Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome Executive Chairman of Google, Dr. Eric Schmidt.
Hi. Well, welcome again to our shareholder meeting. My most important question of the entire day was, how was the food? And then, what about the demos? Did we get a chance to look at those? There's some pretty amazing stuff coming. Have them inside? It's nice weather outside. You couldn't see them, of course. Good point.
Well, thank you all for coming, for being part of what is always a special event here at Google. I'm Eric Schmidt, as you know. I'm the Executive Chairman of Google, and I'll be presiding at this meeting. I wanted to start by saying that Larry is very sorry he cannot be here today, but he's unfortunately lost his voice. This means he can't do any public speaking engagements for the time being.
And that includes the shareholder meeting, obviously, I/O which is our big developer conference next week, and our earnings call in mid-July. That said, of course, Larry will continue to run the company. He was running all the strategic business decisions and all that, just like today. In fact, Sergey, and this is important to note, has said that this problem will make Larry a better CEO because he's going to have to choose his words very carefully. And we wish him, obviously, a quick recovery.
Now, each of you should have registered as you arrived. If anyone has not registered for this meeting, please register with us before you've left. And each of you should have been presented with an agenda. On the reverse side of the agenda is a list of rules of procedure for the meeting, and we ask that you abide by these rules. At this time, I'd like to call the meeting to order. Now, I wanted to do something else. I wanted to make sure that I introduced our directors who are here.
We have Paul Otellini, Ram Shriram and our newest Director, Diane Greene here. S omehow isolated in the little corner along the empty thing, standing right there, and you'll see later we have Patrick, who I think you all know well, Susan whom you know well, Rachel Whetstone is here, Don Harrison's here, and a few others that we'll point out as we go along. Also with us today is Deborah Kelly.
She's a representative of Computershare, who is our transfer agent, who moves everything around and she's going to act as our inspector of elections and then Barbara Marchini Ellis, Matthew Taggart, and Sam Lazarakis, representatives of E&Y, who are independent accountants and they've done that for many years.
I think what we should do is start with Don Harrison, who's Google's Vice President. I think many of you have met him before. He's our Deputy General Counsel. And I think it's quickest if we have Don conduct the formal business of the meeting. So Don, you want to just sort of come right up, and we'll get started.
So thank you, Eric. A quick note about logistics for today's meeting. As stated in the rules of procedure, stockholders should not address the meeting until they're recognized. We will provide a question and answer period at the end so that you can ask questions after we have finished the formal business of the meeting. If you want to ask a question during the question and answer period, please move to one of the microphone stands that we have provided here and here.
After being recognized, first identify yourself and your status as a stockholder or a stockholder representative and then ask your question. Thanks in advance for your cooperation with these rules. I've received the affidavits of mailing from Computershare and Broadridge, which state that notice of this meeting was duly given. All stockholders of record at the close of business on April 23rd, 2012 are entitled to vote at this meeting.
In addition, I've been advised by the inspector of elections that holders of our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock representing at least a majority of the voting power of our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock entitled to vote, is represented in person or by proxy at today's meeting. Therefore, a quorum is present. The meeting is duly constituted and the business of the meeting may proceed.
The first item of business today is the election of directors. 10 Directors will be elected at today's meeting. The Directors elected will hold office until the 2013 annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified. The Board of Directors has nominated the following persons to the board: Larry Page, Sergey Brin, Eric Schmidt, John Doerr, Diane Greene, John Hennessy, Ann Mather, Paul Otellini, Ram Shriram, and Shirley Tilghman.
Our bylaws require that stockholders provide advance notice of their intent to nominate Directors. No such notice was received. Accordingly, I declare the nominations for Directors closed. The next matter being submitted to our stockholders is the ratification of the appointment by the Board of Directors of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm.
Our board of directors has recommended that our stockholders ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young for the 2012 fiscal year. The third matter being submitted to our stockholders is the approval of proposed amendments to our certificate of incorporation. These amendments establish Google's new class of Class C capital stock. Holders of shares of Class C capital stock will have no voting rights unless required by law.
These amendments also increase the number of authorized shares of Class A common stock from six billion to nine billion shares, and they provide that the Class A common stock will be treated in a manner that is at least as favorable as the shares of Class B common stock. These amendments are further detailed on the proxy statement for this annual meeting. You should each have received a copy.
Our Board of Directors has recommended that our stockholders vote for each of these proposed amendments, as detailed in the Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation included with our proxy statement. The fourth matter being submitted to our stockholders is the approval of our 2012 stock plan. Our Board of Directors has recommended that our stockholders vote for the approval of the 2012 stock plan.
The fifth matter being submitted to our stockholders is the approval of our 2012 Incentive Compensation Plan for employees and consultants of Motorola Mobility. Our Board of Directors has recommended that our stockholders vote for the approval of this plan. The next three items being submitted are proposals we have received from our stockholders. Our board of directors has recommended that our stockholders vote against all of these three stockholder proposals.
The first stockholder proposal is being brought by Northstar Asset Management, Inc., funded pension plan. If she's here, I would like to introduce Mari Schwartzer, a representative from Northstar Asset Management to present this proposal. Ms. Schwartzer, you'll have a total of three minutes to make a statement about this proposal, and I'll let you know when your time is about to expire.
Good afternoon. My name is Mari Schwartzer of Northstar Asset Management in Boston. Northstar is the beneficial owner of more than 5,000 shares of Google stock. I'm here to ask for your support of resolution number six. Stakeholders need a say on political contributions. Our values at Google have been developed and marketed to enhance our business. Company profits come from our competitive edge, our reputation for delivering the best unbiased products, and through customer trust.
Google's capacity to attract and keep the best new talent depends on the company's ability to deliver on the promises we have made to our employees. As investors, Northstar investigates every aspect of our company's business models and implementations, financial or otherwise. Significant inconsistencies raise uncomfortable questions about whether Google has become too big to manage.
Google NetPAC was "created to support federal officeholders and candidates who share Google's goal of promoting the internet as a free and open platform for communication and innovation." According to Google, "We support candidates who have demonstrated a commitment to Google's public policy agenda centered on policies to promote the continued openness and growth of the internet. "
Why then, despite Google's very public opposition to the Stop Online Piracy Act, SOPA, did NetPAC support seven of the 12 original co-sponsors of SOPA, including its author, Lamar Smith? Furthermore, Google promises our employees that the company "treats employees' rights the way they deserve to be treated." Discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression are strictly prohibited.
Why then did NetPAC give 40% of its contributions since 2009 to politicians voting against hate crimes legislation, the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and/or sponsoring the Federal Marriage Amendment Act, which would eliminate same-sex marriage across the nation? Why did NetPAC give to politicians that voted to ban adoptions by gay families? Our company states that Google is creating a better web that's better for the environment by using resources efficiently and supporting renewable power.
If that's true, why did NetPAC give nearly 30% of its contributions since 2009 to politicians voting against the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 and voting to deregulate greenhouse gases? Why did NetPAC give contributions to politicians seeking to limit the EPA's regulatory abilities or against renewable energy? Our company may have contributed nearly $1 billion to renewable energy, but NetPAC's gifts threaten to undo that work.
In the Citizens United Decision, Anthony M. Kennedy put the onus on shareholders to ensure that corporate free speech does not divert corporate assets for the benefit of a few executives. He suggested that abuse could be corrected by shareholders, "through the procedures of corporate democracy." We ask you to vote yes for resolution number six. Let shareholders have a say on political spending. Thank you.
Thank you. The second stockholder proposal is being brought by Mr. Mark [Schayevsky]. [Nissan Steenen] on behalf of Mr. [Schayevsky] will be presenting this proposal. Mr. [Steenen] you'll have a total of three minutes to make a statement about this proposal. I'll advise you when your time is about to expire.
My name is [Nissan Steenen], and I move the adoption of proposal number seven, the proxy statement.
Thank you. The third stockholder proposal is being brought by Mr. John Chevedden. Ms. Schwartzer on behalf of Mr. Chevedden will be presenting this proposal. Ms. Schwartzer, you'll have three minutes.
As was noted, I'm just here for Mr. Chevedden who couldn't represent his proposal. Proposal eight, stockholder proposal regarding equal shareholder voting. John Chevedden of Redondo Beach, California sponsored this proposal. Resolved. Shareholders request that our board take steps to adopt a plan for all our company's outstanding stock to have one vote per share.
This would encompass all practicable steps, including encouragement and negotiation with shareholders who have 10 votes per share to request that they relinquish for the common good of all shareholders any pre-existing rights if necessary. This proposal is not intended to unnecessarily limit our board's judgments in crafting the requested change in accordance with applicable laws and existing contracts.
This proposal is important because certain shares not owned by the general public have supersized voting power with 10 votes per share compared to one vote per share for shareholders who are not insiders. This proposal topic is expected to overwhelmingly obtain overwhelming majority support from our independent non-insider shareholders. Please encourage our board to respond positively to this proposal for equal shareholder voting. Proposal eight.
Thank you. Because no further business is scheduled to come before the stockholders, the polls are now open. If you previously voted by proxy, you do not need to vote today unless you wish to change your vote. Please note that we've received sufficient proxies before the meeting to know that the proposals we discuss today will pass or fail in accordance with the recommendations made by our Board of Directors. However, we want to make sure everyone has had the opportunity to vote.
So if you want to vote and you requested a ballot when you registered, please complete it now. Is there anyone in the room that still would like a ballot but does not have one? I believe everyone has now received a ballot. I declare the polls for each matter voted upon at this meeting closed. No, no. And don't worry. Don't worry. I direct the inspector of elections to collect the ballots. Please hold up your hand so that your ballot can be received. Is there anyone that hasn't had their ballot collected?
Thank you. Thank you for your patience. I've been advised by the inspector of elections that the nominees for election to the Board of Directors have been duly elected. I've been further advised by the inspector of elections that a majority of the shares of our Class A and Class B common stock entitled to vote and that are presented at the meeting in person or by proxy, voting together as a single class, voted in favor of the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young to act as our independent registered public accounting firm for the 2012 fiscal year,
the approval of our 2012 stock plan and the approval of our 2012 incentive compensation plan from Motorola Mobility. Therefore, each of these proposals has been approved by our stockholders. I've also been advised by the inspector of elections that at least a majority of our Class A and Class B common stock outstanding on the record date for today's meeting, voting together as a single class, voted in favor of each of the three amendments described in our Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation.
And that at least a majority of our Class B common stock outstanding on the record date voted as a separate class, also voted in favor of each of these three amendments. Therefore, the Fourth Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation is approved by our stockholders and will become effective upon its acceptance by the Secretary of State of Delaware. As previously reported, our recapitalization, which is described in our proxy statement, is subject to pending litigation.
Once this litigation has been resolved, we expect our Board of Directors to declare a dividend of one share of Class C capital stock for each share of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, which is outstanding as of the record date and this will be determined at that time by the Board. We cannot predict when the pending litigation will be resolved, but we do not expect it to occur before the fourth quarter of 2012.
I've also been advised by the inspector of elections that a majority of the shares of our Class A and Class B common stock entitled to vote and present at the meeting in person or by proxy, voting together as a single class, voted against the stockholder proposal regarding an advisory vote on political contributions, the stockholder proposal regarding mandatory arbitration of certain shareholder claims and the stockholder proposal regarding equal shareholder voting.
Therefore, each of these stockholder proposals has not been approved by our stockholders. As soon as possible after the meeting, we'll complete the final vote tabulations and we'll provide the final vote results on our investor relations website and in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. That ends the official business of the meeting, and I declare the formal portion of the meeting adjourned. Eric will now make a few remarks.
You will then have an opportunity to ask any questions you may have. I would like to note that our remarks and answers to questions you may ask may contain forward-looking statements about Google's business outlook and other matters. Actual results or outcomes for these matters may differ from these forward-looking statements due to a number of risks and uncertainties, and these risks and uncertainties are detailed in our public filings with the SEC. I'll now turn the meeting over to Eric.
Okay. Thank you, Don. I thought what would be good would be to show a few slides and talk a little bit about the progress we've made since we all met last year. Let's start with. Perfect. We worked very hard to increase Google's velocity, literally improving our execution and focus on the big bets that will make a difference in the world. For example, we've had a big, big product cleanup, closing or combining more than 30 products.
We've given many of our products a visual refresh, and you'll see if you use Google today that they have a cleaner and more consistent and, frankly, a more beautiful look. Beautifully simple experience across Google is like the way we like to think about it. Now, creating a simpler and more intuitive experience across Google has been another important focus area for us. For most people, technology is a means to an end. They want to do something. They want to get in touch with a friend, find a coffee shop near them, buy the safest crib.
Technology helps them. It helps them live in the modern world. But for many, it's still something that they notice. It has a tendency to get in their way. Even in today's split-second blink of an eye tech landscape, it's still too slow. It's not as seamless as it should be. There's still wires and ports and installs and prompts and connections, probably drives you crazy, and the technology is simply just not there. This doesn't work. At Google, what we're dedicated to making the technology just work, that's sort of our philosophy.
We want to make it so that people don't even notice it, so let's think about sharing, and this is what the slide's about. When you find a great article, you want to share that knowledge with people who find it interesting too. Google Plus makes sharing incredibly easy by creating a social spine across all of our products, which we use everywhere. You can use Circles to group people into different categories, such as friends or family or computer scientists, sort of my group, and then they engage with them just like in real life.
You can recommend great news articles, websites, videos in specific Circles, or share photos with family straight from your Android device. And the photos are even uploaded for you automatically. That's what's so neat. Well, very quick and very easy. Now let's talk about search. We've been working to make search much easier too. Take a query like Eagles. Ever since I can remember, search has essentially been about matching keywords to queries. For a search engine, the word Eagles is just a string of letters.
The computer then munches away. But we know, as humans, that Eagles can have many different meanings. You might think of the football team out of Philadelphia or the bird species or maybe even the band from the 1970s living it up at the Hotel California. We've been working hard to create an intelligent model. We call it a graph that understands real-world entities and their relationships to one another, things, if you will, not just strings of letters.
It's called the Knowledge Graph, and it enables you to search for things, people, or places that Google knows about, landmarks, celebrities, buildings, geographical features, movies, celestial objects, works of art, and more, and instantly get information that's relevant to your query. Now, this is a critical first step toward building the next generation of search. It taps into the collective intelligence of the web, and it understands the world a bit more like the way we do as people.
It's all about building genuine knowledge right into our search engine. Next slide. Now, search is also about taking action as well as discovery. People rely on Google to get things done. It's amazing how broadly successful Google is. So in the early days, you would type in a query, and we'd return what we call sort of 10 blue links, and you'd move on fairly happily. Today, you want more.
If you search for weather in Tel Aviv, where I was earlier this week, by the way, and it's hot, chances are what you want is the weather in Tel Aviv right there on the results page, not another click or two away. So that's what we now provide. Do it yourself. Because really great search is about turning intentions into actions in the blink of an eye. But so much of the data in the world is not publicly available today. So showing it in our results involves deep partnerships across industries in many, many countries.
It's very similar to the work that we did with Google Maps to get it off the ground. And then flight search, if you've tried that, and you can see it here on the screen. It's what we're working on with Google Shopping. So now, if you're looking at the screen, if you type for flights from Chicago to Los Angeles, you get a list of the most relevant flights with prices, and you can book directly with the airline or click on an ad for an online travel agency.
Now, we're also experimenting with a feature called Hotel Finder, which enables you to do the same thing, compare prices and book a hotel room right from the results page. So from desktop to mobiles and tablets, all of this becomes more important as screen sizes shrink as people want to find what they're looking for immediately from their pocket anywhere they happen to be. That's why, by the way, talk about Android, bring up the Android slide. I don't know how to say it, but Android is on fire.
There are more than 900,000 devices activated per day. Now, do a little math. Take a look at the growth rate. This is by far the most successful everything happened in history, as best I can tell of computing. There's so many that are activated per day that there are a network of 55 manufacturers and more than 300 carriers. So whether it's on a phone or a tablet, the software that I'm talking about works seamlessly.
With Chrome, right, we'll talk about that in a minute, available on Android, switching devices becomes painless too because all your tabs are just there across your desktop and your Android device. You can even click the back button on one device, and it'll go back on the other device, which I think is really cool. It's simply your web sort of everywhere. And with Google Play, we recently announced movies, books, apps, and games are all accessible from the web and from Android. No cables, no downloading, no syncing.
A real step forward in terms of ease of use. I mentioned Chrome earlier, and I think back to a few years ago when people thought we were crazy, which we probably were, that the world did not need another browser. Well, it's now Chrome. By the way, if you care about security on the web, use Chrome. Don't care about security? Care about speed? Use Chrome. You care what everybody else is using? Use Chrome. I don't know how to be a stronger ad. Everyone's using Chrome. Everyone's moving to Chrome.
We've got 200 million users. It's growing very fast. Speed, simplicity, and security, those are its three principles. And it's the most popular browser in many countries around the world, and we're beating the other guys. And our web-based applications are exploding too. More than 350 million people now use Gmail. And our enterprise customers love it too. There are 5,000 new businesses and essential establishments signing up every day. In many ways, Gmail has become synonymous with email.
Thank goodness it's only a one-letter difference. And this is all happening in the cloud. Businesses are realizing it's just a smarter way to work, a more efficient way to get things done. It means an end to messing around, trying to transfer files between this machine and that machine and taking 30 minutes to schedule a 30-minute meeting. It means more time spent actually getting things done that you want to do. Another example, 2006, when Google acquired YouTube, we faced a lot of skepticism.
Why were we doing this? Did it make sense? Today, YouTube has 800 million monthly users uploading over an hour of video per second. Think about it. It enables an activist in Syria, where I was not recently, to broadcast globally, right? Hopefully change something there, or a young star to build an entertainment network from scratch. And it allows you to watch millions and millions of videos on any of your devices. I can go on and on and on. This company is always trying new things.
We're always innovating in new ways, sparking new ideas, and reimagining whatever it means to remain a world leader in this always-evolving tech sector. I'm proud to stand here, and I stand here today like I have many times in the past to tell you that the company that you have placed your trust in has so many opportunities ahead of us. Our main challenge is simply keeping our focus. Unless we make hard choices, we end up spreading ourselves too thin, and we don't have the impact that we want.
Thank you very, very much for your support over the last year. None of this would have been possible without your belief in us, and so we very much thank you here at Google, and we look forward to a very, very successful future together. And I want you all to pay attention to a big incentive announcement that we have for Google I/O, which is up in San Francisco next week. With that, I want to thank you all for listening to this, and maybe what we should do is move right to questions. And thank you so much.
It is my privilege to introduce Patrick Pichette and Susan Wojcicki. I think you all have met them before. I think they've been at most of these meetings. Patrick, where is your bag?
It's right there.
Okay. This pocket bag. We have a standing joke at Google that all of the cash in the company is in this bag. So Patrick, what I wanted to say was the bag has not gotten larger, but our cash position has gotten a lot larger. Where are you keeping the rest of the cash?
Motorola. A nd I'll spare jokes about Susan.
Let's go with our first question. Yes, sir.
Tony Medley Pillory, shareholder. I'd like to ask a question about mobile devices.
Sure.
May I summarize? We bought Motorola Mobility, got about an eighth of the market for Android devices about a sixteenth of all the market for smart devices, which compares to Apple, which has about a quarter of the market. That's good because there's a lot of value there. Apple alone created value maybe two or three times this entire company, so we have a lot there. We are even good with Android. We helped Samsung and their Galaxy products and units almost get as big as Apple already.
That's really cool. Plus, more and more people are using smart devices for everything, search everything. What bothers me is some of the players out there, like Apple, are moving upstream in maps, payments, etc. and they're also dominant in tablets. Microsoft also is into search, of course. That's kind of bothersome to me.
So I have two questions about two specific situations. First, about mobile ad revenue, which is about 9% of this company. Because it's very hard to display ads on the small screens, how are we doing that? Have we done it sustainably that we can keep our super growth rate on that going? Also.
Let's hold your first question. Let's answer them one by one. I really wish that we didn't have such strong competitors who are really, really moving the ball forward. It'd be a lot easier for us to just win. And I think the reality is that. Sorry, that was a joke. Don't worry. The fact of the matter is that this is a very, very, very competitive market, and that competition is producing huge value for consumers. Really extraordinary. Leaps forward from all the players. Susan, you want to talk about monetization?
Sure. Yeah, so we've definitely seen a lot of growth in mobile, but we've been excited about the opportunities for the advertising on mobile. And on a mobile phone, you're right, the screen is smaller, but there's still a lot of pixels in that little screen, so we have very high resolution. And we also have a lot of really important signals that we don't have on a desktop. Like, we have location information. We're able to serve things that are relevant for them. We've introduced click-to-call, so the phone number's right there.
They can call. That's good for the advertiser and good for the user. And we've been working on a lot of formats to be able to make what you see on a mobile phone really, really engaging, to be able to swipe like you can with applications. We think there's a lot of opportunity to continue to make the mobile ads really compelling for users and advertisers.
Your second question?
Android fragmentation. There's a lot of devices out there on the hardware side, but there's a lot of versions of Android around that makes a lot of combinations that it's hard to write software and do the QA, etc. We want our developers to have it easy so that they can support us and help us sell devices. What are we doing to make it simpler for the developers?
Our model assumes that everybody moves forward as fast as they can. We're trying to get everybody to move to Ice Cream Sandwich, which is the 4.0 release, and they're doing that as quickly as they can. Some existing products that have been in the market for a while, a few years old, may or may not be able to get upgraded, but virtually everything else looks like it's going to upgrade fairly quickly.
We can't force them to upgrade, nor do we think that's the right model, but they're going to do it, and we'll be fine. I'm not as worried about this as I was, say, a year ago. Yes, sir.
Good afternoon, Dr. Schmidt, shareholders. My name is John Simpson. I am a shareholder. Stock is in street name so I have the proxy here today. I also in full disclosure, should say that I work for Consumer Watchdog, and as many of the shareholders saw and perhaps you heard, our tracking team was down in the parking lot today to make the point about online tracking and that we need Do Not Track as a viable mechanism.
I think that Chrome has announced that you will implement that by the year's end. My question is, does Do Not Track mean to Google, "Do not collect information," or does it mean simply, "Do not target behavioral ads"? That's my first question.
The general answer about Do Not Track is we think that users should have the choice, and the Chrome browser has a specific implementation, which is what you're referring to. By year's end, I don't think it's there yet.
Yeah. Actually, Eric, I can answer more here on this too. So Chrome has said that they will support Do Not Track. We're in the process of figuring out exactly what does Do Not Track mean. It can mean lots of different things to lots of different players in the industry. For behavioral advertising and interest-based advertising, we've already given all of our users the ability to opt out of it. For Do Not Track, we are in the process of figuring that out of exactly what those standards would mean.
There would be some information that would need to be collected for making sure that the services still continue to work. For example, like cookie information, like what are your language settings. So there is some information that is important, but our goal is to enable users who want to opt out of interest-based advertising to do so. As I mentioned, they already can. We have something called the Google Ad Preferences. They can go, they can see, they can opt out right now.
Thank you. Your next question.
Second question. This is something that's often referred to as Wi-Spy of the FCC recently released a bunch of documents that showed that the actual design documents for the Street View project seem to have talked about so-called war driving and gathering up payload data from private Wi-Fi networks around the world.
And I guess my question is, simply put, originally it was described as a mistake and so on and so forth. All this latest stuff that comes out prompts me to ask you, Dr. Schmidt and Mr. Page were here, what did you know about Street View and when did you know it?
We've answered this question many times, and you've asked this in other formats many times. I'll answer it again. The collection of the data that you're referring to was unauthorized and was not known to the management of the company. And by management, I mean myself, Larry, Sergey, Patrick, Susan, the lawyers, and so forth.
When it was discovered, we took immediate action to sequester the data, notify the authorities and deal with it in a proper and professional way. So we're busy dealing with the consequences of that. We've already apologized for the collection of that data. To my knowledge, there has been no use, misuse, or in fact reading of that data and so your privacy remains protected. Do you have any other questions?
I probably do, but I think I'm limited to, so I think that's it.
Why don't we just ask some of those? If you have more questions, you can come back.
Well, I appreciate that.
In the back. Yes, sir.
Doug [McKenzie]. I'm a shareholder, and I had two quick questions. I'm also a parent, and I thank you for hiring people, and so my daughter will be starting in the fall as a college graduate and associate product manager. I wondered if you could give me any advice that she would be unlikely to hear from her coworkers.
Susan and Patrick?
One thing you'll get next year is an invitation to take your parent to work day. Because as you know, like most of the rest of the world is taking their children to work day, we also have that. But given the average age of our engineers and because of people like you who are asking, "How can I come to Google?" you'll get a kind invitation next year, and then you can actually, from the horse's mouth of the people around you, all of these questions. It'll be a terrific moment, I'm sure. Welcome to the family.
I think every once in a while you luck out as a parent. You actually had a pretty good kid.
Thank you. I did have one other quickie.
Yes?
At the last year's shareholder meeting, I asked if there would be something along the lines of a real-time translator through audio from phone to phone to people sitting on a bus, and you said, "Stay tuned." I just wondered if that's possible in the next while, and we'd sure like to see that here rather than on the iPhone, wouldn't we?
We continue to do important research in that area, and I think it continues to be a hard problem. I personally believe we will eventually get there. Susan, do you agree?
Yeah, no, I definitely agree. It's like an area of investment for us. And the number of languages that we're able to translate in right now is pretty enormous, but being able to do that even faster in a real-time simultaneous methodology is definitely something that looks very. It's a hard, challenging problem, but one that we think that we can get to.
Thanks. Go ahead. Yes, sir.
Hi. I'm very excited. I just started my own company about 10 days ago.
I hope you're using all of the Google services in your new company.
Absolutely. And what it is, it's tutoring for Google Business products.
Even better.
And so my question is, for the enterprise, does Google look? You have a lot of great vendors that are using your Chrome and your Android for Google or enterprise business software, your HR, your accounting, logistics, but I don't see it being emphasized as Google is a business tool.
We do have the email, of course, and you have documents, and now you have sites and some other things. But do you see the future of Google saying, "Hey, business, come utilize our enterprise software"? We're competing against Oracle. We're competing against Microsoft.
Yes. Patrick?
That is a short answer. The answer is yes. I mean, if you look at the evolution of the enterprise space at Google, the apps and the quality of not only Gmail, as you mentioned ago, but also the Google Drive that we announced a few weeks ago, a month or so ago, and the focus we're putting also on providing capacity, computing capacity for companies. I think all of these elements are in a chain of providing both small businesses, but also very large businesses.
Many of you may have heard of Roche as an example, this very large international multinational in pharmaceuticals, switched over to Google a few months ago, have announced this. And again, a real testament to the focus of Google into making sure that all enterprises, whether they be small or large, get their full productivity suite of tools available through us and make them on a very competitive basis.
And by the way, just in closing on a comment that Eric made a bit earlier, with security, right? Because of the architecture of Google, security is at the foremost of most companies, the protection of their data, the administration of their data, and it is actually a real strength of the company. So I continue to make it a—we make it a huge priority for the company.
Lastly, don't forget AdWords to get promotion.
Certainly.
Before customers can find you.
I'm more curious about the HR and the accounting. My second question was actually regarding vehicles.
You want your own drive and a self-driving car.
I would love that, and I can see that as being a way to introduce Google to the car, but in the meantime, Apple, of course, is introducing Siri to the vehicle, and Microsoft has introduced Sync. Where's Google?
We're working on a different way of cars. I think that it looks to me like we've invented a completely new way of thinking about how cars should take you around. If you think logically, it's crazy that cars are allowed to be driven by humans. Cars should be driven by computers with humans sort of watching the computers. It'd be much more accurate. Plus, they can't get drunk. Seriously. The lady in the background.
Thank you, Dr. Schmidt and Board of Directors and fellow share owners. My name's Ione Conlan, and I'm a share owner. And I like what you do and how you do it and what you put out in the universe. And you do so many good things. I'd like to suggest something for your consideration, which has to do with agriculture, especially in California. California feeds about 50% of the nation in our fruits and vegetables and so forth, and I noticed that you folks have a wonderful cafeteria with organic foods.
And I was wondering if the Board of Directors might consider some contribution towards agriculture in California, specifically the agricultural land trusts that are around, especially in Marin. We have the Marin Agricultural Land Trust. And so I would like to offer that as a consideration that you might contribute to that, which would help us all in good food. Thank you so much.
Thank you, and we'll certainly take a look at that. I can tell you that one of the most popular cafeterias here is the cafeteria that is food from within 50 mi of the campus.
That's wonderful. Thank you.
Yes, sir.
Good afternoon, fellow Googlers. My name is Mark Zuckerberg.
Yes, Mark. How are you doing? How are you feeling about things?
I don't know. I like this hoodie a lot. Seriously, though, my name is Ron Freund. I work with a firm called the Social Equity Group. We manage assets for many Google shareholders. We want to applaud what Google has done on behalf of freedom of expression and renewable energy, but Google needs to do more. This company is too important, both to our nation and the world.
We supported the proposal on political contributions because it sought to further the stated social mission of Google, quote, "To strengthen democracy and inform participation in the political process." So I'd like to ask a couple of related questions today. First, in our post-Citizens United world of unlimited campaign spending, what is Google's position on using corporate funds for independent campaign contributions as opposed to candidate committees directly?
So far, we've kept to the former, and we're not doing the latter. I think as everybody knows, the political landscape is quite different now with the ability for corporations to, in an unlimited and unallocated or unknown way, contribute large amounts of money to the political campaigns, and we'll see how that changes our landscape. But our core objective as a company is to support the causes that favor openness, free expression, transparency, and good governance.
Along with that, especially your commitment to transparency, there is a proposal now before the Securities and Exchange Commission to adopt a rule that would require all public corporations to do what Google has done and disclose all of its campaign contributions, but it hasn't received the support of corporate America. I'm wondering if Google would consider endorsing that proposal and submitting a comment letter to the SEC.
Why don't we take that as an action item? Have you seen this?
I haven't. I have not seen it, but I will.
Don, let's take an action item to look at that and see if it makes sense. In general, our position is that corporations should be transparent as to what they're doing, and they should take the hits for being honest with what they're doing.
So you'll look at that?
We will absolutely. Don will take a look at it.
Let me ask just one more related quick question. Faster than an Internet Explorer search. Recently, excuse me, you have stated in the response to the proposal on contributions that you do not contribute to trade organizations that support political candidates. However, recently, the Chamber of Commerce announced that in order to avoid disclosing its donors, it's going to start supporting what's called direct ads and supportive candidates. So in light of your membership in the Chamber, will you reconsider your membership as a result of that?
We've been asked about our membership in the Chamber of Commerce many times, and as of today, we've decided to remain a member. We don't completely agree with some of the positions they've taken. They've also been helpful for us with some other things.
Right, but this is a change in policy.
Again, we don't necessarily agree with what everyone does in the entire world. They don't do exactly what we want, unfortunately.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you. In the back?
Yes, my name is Nisslay. It's N like Nestlé's chocolate, N-I-S-S-L-A-Y, rhymes with kiss me. I'm a neighbor of Sergey Brin. He lives about five blocks from me. I'm here to thank him and Vint Cerf . I'm also a founder of the Computer History Museum, and we honored Surf there.
I think these two guys, I'd like the Board to thank the two of them for their attitude on China and stiffening the government. As I'm not interested in the price of our stock, I'm interested in freedom of expression for the Chinese people. I'm also an Air Force vet and 70 years ago, we had an expression in the Air Force for people like China, bomb them.
Okay. Thank you very much for your input. And I think our China situation is well understood. Yes, sir.
Matthew, a fat shareholder. My question has to do with YouTube and captioning. I've noticed that the captioning on YouTube, the technology has been stalling. It seems that only the Khan Academy lectures have been translating or captioning the videos in a way that's basically 50% text-based.
You're referring to the closed captioning part of the videos, yes.
Yes. Thank you for clarifying that. And I wanted to sort of just point out that until we create a situation where the internet is accessible to everybody, we're going to be locking out people who are senior citizens, people who are deaf, people who are hearing impaired. And I want you to just envision a scenario where you've got a grandchild that comes to you who happens to be born deaf or with a hearing impairment and says, "Mr. Schmidt or grandfather," and so on. I love the internet.
I like going on there, and I noticed that 40 years from now or 10 years from now, a lot of it's based on video. We're moving from a text-based society to a video society, whether it's on Hulu or YouTube.
I want you to envision a scenario where that person asks you, "I love the internet, but I can't partake fully, and it's because of the fact that we don't have captioning. Was there something that you could have done about this in 2012 or in 2011 or in 2013?" I'd like you to just think about that scenario, and hopefully, you'll have an answer for her or him.
Thank you for bringing up this issue. Accessibility is definitely something that's really important to us and something we think about. Actually, the accessibility team right now is part of my team, and we are definitely committed in trying to make Google's products accessible. The captioning part of YouTube is something I will look into more.
I thought we had more captioning across a lot more YouTube products and the YouTube videos. And so definitely, I'll take that action to look into more because our goal is to develop the technology so that we can have captioning. We want to make the products accessible, and I know how important it is to people who need it. Thank you for bringing that up.
Thank you. And again, right now, it's essentially almost like looking at a Mad Lib book. About half the words come out. The other half just don't really translate in a way that makes sense.
Just to close the loop on it, it is, again, in part of Google's innovation model is to learn and iterate, and the machine learning, so as people actually give us feedback, it's the same thing when you type text and then you correct it. It's all about computers. So the machine learning, you have to launch it in order to get the machine learning to actually improve it. And then what we find is improvement is exponential. It's not linear.
And so what you will see in many products where we decide to push for accessibility, it is painful at first because it's far from perfect, but that's where computer science does its magic over the space of a couple of years. So take it as a testament for our absolute commitment to this investment. And in the first steps, just like voice was three, four years ago, incredibly frustrating, machine learning has proven to be immensely powerful by now. So you should see that as that kind of signal.
Thank you very much.
Thank you. In the back.
You bought Motorola Mobility, as I understand it, as much for the patent portfolio as for any of the hard assets. We as consumers, as the public, it's hard for us to kind of evaluate what a patent portfolio is worth. I mean, from our point of view, it seems like many tech companies infringe on each other's patents anyways and with general impunity. So can you sort of provide us some insight as to what a portfolio like that is worth and how we can assign some valuation to that?
In general, we won't. We bought Motorola for some patents, the products, the people, the innovation. There's some unique innovation inside of Motorola that we really like. And so we don't divide it out. I would like to make a statement that Google believes that much of the current patent structure needs to be overhauled, that there is a whole bunch of patents which are being used to stop innovation, which is really, really bad,
and this is a bad situation for the industry. It's fine for a company like Google because we have enough cash because of the brilliance of what Susan and Patrick do, that we can afford this, but the patent structure effectively eliminates additional competition into the market. Not good.
Yes, my name is Jeff Kline, and I am a shareholder. Several years ago, I saw a documentary on Google, and the combination of products and the people behind the products are the reason I invested in the company. With that as a preface, Dr. Schmidt, your remarks, you talked about the skepticism surrounding the YouTube acquisition.
I think it's fair to say there was similar skepticism, if not more, surrounding the Motorola acquisition. Could you please comment on the integration of Motorola into the Google culture, what the plans are in terms of is Google going to become a hardware manufacturer, or are there plans to sell off the hardware?
By virtue of the acquisition, we are a hardware manufacturer as of right now. Do you want to sort of give us an update on where we are in the integration?
Yeah, I think a couple of points that are really important about Motorola. It functions in its own industry. If you think of Google being in a software industry, Motorola is really in the hardware industry. And so it is very important that from the economics and from the culture, it stays on its own battlefield, if you wish. So in that sense, we are not integrating Motorola with Google. We're making sure that it actually has everything to win in its own space, but you shouldn't expect to actually have a full integration of the two companies.
That's very important for us. And that's also why we announced that we're going to do segmented reporting so you can clearly see the difference in the performance and the activities in each of the two spheres of activities. Two additional points, if I may, very quickly. One is there's a bit of a mythology that Google doesn't know anything about hardware, but without knowing the very specifics, and we never kind of announced the specifics, we're big in hardware.
Google actually builds servers in a factory that actually probably makes us one of the largest hardware manufacturers in the world, and so we know hardware. We know about flash. We know about equipment. We know about supply chain. So we were very well equipped, actually, from the hardware side, to be very competitive in that space and very thoughtful.
Then finally, from a market perspective, the way that I've been kind of talking to the market in general about our acquisition of Motorola is a fantastic asset that needs to be reset, reprioritized in many ways, and in that context, think of Google as actually, in a way, taking Motorola private. And in that, I mean, just we need to kind of reset and retool so many of their areas, and we're working with a great management team there to do so.
And so over the coming quarters, you'll see a lot of changes and a lot of velocity at Motorola that really excites us. So close to hardware in the first place, a different industry that we know quite well and we're actually well poised for, and over the coming quarters, expect a lot of velocity and change in the place in order for, again, we actually have an agenda for the long term. We didn't buy Motorola for the next two quarters. We bought it for the next decade to make amazing things happen.
Thank you. One quick question, which is more generic in nature. I think over 50% of your revenues come from outside North America. Can you make a general comment or perhaps a specific comment on how the macro situation is affecting Google's revenues?
I think what we read in the newspaper is what you read in the newspaper. We're not immune in any way, shape, or form to the economy. We just are participants like we are, like everybody else. The good thing is, I mean, we're in the digital economy, and in that sense, while there's a lot of fluctuations, the digital economy is somewhat more robust because it is a fundamental secular trend.
So in that sense, rather than to comment on the specifics, these are the two fundamental levers in our situation. Not immune to the economy in general, but if I had to pick in one place in the economy I want to be in, the digital economy and right here.
Thank you.
In the back.
I'm Mark Jacobs down here from Folsom, California. I have a question on the lighter side. Google is, first and foremost, a marketing company, and all around us today, we've seen people wearing Google shirts, Google jackets, etc. Has the company given any thought to an online store where the shareholders and others could buy Google items?
By the way, this is a great suggestion. Go on. Susan.
So yes, so we have thought about that, and we do have an online store. And you can buy Google goods there. I think if you just Google it, you should be able to find it.
How do you find it? Where is it?
Use Google Search.
It's an online store. So if you just type in Google Store, you should be able to find it and find those goods.
My wife has given up. She's asked me to bring a few T-shirts here and there, and she's given up. She just goes straight to the store, and then she gets it delivered.
Did you have any other questions, sir? Good. Yes, sir.
My name is Keith Trauner. I'm a shareholder. I also help run an investment firm that owns Google shares. I have two quick questions. One has to do with YouTube. In many ways, it seems like video is morphing in a way that the music business morphed, where control over the content has changed dramatically. Who has the power in the relationship?
My question is, it seems as though you're starting to get the development of what I would call almost alternate networks, whether it's Hulu, YouTube, others, and nobody has really kind of broken through in a way where à la carte demand has kind of become the future, although people have talked about it. Could you talk a little bit about how you see YouTube down the road and how you think you make money from it?
Well, first, we're making lots of money from YouTube, which is a good report. And I'll let Patrick talk if he wants about that. I went and spoke at something called the Brandcast, which we did in New York, where we actually showed many of the new channels. But the simple answer is they are there, and you can find them on YouTube. And there are people who are making five-minute, 10-minute shows, which are series.
They're advertiser-supported. They have either traditional ads or other kinds of ad sponsorships. And it looks to me like it's the fastest-growing part of the sort of television video entertainment. If it scales, and I personally think it will, we're going to have a huge success there.
Yeah, we've been very encouraged with our YouTube business. Really, what we've been doing is we've been enabling content owners to launch their own online channels. And so it's not that we are a channel. We are a platform for enabling all of the content creators out there throughout the world to be able to create their own dedicated channels. And then we've also come up with some of our own ad formats of video formats that are working really well for advertisers and for users.
So we think there's a huge opportunity to enable all of those channels out there. So just like we had a few channels when it was broadcast, and then we moved to hundreds of channels when there was cable, there should be millions of channels online. And that's our goal, is to enable those millions of channels off of YouTube.
So do you intend to take any role in trying to shape, for example, or how do you bring attention to the things that are somewhat successful but haven't gone viral?
You'll see that if you look at YouTube. You'll see some things which we are promoting just to get some interest in them to try to help them.
Okay. And my other question was, if you could just touch briefly on what you believe the sustainable competitive advantages are of Google. I mean, you're in a business, an industry where there's a lot of turmoil, constant change, and what have you. And yet, one of Warren Buffett's classic postulations for what a strong business is, is to say, "If I handed you $1 billion, could you compete with it?"
I think in search, that would be very difficult. Even with $1 billion, I think it would be difficult to compete with Google in that business. So can you just touch a little bit of what you think your most sustainable competitive advantage is?
Basically, the innovation culture. The fact that we can continue to throw out these extraordinarily new products that get to the kind of scale. I think that's ultimately the differentiator. Do you guys?
Yeah. I mean, when you look at the priorities of the company and where the types of products and services that Susan and her team, but also Sundar and the rest, look at the products, and what you fundamentally see is the following interaction. It's computer science. So somebody said a minute ago that we're a marketing company. Google is really a technology company. It's fundamentally through its engineers.
So it's computer science at the service of complex problems where, in our own bar, we asked the bar that, and Eric is always the first one to ask, "Will a billion people use this?" And if it's not a billion people, it's kind of not worth our time. When you have that high a bar, you end up with the kind of innovation that you've heard about today, which makes it really difficult to compete against because the bar is so high. That's what's exciting us.
Actually, for the gentleman who wanted to purchase some Google stuff, I have the URL. It's store.google.com.
Perfect. Okay. Let's see if we can sort of quicken this up and be done in 10 or 15 minutes. So yes, ma'am.
Thank you. Mari Schwartzer again, Northstar Asset Management. We're shareholders of, I believe, over $3 million in stock. I just had a follow-up question to our proposal. I think it's very clear that both Google and NetPAC. I find it very important that they support financially politicians that support the openness of the internet. So I wanted to ask the question of, as recently as two months ago, I believe it was April, Google's NetPAC gave money to one of the co-sponsors of SOPA. So.
Rachel.
So I just wanted to ask that question.
I don't actually think that's. Let's make sure this is true.
After SOPA, as far as I know, after SOPA, we shifted as you would wish us to.
Yes, and that's my understanding too. After you asked that question, I checked, and as you say, we are supporting people who support innovation and openness, and there are people that we may have given money to in the past who then took a very strong stand on SOPA. Obviously, we've been looking at that since that happened,
So I think that Bob Goodlatte was one of the original co-sponsors.
Let's have a conversation because I was just giving some facts. We can take it offline afterwards. Okay. Thanks.
By the way, I failed to introduce Senior Vice President of Everything Interesting, Rachel Whetstone. Mayer. Yes, sir.
So I appreciate you letting me speak again. The other concern I had was regarding when you go to a website, they used to have you register. Now you connect with Facebook. And my concern is that this is creating further sync with Facebook where you couldn't get rid of that account because now you get rid of all these auxiliary accounts.
And I'm seeing more and more of that connect with Facebook, but I don't see connect with Google+ hardly at all if they even have that function. I'm assuming that you guys probably are working on that, but what are your thoughts on that competition with Facebook?
Yeah, sure. So I'll just say we started by building Google+ to enable all of our own products to be able to have that functionality. So across YouTube, across search, across Gmail, when you're logged on or when you have a Google+ account, how does knowing who you are make all of the Google products that you have be better products?
We've also been enabling the Google+ and the Plus One buttons across the internet. We've had really good success there. But certainly, our goal is to continue to grow Google+, to continue to grow the login. So if we know who you are, we can offer you better services.
My second question was regarding the Surface that Microsoft just announced. They're using a high-end Intel chip for one of their processors. Are you guys looking at doing any high-powered computer devices? You guys do a lot with the low-powered stuff, but regarding high-powered microchips and things?
We have the benefit of having the CEO of Intel here. Paul, would you like to talk about this at all? We actually have the man who runs the whole thing and knows all the details. It's pretty exciting, actually, all the use of your chips.
The thing that we do have design wins with Motorola for pretty advanced smartphones. You'll see those coming out later this year. That's public. The new versions of Chromebook, which started out using a fairly low-end Intel processor, are using our top. They're using the same processors that Microsoft just picked for their tablet. We're very happy about that. The other stuff is not public, so I can't talk about that.
I think the answer is the future is bright for what you're doing and for him as the supplier of these very high-speed chips. Yes, sir.
My name is Jackie Solean, and I am a stockholder. I would like to ask, is Google planning on splitting the stock? If they are, I hope they won't be doing that. I've come here every stockholders' meeting to ask that you don't split the stock.
So I know, and you've asked this question before, and actually, the answer is different this year. If the shareholder proposal that was approved to create this additional class, there will be a stock dividend in this way that's described very carefully in all our documents. And Don, I think you said that might occur by the end of this year. So the answer is yes, but only if a set of things occur and you can read about it.
Okay. Thank you.
Let's have you, and then you'll have the honor of the last question if that's okay, as you did last year. Yes, ma'am.
Hi, thank you. My name is Isabelle Fumat, and I have two questions for you. What gives you the confidence that you can monetize mobile at a similar level to desktop, particularly since it's tougher to track a user and their behavior on the mobile device?
Susan?
Yeah. Well, I mean, our goal with mobile is to continue to improve it because we've had 10 years with desktop. And so I think we can take all those learnings, and we can apply them to mobile. And we think over time, we're going to be able to accelerate all the things that we can do. And as I mentioned, we have additional information on mobile. And mobile is not just handhelds. They're also tablets. They're both of those devices. And so we have additional information. A lot of times, we have the location information.
A lot of times, the user is logged in to an actual account. And so we know information about them that way. Sometimes we use, like in search, we use keywords as the most important signal. And so there are many different signals that we use in ad targeting. And we think mobile has enough interesting characteristics that we really will be able to make it work very well. It's going to take some time, but we are very invested in this, and we're confident that we will see a lot of improvement.
Just to give us a financial perspective on it at a very high level, everybody talks about the desktop, and of course, there's so much economic activity going on on the desktop, but 85% of your wallet, roughly, is spent locally, and locally is location-aware, and so if you think of it from the opportunity side of this pie, the local opportunity for you, because I know, as Susan just absolutely pointed rightly,
we know some of your intent, some of your attributes, and we know where you are and when you are because you've given us kind of this information to look for better results for yourself. The opportunities are actually huge, then the question is, how fast can computer science and the interaction with the application give you the great answers that you're looking for? That's what's exciting about that space.
A follow-up to that one is, so what's it going to take for monetization to step up and be on par with the desktop?
Well, first of all, there are going to be some queries that are going to perform better now on mobile because they might be local or because it might be an app. So I think it really does depend on the class of queries that you're talking about or the type of experiences. But in general, our goal is to make improvements every quarter. And if you look at that and you say, "Every quarter, it's going to get X% better over a period of time," you get there. And so we're investing a lot. And the technology is also changing.
You have to remember that too. Tablets have only been around for a few years, and the apps under them are changing. And so when you think about all of the things that are changing at the same time, we're having to react and have to change on that. But it's such a compelling medium. I mean, you think about it, you know who the users are interacting. They're large screens. They're very dynamic. We think that we can do a lot of really interesting things.
Okay. Then my second question, thank you for that follow-up. My second question is, a lot of your products and certainly your acquisitions in the past three years or so are competitive with your advertisers. So where do you draw the strategic line and how do you think about that?
Let me talk about, I mean, in general, our philosophy for mergers and acquisitions in our case. Actually, our filter is pretty simple. We have an agenda at Google. Our agenda is very well anchored, and we're driving full steam ahead on it, and then we actually have a team that scans the world and looks for products and engineering teams anywhere in the world that can accelerate or complement well, turbocharge that agenda,
so when you find a great team and a great application that feeds into a system for Susan or whether it be for Android, then the question becomes the following: how good is the product? How good is the IP? So is the code good, or is it all kind of stringware? How good is the team? And so we'll actually really kick hard the tires on the team themselves because they have to fit our standard. And then finally, if you can think that the IP is good, the team is good, and there's a decent integration plan that you can make work, is the price right?
Because in some cases, you get everything, but you can't make the numbers work. And I want to give, again, a word of reassurance that we kick the tires on a lot of things at Google, and the bar is very high. So what you have is really an accelerant to our agenda where people are excited on both sides. They're excited to come to Google. We're really excited to have them on because they're going to fuel our agenda. But they have to pass that bar. A huge chunk of our acquisitions that we look at, they fail because it is such a high bar.
This is less a question about your M&A strategy, but more a question of, so for example, ITA and Google Flight Search is a very good product, but it's very competitive to partners such as Expedia and Priceline. And that's.
I'll give you a crisp answer when we move on. We make the decision based on what, in our judgment, is in the best interest of the end user. The end user is best served by having that technology as part of a sophisticated, structured answer out of Google. We'll go ahead and do that acquisition. Ma'am, you have the honor of the last question, and thank you for coming.
Thank you. Kathryn Alexander, shareholder, a complimentary comment to Susan, if you have time for that.
Of course.
I'm not sure you mentioned that Google has risen to the height of art. It is mounted on an entire wall at the Museum of Modern Art, MoMA, in San Francisco, an email correspondence between a San Francisco female and a Shanghai female translated by Google. Many, many pages of it. It's fascinating.
Wonderful. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you for sharing that.
So we run over, but I think the questions were so good, and it was well worth coming. Thank you guys so much for coming. We look forward to seeing you in one year, if not sooner. Thanks again.