katemcintyre

> And yeah, Google isn't in the position of competing with companies that it needs.

Why not? Motorola's Moto X is pretty high end and Google is spending $500M on just advertising it this year[1], beating Samsung's and Apple's ad spending. In watching a couple of hours of primetime TV in the US, I usually see 3 to 4 Moto X ads, and almost the same number of Windows 8/Surface ads. However, sales seem to be quite sluggish[2].

Motorola can't be making all that much money on Moto G and it seems to be Google's loss leader just like Microsoft's Lumia 520/521 at $69 to $99 unlocked(Surprised the article didn't mention it at all or compare it against the Moto G, it's a surprisingly fast phone for that price). Meanwhile Motorola's losses continue to grow every quarter and continue to be a drag on Google's earnings [3] . I guess the pressure is on Motorola to deliver, but even if this phone sells well, I doubt it's going to help them unless they're going to make money from ads and/or Google Play sales on those phones.

[1] http://9to5google.com/2013/07/11/moto-x-would-be-most-heavil...

[2] http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-motorola...

[3] http://mobilenewsblog.co.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sc...

So does this make it so if the intermittent wiper blade inventor Kearns[1] had lost due to having cheaper lawyers versus the millions that the auto companies can spend on top knotch lawyers, he would be liable for the millions and have his life completely destroyed?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54564-2005Feb...