What part of these profits comes from work actually done remotely during the pandemic ? What you are proving is that the Google model of hiring extremely talented devs, paying them handsomely, and asking them to spend days in their campus allowed them to create a company that takes in billion of profits even during a pandemic.
Which part of the Google offer significantly changed thanks to work done during the pandemic ? All these profits come from something that was built - in person - in pre pandemic work organisation, so we know that this was was successful.
The only big thing that I can think of on Google side that was supposed to take off during the pandemic is Stadia. I own one, and it's an understatement to say that it did not deliver on its promises. It is not the first Google product that fails, and it is hard to say if the failure is due to remote work, but still something to consider.
Honestly, the argument you made in the first paragraph is a good argument against companies getting too big rather than against remote work: what part of Google's profit comes from work done in the last 5 years?
Most Google products and services were mature in 2017.
>what part of Google's profit comes from work done in the last 5 years?
I imagine maintanence. Even if they decided not to pursue any new products, features, or other major updates, keeping their services updated and providing various B2B support is a big part of keeping the whole thing running. It's not glamorous, but it is very specialized and requires top talent even for bug fixes, security patches, etc. at that level.
> All these profits come from something that was built - in person - in pre pandemic work organisation, so we know that this was was successful.
This is very true.
It is also true that these built products were operated in a remote work environment - meaningful, and significantly enhanced profits were extracted when operating these assets remotely vs operating them in person. Sample size is small of course and time will tell.
Stadia, not a great example, build in person - launched and operated remotely. Was its failure due to it being poorly built or poorly operated? Fellow owner and former user of the service, I didnt think it was that bad technically, but understand I am in the significant minority on that one.
Which part of the Google offer significantly changed thanks to work done during the pandemic ? All these profits come from something that was built - in person - in pre pandemic work organisation, so we know that this was was successful. The only big thing that I can think of on Google side that was supposed to take off during the pandemic is Stadia. I own one, and it's an understatement to say that it did not deliver on its promises. It is not the first Google product that fails, and it is hard to say if the failure is due to remote work, but still something to consider.