Talks the US government may pursue a similar case got me wondering? Should Google have to sell its search engine or its retail business? Seems they are certainly heading for antitrust issue like we saw in the early 20th century and again in in the 1970s?
Post Reply
1 of 1
Google and the European judgement?
1,608 Views |
19 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by agmag90
It'll open up a major can of worms. Amazon would be at risk too I would think.
I agree, another new development that we have to watch is new media and it's huge power.
I was pissed the other day when I went to Fry's and they didn't offer to sell me Best Buy products.
But Fry`s doesn't control how you get to the mall, own the mall and you can only get to Best Buy by going through a maze of stores all owned by Fry`s ( but you don't even know that) .
That's a way more accurate example. They have 80% of the world search market. Sooner or later they will be broken open up. They will have to decide what they want to be.
That's a way more accurate example. They have 80% of the world search market. Sooner or later they will be broken open up. They will have to decide what they want to be.
Your choice to use google or not. Pretty simple.
Agnzona said:
But Fry`s doesn't control how you get to the mall, own the mall and you can only get to Best Buy by going through a maze of stores all owned by Fry`s ( but you don't even know that) .
That's a way more accurate example. They have 80% of the world search market. Sooner or later they will be broken open up. They will have to decide what they want to be.
Google owns all malls and transportation methods? Damn my stock price should be much higher.
I think it would do more harm than good to break them up. Who is harmed by Google owning 80% of the search market? The consumer? As a consumer, I have a choice of whether or not to use Google, Bing or any other search engine and the cost to switch to a different search engine is $0. The original concept of anti-trust law is to prevent anti-competitive behavior, and Google dominates the market by having a vastly superior user experience, not by doing something to prevent me from using a different service. Given the massive amount of information they have on search history, their search function keeps getting better and better.
In terms of them offering various integrated services, I love the fact that gmail, maps, youtube, my picture gallery, etc are all integrated and can be accessed on any platform with one login.
Also, breaking Google up weakens IOS's only real competitor, Android.
I think politicians need to look at the monopolies from a prospective of what harm is being created from the Company's behavior, not just looking at market size. Breaking up Google would hurt the user experience.
In terms of them offering various integrated services, I love the fact that gmail, maps, youtube, my picture gallery, etc are all integrated and can be accessed on any platform with one login.
Also, breaking Google up weakens IOS's only real competitor, Android.
I think politicians need to look at the monopolies from a prospective of what harm is being created from the Company's behavior, not just looking at market size. Breaking up Google would hurt the user experience.
AggieStan said:
Your choice to use google or not. Pretty simple.
Not when they are a defecto monopoly.
Also more worrisome than the size and dominance in one market, is owning the entire process barometer Adelphia to Zimbabwe. There are lots of industry that we dont let one company play in all aspects from raw materials, to MFG, distribution and then retail.
I'm not necessarily advocating breaking them up I'm just speculating it eventually will happen. Especially since the search engine is the modern day road.
I'm not necessarily advocating breaking them up I'm just speculating it eventually will happen. Especially since the search engine is the modern day road.
Not sure if anyone here reads stratechery, but he wrote about about the impact of monopolies on the tech industry. The article is mostly about Facebook, but I think there are a lot of similarities between Facebook and Google's business (at least, more so than they are to amazon and apple).
Facebook and the cost of monopoly
I don't subscribe to his daily letter, but he has a pretty good free-mium site and posts a free article weekly. It's a great introduction to tech industry business models for someone with a little bit of business or economics background.
EDIT: His free article today is on the very topic of Google and anti trust. Worth a read.
Ends, Means, and Antitrust
Facebook and the cost of monopoly
I don't subscribe to his daily letter, but he has a pretty good free-mium site and posts a free article weekly. It's a great introduction to tech industry business models for someone with a little bit of business or economics background.
EDIT: His free article today is on the very topic of Google and anti trust. Worth a read.
Ends, Means, and Antitrust
Can't wait til the GoogleZon happens.
I think this is what the argument turns on. Standard Oil and Ma Bell were legit monopolies. You really didn't have a choice to use a business other than them. The option just didn't exist. While Google and Amazon are convenient as hell, there are other options readily available to consumers to do what Google and Amazon can do.AggieStan said:
Your choice to use google or not. Pretty simple.
In that article linked earlier the author states a monopoly by customer choice is still a monopoly. So even if there are a thousand competitors but Google has market domination its still has all the negatives bid a more traditional monopoly dispite choice.
I disagree with that line of thinking. Using customer choice as a defining metric in the determination of monopolistic market share destroys the incentive to develop and grow within a marketplace. It's like the government placing a cap on success.
If they are a monopoly by customers choice? Why break them up?
And google isn't a search monopoly, they are an ad space monopoly by virtue of being the most popular search engine. but what is the government going to do? Force search users to use Bing or something? How do you actually break up google? Make their search engine worse so people seek alternative searches and advertisers go elsewhere?
And google isn't a search monopoly, they are an ad space monopoly by virtue of being the most popular search engine. but what is the government going to do? Force search users to use Bing or something? How do you actually break up google? Make their search engine worse so people seek alternative searches and advertisers go elsewhere?
Two things:
The nature of social networks makes the first company to establish the network an immovable force in that sector. That's why no matter how much money google spent on google plus, they couldn't compete with Facebook. The social network itself is a monopoly.
AI requires vast information databases in order to function correctly. This means that the first company to acquire a sufficient dataset will become the dominant force in that industry. No other company will ever be as good because the AI with access to the most data will always prevail.
These two realities will need to be the subject of the next anti-trust cases in the near future.
The nature of social networks makes the first company to establish the network an immovable force in that sector. That's why no matter how much money google spent on google plus, they couldn't compete with Facebook. The social network itself is a monopoly.
AI requires vast information databases in order to function correctly. This means that the first company to acquire a sufficient dataset will become the dominant force in that industry. No other company will ever be as good because the AI with access to the most data will always prevail.
These two realities will need to be the subject of the next anti-trust cases in the near future.
Facebook wasn't the first - it wasn't even the second or third.Ag$08 said:
Two things:
The nature of social networks makes the first company to establish the network an immovable force in that sector. That's why no matter how much money google spent on google plus, they couldn't compete with Facebook. The social network itself is a monopoly.
AI requires vast information databases in order to function correctly. This means that the first company to acquire a sufficient dataset will become the dominant force in that industry. No other company will ever be as good because the AI with access to the most data will always prevail.
These two realities will need to be the subject of the next anti-trust cases in the near future.
But I agree that it would be very hard to unseat facebook.
Right, and Google wasn't the first, second or third. Both just ended up being the BEST!Solo Tetherball Champ said:Facebook wasn't the first - it wasn't even the second or third.Ag$08 said:
Two things:
The nature of social networks makes the first company to establish the network an immovable force in that sector. That's why no matter how much money google spent on google plus, they couldn't compete with Facebook. The social network itself is a monopoly.
AI requires vast information databases in order to function correctly. This means that the first company to acquire a sufficient dataset will become the dominant force in that industry. No other company will ever be as good because the AI with access to the most data will always prevail.
These two realities will need to be the subject of the next anti-trust cases in the near future.
But I agree that it would be very hard to unseat facebook.
It isn't a monopoly simply because they are the preferred brand, it is a monopoly when they are doing things to prevent competition. If Google truly is pushing their own stores over others' stores, then that will hurt their reputation as the best place to go to find products, opening the door for a competitor to come in and steal some market share. But no one is stopping a competitor from entering the marketplace (Bing, Baidu, Yahoo!, etc.).
Google just needs to buy a few career politicians to make this problem go away. Google did everything right to get to be the biggest and the best and Eric Schmitt and Sergei Brin can just buy some scummy career politicians like the world is full of to make the Monopoly problem go away. And Google will announce a change was made to their algorithms which nobody really understands and BOOM, it's over and politicians like John McCain and Angela Merkel can buy another summer home.
I'll be adding to my Google on any further weakness.
I'll be adding to my Google on any further weakness.
THIS. Google earned their % of the market because they offered a superior user experience and users chose to go there. Keep in mind Google was not the first search engine.The Wonderer said:
I disagree with that line of thinking. Using customer choice as a defining metric in the determination of monopolistic market share destroys the incentive to develop and grow within a marketplace. It's like the government placing a cap on success.
Featured Stories
See All
14:28
15h ago
6.9k
Comparing metrics from Texas A&M's top teams throughout history
by David Sandhop
13:53
10h ago
2.0k
Reliever Evan Aschenbeck's JUCO path led him to Aggieland success
by Ryan Brauninger
43:16
12h ago
4.4k
Elko encouraged by strides exhibited during A&M's second scrimmage
by Olin Buchanan
12:56
14h ago
6.6k
Rattlin' Boggin' with Aggie sluggers Jace LaViolette & Hayden Schott
by Ryan Brauninger
ChillyAg19
Texas A&M Offers Colorado OT Savion Washington (Transfer Portal)
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6