Difference between GOOGL and GOOG
Source "Note that these used to be a single ""common"" share that has ""split"" (actually a ""special dividend"" but effectively a split). If you owned one share of Google before the split, you had one share giving you X worth of equity in the company and 1 vote. After the split you have two shares giving you the same X worth of equity and 1 vote. In other words, zero change. Buy or sell either depending on how much you value the vote and how much you think others will pay (or not) for that vote in the future.  As Google issues new shares, it'll likely issue more of the new non-voting shares meaning dilution of equity but not dilution of voting power. For most of us, our few votes count for nothing so evaluate this as you will.  Google's founders believe they can do a better job running the company long-term when there are fewer pressures from outside holders who may have only short-term interests in mind. If you disagree, or if you are only interested in the short-term, you probably shouldn't be an owner of Google. As always, evaluate the facts for yourself, your situation, and your beliefs."
Not a whole lot of people. Google thinks that by acquiring Meebo and dozens of other companies in the social space, it is bound to eventually succeed in social. Like, maybe my melding meebo with google analytics with gchat they'll come up with something. This kind of thinking is very typical of internet companies. Instead of going strong in a single direction the company hedges its bets by going down 50 different strategy paths, because hey, coding is cheap. The problem arises when this attitude becomes ingrained in the company's culture and nobody is left to take bold steps in a single direction. Apple is different, it takes bold steps time and time again. I'm a big believer in pulling the quarterly and or annual statements and deriving your own analysis.  The automated parsing systems at Google, Yahoo, and others are a good starting point and they'll let you generally compare various metrics of different companies or market segments.  With that in mind, there are any number of reasons Google's scripts could have broken out or combined a couple of cash flow line items.  If you're digging this deep in the weeds on this company you should pull the SEC filings and build out your own data. "not sure if I will help or just spread more gibberish but maybe the first concept I'd look at is risk tolerance.  Risk tolerance is discerning your ability to risk losing money to get better results.  So you know the saying ""the higher the risk the higher the reward""?  The way most people are going to operate is somewhere on the midpoint of behavior - not doing the riskiest thing, but not doing the very most cautious thing either.  So given that concept, some investments will be more appealing given different economic scenarios.  Typically stocks are going to reward your investment a little more aggressively than a treasury bond if the economy is humming along.  This drives prices of treasuries lower, stock yields higher.  In a crappy economy, people want to move their money into conservative investments like a treasury bond. Bond prices rise while stock prices dip.    If you google 'correlations between the market prices of stocks and the market prices of Treasury bonds' you will find plenty of helpful and hopefully not too convoluted articles a la http://finance.zacks.com/correlation-treasuries-stocks-10871.html Don't get freaked out by graphs, the graphs are just a way to put into a picture that correlation." Apparent data-feed issues coming out of NASDAQ in the after hours market. Look at MSFT, AMZN, AAPL, heck even Sears.      Funny thing though, is that you see traces of irregular prices during the active session around 10:20am on stocks like GOOG. http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/economix/2014/04/02/the-many-classes-of-google-stock/ Are you counting both class A and other share classes? "A lot (sometimes called a round lot) always refers to the quantity of physical good that you're getting, like a carton of eggs or a barrel of oil.  The tricky thing in the case of forex is that the physical good also happens to be a currency. A spot currency product trades in the denomination on the right-hand side (RHS) of the product name.  So if you're buying EUR/USD you are paying USD currency to get EUR ""units"", and if you're selling EUR/USD you are receiving USD by giving away EUR ""units"".  The EUR is the ""physical good"" in this case. The way I remember it is to think of all products (not just currencies) as trading pairs.  So AAPL in my mind is AAPL/USD.  When I buy AAPL/USD I am paying USD to get AAPL units.  When I sell AAPL/USD I am receiving USD by giving away AAPL units. The thing on the left is the physical good (even if it happens to be money) that you are exchanging, and the thing on the right is the money that you are exchanging. So, when I buy a lot of AAPL, I am buying 100 shares at their current price in dollars. Similarly, when I buy a lot of EUR/USD, I am buying 100K Euros at their current price in dollars." skills and ATL, not often used in one sentence.   this might sound racist, which I'm seriously not but out of experience if I hear a black person on the support line with an ATL swing in their voice, I hang up until I hear someone with an Indian accent. "Okay Stevie. Let me introduce you to a distinction that may help you as you go through life. You can thank me later.   The distinction is between prescription and description.   What you get when you look in a dictionary or a reference source like Wikipedia for a definition of a word or phrase is a descriptive example. It's a description of a common usage but not a limitation or restriction.   You seem to have confused this descriptive resource with a presciptive edict such as a law against parking in a handicapped zone without plates that allow you to do so. The latter is a hard-fast rule that cannot be altered and that seems to be what you think a dictionary or Wikipedia represents. That's not what how it works. You can go ahead and write a letter to Jimmy Wales yourself if you like but I'm sure he's on my side.    Besides which, if you don't like the phrase ""patent troll"" in reference to LEGO then I'm happy to work with you and say instead they're ugly mutherfucking thugs that abuse the patent system. Does that work out better for you?   Anyway, glad you took the time to make sure the message was crystal clear."