conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me a description for a book titled The Google Story about BRAND, BOOK.WE, PROVIDE with the genre: Teen & Young Adult.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: THIS IS BRAND NEW BOOK.WE PROVIDE 100% CUSTOMER SATISFACTION.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the first five paragraphs for this book.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The Google Story
  If the experience of other newly public companies was any indication, it was possible that a Google brain drain could follow its IPO. The generous way Sergey and Larry handed out stock options to recruits while the search engine was private, as well as looser-than-normal restrictions on selling, made cashing in and leaving the company easier. In Silicon Valley, new start-ups attracted such talent. Also, hundreds of Google millionaires might lose motivation and focus. Could the company ever create the sort of financial incentives necessary to recruit fresh talent, in the absence of the huge financial rewards reaped by early employees? Finally, what if Sergey and Larry decided Google wasn't a fun place anymore and left to pursue other ventures? "If we lose the services of Eric, Larry, Sergey or our senior management team, we may not be able to execute our business strategy," the company warned.
  Worst of all, Google was the target of a billion-dollar lawsuit filed by Yahoo's Overture subsidiary, which charged that Google's entire advertising system blatantly infringed on the one that Overture had patented. Resolving the litigation could prove costly at best, requiring the company to pay hefty one-time or ongoing licensing fees to Yahoo. At worst, it could force Google to seek another ad model.
  Meanwhile, the Securities and Exchange Commission had launched a probe into the company's internal procedures. The search engine had issued enormous quantities of stock and options without registering the shares or revealing its financial results to its private employee-shareholders. A pending investigation like this one by the SEC before a public offering could be the kiss of death for a normal company. How could Google's general counsel and its outside lawyers have permitted this to happen? The answer, analysts speculated, was that Larry and Sergey didn't really want their employees to know how much money the company was making, because the news would leak and competitors would find out. So despite the regulations, they had played it close to the vest.
  Google's unusual auction method for selling stock in the IPO was not devoid of potential problems or risks either. "The auction process for our public offering may result in a phenomenon known as the 'winner's curse,' and, as a result, investors may experience significant losses," the company warned. "Successful bidders may conclude that they paid too much for our shares and could seek to immediately sell their shares to limit their losses should our stock price decline."
  With the stock market entering the dog days of summer and the SEC still reviewing Google's unorthodox auction, speculation mounted that the search engine giant would do the logical thing and wait until after Labor Day to go public. It appeared the company was going to raise billions of dollars in the IPO, and nobody attempted this kind of unconventional deal in August, when Wall Street took a nap. It was a time when investment bankers fled to the Hamptons, Martha's Vineyard, and more exotic locales, since few decisions of consequence were made then. Major clients, including companies and investors, tended to vacation then too.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me five more paragraphs.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The trouble began when Cohen noticed that an increasing number of clicks on lendingexpert.com's ads looked suspicious. For one thing, many of the clicks came from the same Internet addresses. And none of the clicks was generating any business. In other words, someone, or some business, or some automated software, was clicking away on lendingexpert's ads, driving up its advertising costs without ever completing a mortgage application. Cohen knew roughly what proportion of users who clicked on his Google ads went on to fill out mortgage applications, making the barrage of dubious clicks easy to spot. The unanswered questions were: how much was this costing Cohen in advertising fees his firm paid to Google, how could it be stopped, who was behind the artificial clicks, and what was motivating them to hurt his business in this way. Though he couldn't prove it, Cohen sensed that a competitor was clicking on his ads and trying to damage his business by driving up his costs.
  Cohen couldn't easily pull back on advertising or switch to traditional ads, given his business model. "We are very vulnerable," he said. If you go onto Google and type in 'commercial loans' or 'construction loans,' we need to be there. We need to be on search engines to stay in business and compete and succeed. People using search engines are more likely to fill out an application for a mortgage than somebody reading a newspaper or reading another news source on the Net.
  To handle the matter, Cohen turned to Nicole Berg, who runs his firm's search engine marketing program and closely tracks its performance, morning, noon, and night. After compiling the basic data, Berg, who logs on numerous times daily from both work and home to monitor activity, agreed there was a problem. Berg sent an email about it to Google on January 6, 2005.
  We are the victim of click fraud. Our systems administrator was able to track down the IP address of someone who has clicked on our ad 20 times in one day which has cost us $200. We would like to request a refund.
  If you are able to supply any of the following information related to the suspicious activity, it may help us significantly expedite our investigation:
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Add another sentence about need, selling.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The trouble began when Cohen noticed that an increasing number of clicks on lendingexpert. com's ads looked suspicious. For one thing, many of the clicks came from the same Internet addresses. And none of the clicks was generating any business. In other words, someone, or some business, or some automated software, was clicking away on lendingexpert's ads, driving up its advertising costs without ever completing a mortgage application. Cohen knew roughly what proportion of users who clicked on his Google ads went on to fill out mortgage applications, making the barrage of dubious clicks easy to spot. The unanswered questions were: how much was this costing Cohen in advertising fees his firm paid to Google, how could it be stopped, who was behind the artificial clicks, and what was motivating them to hurt his business in this way. Though he couldn't prove it, Cohen sensed that a competitor was clicking on his ads and trying to damage his business by driving up his costs. 
  Cohen couldn't easily pull back on advertising or switch to traditional ads, given his business model. "We are very vulnerable," he said. "We need to be out there selling to mortgage companies, and they want to know we have a major presence. If you go onto Google and type in 'commercial loans' or 'construction loans,' we need to be there. We need to be on search engines to stay in business and compete and succeed. People using search engines are more likely to fill out an application for a mortgage than somebody reading a newspaper or reading another news source on the Net. 
  To handle the matter, Cohen turned to Nicole Berg, who runs his firm's search engine marketing program and closely tracks its performance, morning, noon, and night. After compiling the basic data, Berg, who logs on numerous times daily from both work and home to monitor activity, agreed there was a problem. Berg sent an email about it to Google on January 6, 2005. 
  We are the victim of click fraud. Our systems administrator was able to track down the IP address of someone who has clicked on our ad 20 times in one day which has cost us $200. We would like to request a refund. 
  If you are able to supply any of the following information related to the suspicious activity, it may help us significantly expedite our investigation:
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Give me the last five paragraphs.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: In the first half of 2005, Google's financial performance sizzled. The company's sales doubled, its profits shot up 500 percent, and its cash from operations grew 300 percent. By June 30, 2005, the company had nearly $3 billion in cash and no borrowings.
  On August 18, 2005, Google announced plans to raise about $4 billion by selling 14,159,265 additional shares of stock to investors. It was the largest secondary stock offering ever by a one-year-old media and technology firm. The unusual number of shares was meaningful to Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who are both mathematicians. The figure represented the first eight digits following the decimal point in the value of pi (3.14159265), a famous term from geometry derived by dividing the circumference of a circle by its diameter. The Google Guys continued to maintain voting control over all major decisions affecting the company after the $4 billion stock offering.
  Many of the interviews were conducted "on the record," and those individuals are named in the text wherever possible. Numerous other interviews were conducted "on background," meaning that we used the information these sources provided but agreed not to identify them by name. In many such instances, sources cited the need to remain anonymous to protect ongoing business or personal relationships with people at Google.
  We are aware of the difficulties in any attempt to reconstruct events after the fact. Wherever possible, we reviewed the accounts of conversations and events with multiple persons involved or with other knowledgeable parties, to ensure that we had the best obtainable version of what happened. We also drew heavily on contemporaneous documents and materials that, unlike memories, do not change over time. In addition to video and audio recordings, these included filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission, court papers, transcripts, contemporaneous notes, archives of Internet pages, emails, slide presentations, and other documents. We attended, or obtained video footage of, numerous talks and presentations given by Google employees and others, including Sergey Brin and Larry Page's appearance at an Israeli high school and their explanation of Google's inner workings to an audience at Stanford. Additionally, we relied on videos of talks given by Eric Schmidt and Jeffrey Dean at the University of Washington. We also made use of public records, dated postings on Google's Web site, and surveys and studies of Internet usage compiled by Family Safe Media, the Pew Internet & American Life Project, and others. We also reviewed more than 100 pages of correspondence between the SEC and Google concerning the company's unorthodox initial public offering, obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request.
  For always being there, Jenny, whether you were nearby or far away, you have my deepest appreciation and affection. I look forward to many more adventures and travels together.
conversations.from: human
conversations.value: Delete the first sentence.
conversations.from: assistant
conversations.value: The company's sales doubled, its profits shot up 500 percent, and its cash from operations grew 300 percent. By June 30, 2005, the company had nearly $3 billion in cash and no borrowings.
  On August 18, 2005, Google announced plans to raise about $4 billion by selling 14,159,265 additional shares of stock to investors. It was the largest secondary stock offering ever by a one-year-old media and technology firm. The unusual number of shares was meaningful to Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who are both mathematicians. The figure represented the first eight digits following the decimal point in the value of pi (3.14159265), a famous term from geometry derived by dividing the circumference of a circle by its diameter. The Google Guys continued to maintain voting control over all major decisions affecting the company after the $4 billion stock offering.
  Many of the interviews were conducted "on the record," and those individuals are named in the text wherever possible. Numerous other interviews were conducted "on background," meaning that we used the information these sources provided but agreed not to identify them by name. In many such instances, sources cited the need to remain anonymous to protect ongoing business or personal relationships with people at Google.
  We are aware of the difficulties in any attempt to reconstruct events after the fact. Wherever possible, we reviewed the accounts of conversations and events with multiple persons involved or with other knowledgeable parties, to ensure that we had the best obtainable version of what happened. We also drew heavily on contemporaneous documents and materials that, unlike memories, do not change over time. In addition to video and audio recordings, these included filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission, court papers, transcripts, contemporaneous notes, archives of Internet pages, emails, slide presentations, and other documents. We attended, or obtained video footage of, numerous talks and presentations given by Google employees and others, including Sergey Brin and Larry Page's appearance at an Israeli high school and their explanation of Google's inner workings to an audience at Stanford. Additionally, we relied on videos of talks given by Eric Schmidt and Jeffrey Dean at the University of Washington. We also made use of public records, dated postings on Google's Web site, and surveys and studies of Internet usage compiled by Family Safe Media, the Pew Internet & American Life Project, and others. We also reviewed more than 100 pages of correspondence between the SEC and Google concerning the company's unorthodox initial public offering, obtained under a Freedom of Information Act request.
  For always being there, Jenny, whether you were nearby or far away, you have my deepest appreciation and affection. I look forward to many more adventures and travels together.