Goodwill

BB has today posted on the Google acquisition of Youtube and the much-hyped 'fact' that the acquisition was on a price/revenue multiple of 100.

A few thoughts:
- I am surprised the multiple isn't higher... youtube would at the time of acquisition have been generating f-all revenue... it clearly wasn't bought on the basis of present revenue, but on the basis of its clear leadership of a segment in which google would consider itself the natural leader
- it is inconceivable that the price/revenue multiple would have been the deciding factor (or even a relevant factor) in determining the purchase price or the valuation. a very early stage (almost pre-revenue) company like youtube can only really be valued on the basis of its potential or else on raw belief / hype... multiples of any kind are largely meaningless
- BB writes that $1.2b of the purchase price is assigned to goodwill. From my M&A experience, 'goodwill' is that part of the purchase price that doesn't fit anywhere else... you can't fairly call it a tangible asset (eg. a computer, a chair) or an identifiable intangible asset (eg. the copyright in a software program, a trade mark). Although of course I do not hold myself out as an expert on accounting for intangibles under US accounting rules.