Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#11

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

jbuzbee wrote: post #8
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is like a convenient highway that everyone takes to work: just because there are other routes (DuckDuckGo) it doesn't mean people will take them, and regulatory framework has to, in absence of a legitimate competitor (Japan prefers Yahoo! for some reason), treat Google as a functional monopoly. Standard Oil held down prices which was good in theory for customers, but it was devastating for competitors and thei…

>Standard Oil held down prices which was good in theory for customers, but it was devastating for competitors and their employees Uh, are you saying that Standard Oil should have made business decisions based on what was good for their competitors? This starts to get into collusion. And I understand that the theory was that Standard Oil would hold prices down, running at a loss in order to kill off all competition, t…

The problem wasn't just Standard Oil, it was the society around it. A purely free market society would see what the company was doing and close the books at that, but the government has a broader base of concerns. Namely, constituents of oil-producing regions who elected representatives to protect them.

Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow towards the Walton family. Local businesses tend to recirculate their profits within the community through investment and higher spending, resulting in a broader standard of life increase.

Europe as a whole is much more concerned with quality of life than America, so it makes sense to see why they would view Google's homogenization of habit as a potential threat.

I think it's worth considering other societies' values when debating their laws compared to your own. There's a lot that America does right that Europeans want no part of, and vice versa. It really depends on who you are as a person.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#12

Post by jbuzbee »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #11
jbuzbee wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Standard Oil held down prices which was good in theory for customers, but it was devastating for competitors and their employees Uh, are you saying that Standard Oil should have made business decisions based on what was good for their competitors? This starts to get into collusion. And I understand that the theory was that Standard Oil would hold prices down, running at a loss in order to kill off all competition, t…

The problem wasn't just Standard Oil, it was the society around it. A purely free market society would see what the company was doing and close the books at that, but the government has a broader base of concerns. Namely, constituents of oil-producing regions who elected representatives to protect them. Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow to…

> Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow towards the Walton family

Providing jobs and cheaper goods to the community sounds like it's putting wealth into the pockets of the community to me. If you can buy a gallon of milk for the kids cheaper at Walmart then you can at the corner store, you have extra money for school supplies, medicine, etc.

>Europe as a whole is much more concerned with quality of life than America

Sorry, I have to roll my eyes at that comment and move on...

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#13

Post by bpodgursky »

lilbarbarian wrote: post #7

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. Just do a search for "Chicago Hotel" on a desktop browser. Unless you have a gargantuan screen, you will not see a single organic result. You will be given a list of paid ads, and then links to Google's local results. Clicking one of those local results will tak…

I tried this, and it's true there are barely any organic results visible. 75% of what I do see are paid ads, either right bar or top bar.

But I don't see how paid ads are an example of using dominance to support their business though; paid ads are just a market that both hotels and resellers bid for space in. In fact, in my results above the google-box results are

- booking.com (ad)

- expedia.com (ad)

- priceline.com (ad)

- hotwire.com (ad)

- trivago.com (ad)

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#14

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

jbuzbee wrote: post #12
rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem wasn't just Standard Oil, it was the society around it. A purely free market society would see what the company was doing and close the books at that, but the government has a broader base of concerns. Namely, constituents of oil-producing regions who elected representatives to protect them. Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow to…

> Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow towards the Walton family Providing jobs and cheaper goods to the community sounds like it's putting wealth into the pockets of the community to me. If you can buy a gallon of milk for the kids cheaper at Walmart then you can at the corner store, you have extra money for school supplies, medicine, etc. >…

1: Unless Wal-Mart sells literally everything (health insurance, higher education, etc), then proprietors of other kinds of businesses will be hurt because average incomes have gone down. Milk may be cheaper but getting a contractor to tile my roof isn't.

2: Go to, say, Ravenna, Italy, and try to get a drink after midnight and on a weekday. You can't. The people there would rather all be on the same schedule (espresso for breakfast, big lunch with the family, work till evening, late dinner, then a stroll around town) instead of having their friendships and families be separated by the graveyard shift. As a hungry American at 2AM it was an inconvenience, but overall it works and people are happy.

If you're still unconvinced, ask a European what they think of paid parental leave, month-long vacations (inb4 productivity argument, Germany offers much longer vacations than America and has higher productivity per worker), national single-payer health care...I could go on. If Americans really, really cared about these things, we would have them by now.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#15

Post by lilbarbarian »

bpodgursky wrote: post #13
lilbarbarian wrote: post #7

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. Just do a search for "Chicago Hotel" on a desktop browser. Unless you have a gargantuan screen, you will not see a single organic result. You will be given a list of paid ads, and then links to Google's local results. Clicking one of those local results will tak…

I tried this, and it's true there are barely any organic results visible. 75% of what I do see are paid ads, either right bar or top bar. But I don't see how paid ads are an example of using dominance to support their business though; paid ads are just a market that both hotels and resellers bid for space in. In fact, in my results above the google-box results are - booking.com (ad) - expedia.com (ad) - priceline.com…

All of those companies have to pay Google the instant you click on any of those ads.

In the past (when Google was touting their "Do no evil" slogan), you would have seen at least as many or more organic results to go along with the paid ads.

By pushing the organic way below the fold, Google is drastically increasing the odds someone will click on their ad. In fact, a lot of these companies are in the organic results but instead of getting their traffic for free, they'll have to pay Google for it.

I'd like to make clear - I have no problem with Google doing things that it deems good for it's bottom line. They have every right to do that, but that is why regulators exist - to make sure that when someone becomes the dominant player, they don't then use that position to eliminate competitors and extort customers.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#16

Post by wvenable »

lilbarbarian wrote: post #7

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. Just do a search for "Chicago Hotel" on a desktop browser. Unless you have a gargantuan screen, you will not see a single organic result. You will be given a list of paid ads, and then links to Google's local results. Clicking one of those local results will tak…

It's almost as if Google's business was somehow entirely supported by advertising.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#17

Post by thomasahle »

lilbarbarian wrote: post #7

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. Just do a search for "Chicago Hotel" on a desktop browser. Unless you have a gargantuan screen, you will not see a single organic result. You will be given a list of paid ads, and then links to Google's local results. Clicking one of those local results will tak…

I tried it: http://i.imgur.com/a45wZdf.png

And while the top 'results' were not 'organic', they were not ads either. They were simply the top rated hotels on google maps near Chicago.

When I clicked on 'More hotel', I was taken to google maps, which showed me top rated hotels as well as ads for hotels.

In terms of giving me the most relevant results, I think this is pretty close.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#18

Post by jbuzbee »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #14
jbuzbee wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Think of it like Wal-Mart: it may provide jobs and cheaper goods to a community, but the wealth is a net outflow towards the Walton family Providing jobs and cheaper goods to the community sounds like it's putting wealth into the pockets of the community to me. If you can buy a gallon of milk for the kids cheaper at Walmart then you can at the corner store, you have extra money for school supplies, medicine, etc. >…

1: Unless Wal-Mart sells literally everything (health insurance, higher education, etc), then proprietors of other kinds of businesses will be hurt because average incomes have gone down. Milk may be cheaper but getting a contractor to tile my roof isn't. 2: Go to, say, Ravenna, Italy, and try to get a drink after midnight and on a weekday. You can't. The people there would rather all be on the same schedule (espress…

> 2: Go to, say, Ravenna, Italy

Not to pick on Italy, but:

http://ycharts.com/indicators/italy_youth_unemployment_rate_...

So I wouldn't exactly want to model my economy on Italy.

>If you're still unconvinced, ask a European...

I've spent a lot of time in Europe and had long discussions in the pubs. Great times, nice folks, and I look forward to visiting again. but I still prefer the US.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#19

Post by kllrnohj »

avmich wrote: post #2

"Google argues that the commission's proposed remedies, which include obliging its website to display ads "sourced and ranked" by rival companies, would only have a legal basis if it were a monopoly provider of essential supplies such as gas or electricity." Interesting. So, Google isn't a monopoly or web search that it provides isn't essential supply. That means, as I understand, there are plenty of comparable rival…

Important and essential have two distinctily different meanings.

Also note that this is about product search not search.

Re: Google finally responds to Europe's antitrust charges

#20

Post by thedevil »

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #3
avmich wrote: post #2

"Google argues that the commission's proposed remedies, which include obliging its website to display ads "sourced and ranked" by rival companies, would only have a legal basis if it were a monopoly provider of essential supplies such as gas or electricity." Interesting. So, Google isn't a monopoly or web search that it provides isn't essential supply. That means, as I understand, there are plenty of comparable rival…

Google is like a convenient highway that everyone takes to work: just because there are other routes (DuckDuckGo) it doesn't mean people will take them, and regulatory framework has to, in absence of a legitimate competitor (Japan prefers Yahoo! for some reason), treat Google as a functional monopoly. Standard Oil held down prices which was good in theory for customers, but it was devastating for competitors and thei…

"Google is like a convenient highway"

If I have an idea for a better highway and money to build it, I still can't just build the highway. If I have a better idea for a search engine, I could wipe out Google.

Google is exposed to market forces, the highway isn't. Your analogy doesn't work at all.

Post reply on HN