google".

ironic that Larry does not like oversight since he built the largest surveilance company in the world

As a Google employee, I 100% think Larry was right, and it's a shame he didn't succeed at cutting down the management/bureaucracy. Every year we've seen an increase in management % of employees and a decrease in engineers' ability to self-select work areas, projects, promotion designations, peer reviews, etc. At this point, if you want to do/ask basically anything, you need to go through your manager, or manager's manager..

I miss a Google with Larry and Sergey in the spotlight. Unpretentious CEOs, loved it.

Google already removed their slogan "Don't be evil" couple of years ago.

I completely have to agree with Larry. Tech people should NEVER report to non-tech people in development. Good people need no managers. They manage themselves. Set goals, revise offer support, and stop programs if needed. All of those require that you understand the technology.

Oversight and accountability may just be inconveniences for a hard working genius, but for the rest of us their essential. I really like that the funders just go off and do what they want, instead of being dragged into jobs their not suitable for.

As a scientist I respect Larry’s philosophy, but good management is important for any big project that requires people to work together to succeed. Personally, I would only hire managers who have proven themselves first in a technical (science/engineering) field. I wonder if they were forced to hire too many bean counters who have no understanding of anything except money

Honestly sounds like what Mark should have done.

Love this. As an Engineer myself, resonate with these guys opinions. I love building software to solve the problems I face, but when someone keeps telling me that no, don’t do this, it is quite frustrating. Good for them.

I love Larry and Sergei. In fact the moment they cut down on Google X lab projects and pushed Larry and Sergei, there start demise of Google innovation.

I guess "Don't be evil" was easy to implement at the start, but then they had to bend backward for investors and NSA/US government. After that, the slogan became a slogan for double morals. But, besides that, I guess they are not doing too badly on the evil part.

Amazing how this channel keeps producing so many films a week! Thank you! (... and yes, they are films)

Here's one thing I like about this vid. In the first 2 minutes you answer the question. You don't leave it for the end like so many other vids do to force me to stay. You answer it and then, if I want more info, I can choose to stay. This is a good thing. Gonna subscribe just to encourage this even though I probably won't view many other of your videos. Keep up the good work.

I strongly think that Google would be much better off under larry's and surgey's leadership just imagine what Google would be if they haven't acquired Android , KZfaq and self driving car. Back in 2014 when I was high school I use to love Google for their crazy projects like Google glasses etc they seemed so much more innovative and cool. Investors are short sighted they only care about quick profit .

Get this man to 1 million subs already.

The "Don't be evil" thing is, well, just a memory, a memory of an idea that never really existed!

Larry and Sergei deserve more public attention than they get.

While I agree with Larry's anti management stance, every corporation needs to be held accountable by some outside entity. We have seen all the proof we need that corporations will violate every common sense decency in the book in the pursuit of profits, so they must be closely regulated for the benefit of the public.

the old Google was better. It stood for something. They were trying to build things that were greater for humanity.

I think the last rule was always the first rule "don't be evil" that's what their goal, unfortunately as you grow and have to answer to others probably,most likely, highly guarantee even to the government...thennn you start losing interest in what you start it all for....I think they had a different idea but between competition and making investors happy........that "dont be evil" written on code lines disappeared and they also did...

The simple answer is "He was secretly laid off" 🤨

you should never ever kick founders out of a company. I don't care what they did. its there company not ours, yes we are shareholders and lucky to go through the roller coster ride with them. but, when you are investing in a company you are no investing in the company, you invest in there creativity and there Passion. That Apple for example, Steve Jobs my not be present but his soul is still blended into the company. the only reason Apple exist is because of him.

*1:55* one of the founders' goals was *"don't be evil"* Google is one of the most evil companies now.

Public companies’ Achilles’ heel, Investors…

Google Books was a very great service. I used it a lot some years ago. But today the service is mostly broken. No more fulltext, only fragments. It shows you that your search query appears in the book, but it doesn't show you the text of the search result anymore. I don't know, maybe there is a premium subsription or something, but not even that is clearly apparent.

Larry Page is a genius and an entrepreneur, not a businessman.

I believe in the power of research and so many people find great careers, information and inspiration from the internet. From 2 PhD students looking to bring information and knowledge to the masses, having had their idea chopped to making money off of what's viral had to be a hard pill for academics to swallow. True academic is always about learning and about the knowledge. In 20 years or so when social media will be doomed evil and less profitable then maybe a shift for actual research and knowledge will take a hold. Only time will tell

Unlike Zucks, Brin and Page gave up the company as soon as they took it public and gave up their majority stakes....Brilliant innovators don't necessarily convert that brilliance into other spheres. Not that Zucks is such a great businessman, but he was smart enough never to have given up control of his own company.....

I think Google would be more Googley with original founders but not as financially successful.

Creepy surveillance aside, it's always good for a company when the founders realise that the the company that they created can flourish more with the right people which might not necessarily be them... Or they could turn into Facebook

As google grew and went public, it simply outgrew their management capabilities. It's really that simple, it wasn't their strength. Hardly the first time this has happened in tech. Brin checked out a long time ago. Now they can sit back and enjoy all the money they have from their initial idea that made them both billionaires many times over.

He didn't get the book thing right, it came down to copyright law. Also, they created a very good browser however, that doesn't mean you can be all things to all aspects of a company like this. That is why it's best to build a team to support the areas you are not good at.

10:47 they didn't want for Google to lose its identity as a research institution either, now I might understand why its initial project to access all the books globally was demoted.

Managers feeling humiliated after being insulted in front of a group. Omg my heart weeps for them.

Larry's heart was definitely in the right place, and I miss his Google.

Could be bcz of Spl interest groups wanting to establish their control. Larry and Sergy get to keep their wealth, but they would be losing out on the directing the company.

Should shareholders be the blame of why corporations lose their soul and become corrupted?

This hits at the heart of a truth most people don't want to see, and this truth is that most founders are not superspecial enlightened beings, they are capable people yes, but mostly they were at the right place, at the right time, and with the right tool. Google and Facebook are excelent examples of this, all of them would have had brilliant tech or research carreers, but they kind of 'stumbled' into something that was perfect for the moment. Because what if Larry and Sergey had been born 15 years before or 15 years after? Would the world wait for their search algoritm? Or someone else would have come up with something similar just 5 or 10 years later? Same for FB, how long before someone comes up with a good social network? Would Zuckerberg still beat said network if he comes even 5 years later? I'm not discrediting or saying they don't have merit, what I'm saying is that these are "normal" people catapulted by incredible success. The thing is that creating an amazing math algorithm doesn't make you know the best way to manage even an small company. But the individual swept by this huge success starts thinking they are indeed all knowing people and that they know best at every single matter, no matter how far this is from their actual field of expertise.

I think giving managers too much power is always bad idea. Speaking from experience. Gotta side with them. They are like mediators who doesn't add any value and waste everyone's time by scheduling random conference calls.

If bunch of smart engineers can work together as a team by putting their personal ego aside then obviously managers would not be required, but that’s not the case unfortunately.

Larry and Page shouldn't have left Google. They are the reason why Google is different from other big tech with long history like IBM, Oracle, etc.. Now, Google will become IBM in due time. This is sad. I guess every human will eventually worn out. Sad...

Seeing what Alphabet is doing with Boston Dynamics tells me they forgot about "Don't Be Evil."

Is it ironic Larry Page is the co-founder of Google Page rank?

I actually think them five rules actually worked for the company, It led to some amusing things in there Google Labs project. Obviously only the best stuff from the labs made it to the final Google. But it was excellent at asking users there viewpoints on things and made the user feel like they had some input on Google.

Fast forward a couple years, everyone is trying to get rid of middle managers....

Companies are great during growth and innovation periods. Once their product service saturates and growth stops it gets ugly.

As always, solid video. Well done.

Low key, they dropped off the face of the earth!! Crazy to see and hear!!

Each one of these tech companies could make investors wealthy again.

image of a person or ceo matters alot, these are tech companies, and soo vulnerable. that can dust in a sec. . so trust must b within companies.

Larry is someone that have the balls to do everything I think of doing and for that I totally respect him. He sticks to the fundamentals not some mumbo jumbo management speak.

No , it is always wise to put smart minds in charge after some time .. just like our children, We can't keep them life long . They should be left free. To grow to greater heights.

If they weren't greedy to get big, they would still be innovating there.

"Don't be evil" is a phrase used in Google's corporate code of conduct, which it also formerly preceded as a motto. Following Google's corporate restructuring under the conglomerate Alphabet Inc. in October 2015, Alphabet took "Do the right thing" as its motto, also forming the opening of its corporate code of conduct.

Great stuff bro!

Right, Schmidt didn’t know they bought Android in 2005 when Schmidt was on Apples board and the iPhone came out 2 years later in 2007. Right.

At the end of the day, the investors own the company - Lowkeyy Have a great day. 😊

Thanks for the awesome content and great video!

Once out of the initial growth phase, ax the creativity and stick to the script. Founders often struggle with that pivot.

I think you had also made 2 videos earlier on this channel on Google founders but nonetheless got some new information.

The only reason why Pichai is CEO is because he has that india connection to cheap labor just like Microsoft does. That is the reality.

I’m sure sundar talks to Larry and Sergei every week

Hey brother, hope you’re having a great week!!

i like larry. he understands technology. investors are a necessary evil

Larry was always very altruistic and seeking ways to help all of mankind / the planet. However, with his head in the clouds, he was difficult to work effectively with and wasn't good at the day-to-day running of a business. Sergey was trying to build the cool new thing, was not invested in making incremental improvements to existing organizations or processes. He was never executing to get to some eventual desired state.

“Don’t be evil”? I’m pretty sure they officially got rid of that slogan

Wow! I think that's the first time you've used the word "Ironic" correctly. Congrats!

They dropped that "Don't be Evil" slogan a long time ago.

As someone who both enjoys programming and project managing, and having come to understand the capacity and limits of both sides of the spectrum, I'm very surprised to see that Google was originally an engineer/researcher project that believed in the meme that engineers are the sole workforce that matter. Usually people who believe and apply this fantasy quickly crash and burn because competence at building does not mean competence at planning or vision. It's great that it succeeded, and gave me a better opinion of Google than I had. Still wonder what Pichai is doing, cause since about 2017 or so, I don't think I've heard of a single innovation that Google had...

Sunder has killed Google.

Hopefully their recently announced hiring pause allows them to reevaluate how much of their talent is engineers compared to management and how that has evolved over time.

It's weird that he didn't see the simple solution. Take your engineers which are not actually that great at coding but super good at managing and organization then make them managers

Crazy how there's an alternate universe where Google is a research company

"Engineers should be managed by engineers" is a self-defeating argument because STEM-minded folks often tend to be poor managers, too unappreciative of what actually motivates people. This lack of humanities in the hierarchy can explain why Google usually fails at gaining wider adoption of its projects as a competitor, and more broadly why STEM professionals usually fail at politics worldwide.

Downside of making a company go public, they start a new private company

Google is amazing

I couldn't understand the story...

great vid man

they got old and decided they prefer $$$ than to follow their ideals. Since they don't have enough balls to push things that direction on their own, they hired someone else to do the dirty job for them while they just count $$$. It's really sad: I used to respect them a lot back in 2000s... I remember Sergey announcing in 2010 that Google would move its business out of China as he didn't want his company to participate in censorship: I thought to myself then: "that's the man to follow!". now all of that is gone...

Google used to be exciting. They were taking on lofty/outlandish goals. They appear to be on cruise control today. Rather than blazing their own path, they’re just looking at their bottom line and keeping pace with their competitors. I lost my interest in the company.

Google would be much better under Larry and Surgei

Interesting and insightful

"Entire fortune" - that is, relies on Google. WHAT. There is NO chance they have failed diversify.

Why is Netflix the source for all the Mr. Robot scenes? They’ve never hosted that show…

Whatever happened to the rule "Don't be evil", or was that a different company?

Great video and really well researched. What is the name of the song playing in the background?

never go public folks

Larry comes off a bit idealistic back then. A place where engineers rule themselves with no managers sounds like a place where nothing gets finished and piles of cash burn away.

Re your closing remarks: Didn't Google _already_ drop their slogan, some time ago?

I think having them working hard on moonshot ideas is much better for the future of humanity. Let the business run as a business. They could even spin up a lab department or a separate lab company that is working hard on the world changing stuff.

Brilliant & informative

Google has become more bureaucratic, less innovative and in my opinion less competitive since Larry.

He found out page 21 of search results never exist

They couldn't accept what monsters they've become.

I’m watching this while a google ad is in the video.