For every impression/click payout that the clandestine "GTTP" network garners, Google the company will also have earned some profits off advertisers which'll be transferred to Google's bank account or used to build more infrastructure.
However, suppose GTTP compromise a significant or even 100% of GOOG's total ad payout; there are three possible scenarios:
a) if Adwords is operating at a loss (a la PS3, unlikely), the shares of GTTP will decrease massively, thereby depressing the shares of GOOG. However if GOOG wants to facilitate the transfer of the company of GTTP, it'd continue to operate at extreme loss by transferring more money to GTTP via Adwords loss until the shares goes down minimally $0.001 on OTC market (a la LEH). Then GTTP can acquire a worthless asset.
b) Adwords is generating a net profit more than the payout to GTTP. Net profit not in terms of net income but in the sense that the profit/intangible valuation of Google's use of revenue from GTTP's generated ads to build out infrastructure and human resources. GTTP's activity will then boost the shares of GOOG, given that GTTP generate a fixed amount of money for GOOG; using discount cashflow model, that means whatever GTTP's income cannot outpace the GTTP-GOOG Adwords unit's constantly rising valuation. (Think of this using a shareholder's dividend to cannibalize the company; or using a child's allowance to buy his/her parent).
c) Adwords is generating a net profit but less than the payout to GTTP. Basically a company distributing the bulk of its net profit to shareholders as dividend than using it to reinvest in R&D/infrastructure. In practice, GTTP's internal shareholders would likely revolt given GOOG's business model of growth (vs. say sleepier industries such as utility). But let's suppose say for the sake of the argument, that GTTP shareholders are agreement to cannibalize GOOG, they can do it! Given that the accumulated annual income generated by GTTP outpaces the market valuation of GOOG. (Think of WhatsApp founders cash out of 16B of FB stock or Mark Cuban with Broadcast.com at the height of YHOO's valuation, and the valuation of GOOG or FB decrease enough and/or they kept siphoning income to buy the company at a later time.)
However, suppose GTTP compromise a significant or even 100% of GOOG's total ad payout; there are three possible scenarios:
a) if Adwords is operating at a loss (a la PS3, unlikely), the shares of GTTP will decrease massively, thereby depressing the shares of GOOG. However if GOOG wants to facilitate the transfer of the company of GTTP, it'd continue to operate at extreme loss by transferring more money to GTTP via Adwords loss until the shares goes down minimally $0.001 on OTC market (a la LEH). Then GTTP can acquire a worthless asset.
b) Adwords is generating a net profit more than the payout to GTTP. Net profit not in terms of net income but in the sense that the profit/intangible valuation of Google's use of revenue from GTTP's generated ads to build out infrastructure and human resources. GTTP's activity will then boost the shares of GOOG, given that GTTP generate a fixed amount of money for GOOG; using discount cashflow model, that means whatever GTTP's income cannot outpace the GTTP-GOOG Adwords unit's constantly rising valuation. (Think of this using a shareholder's dividend to cannibalize the company; or using a child's allowance to buy his/her parent).
c) Adwords is generating a net profit but less than the payout to GTTP. Basically a company distributing the bulk of its net profit to shareholders as dividend than using it to reinvest in R&D/infrastructure. In practice, GTTP's internal shareholders would likely revolt given GOOG's business model of growth (vs. say sleepier industries such as utility). But let's suppose say for the sake of the argument, that GTTP shareholders are agreement to cannibalize GOOG, they can do it! Given that the accumulated annual income generated by GTTP outpaces the market valuation of GOOG. (Think of WhatsApp founders cash out of 16B of FB stock or Mark Cuban with Broadcast.com at the height of YHOO's valuation, and the valuation of GOOG or FB decrease enough and/or they kept siphoning income to buy the company at a later time.)