Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline • Hacker News Board

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#61

Post by yomly » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 11:08 AM UTC

emilsedgh wrote: post #48

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * Search * GMail * Youtube * Android * Chrome * Maps * Docs Its just that Google is unable to monetize many of them. However, Facebook has only Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. 1) Instagram _is_ what Facebook was 10 years ago. Its not a new product. They just boug…

From that comparison, it is quite apparent that while Facebook may have a stronghold on your hours per day, and have richer personal data on the individual, Google has access to a far more diverse dataset from its users.

For example, there have been talk about how search has shown promise in early cancer diagnosis [0].

So as you say, while Google are currently only monetizing their ad platform at the moment, they are far better positioned than Facebook to quickly find new revenue streams, should they need to.

Additionally, if you should believe that AI is going to be a huge area for monetization in the near future, then Google are very much well positioned to be a leader there - it is no coincidence that a "search" company is able to make self-driving cars or Alpha Go...

[0] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/technology/online-searches...

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#62

Post by jacquesm » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 11:20 AM UTC

LoSboccacc wrote: post #40

Steeeve wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook has social data. Google knows a whole heck of a lot more than that. Adsense, GMail, Analytics, and hosting fonts for a ton of websites, for example are sources of data that provide a pretty good deal of insight as to who you are and what you are insterested in.

Facebook pixel is becoming more and more common, so they will shortly have the same data plus verified and not inferred data from their social channels. edit: now that I think of it facebook will be shortly in a position of being able to de-anonimize the internet. imagine selling that ad-space.

All it takes is a 'like' button. Even if you don't have a facebook account that's enough to track you until you re-install your machine, and even then there are ways to re-connect your profile.

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#63

Post by amelius » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 11:38 AM UTC

emilsedgh wrote: post #48

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * Search * GMail * Youtube * Android * Chrome * Maps * Docs Its just that Google is unable to monetize many of them. However, Facebook has only Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. 1) Instagram _is_ what Facebook was 10 years ago. Its not a new product. They just boug…

Of those products you name, GMail, Youtube, Chrome, Maps and Docs are near-commodity products. These are just basic services for which open-source versions exist, and every engineering team of about 50 people could easily recreate them given today's state of technology. This also holds for Facebook.

The real struggle lies not in the technology, but in the network-effect and branding.

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#64

Post by amelius » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 11:42 AM UTC

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

It saddens me that so many smart people work for IT companies like Google and Facebook, while they could make a real difference doing medical or fundamental physics research.

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#65

Post by muwaisaac » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:01 PM UTC

Nullabillity wrote: post #39

defenestration wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I reckon if Facebook would add search to WhatsApp, it could hurt Google's ad income quite a bit. Right now you have to close WhatsApp to start a search. And then come back when you have found the answer. There is potential for Facebook for smooth search integration in its products and take bigger piece of the search-ad pie.

Now on Tap does that for pretty much any application though, if you've got Marshmallow.

That's the thing though, how many android phones are on mashmellow? A very small percentage.

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#66

Post by Jabbles » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:11 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #63

emilsedgh wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * Search * GMail * Youtube * Android * Chrome * Maps * Docs Its just that Google is unable to monetize many of them. However, Facebook has only Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. 1) Instagram _is_ what Facebook was 10 years ago. Its not a new product. They just boug…

Of those products you name, GMail, Youtube, Chrome, Maps and Docs are near-commodity products. These are just basic services for which open-source versions exist, and every engineering team of about 50 people could easily recreate them given today's state of technology. This also holds for Facebook. The real struggle lies not in the technology, but in the network-effect and branding.

What do you think the thousands of engineers that work on these products are doing? You realise that there's a lot more to these products than the web interface?

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#67

Post by eulji » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:14 PM UTC

emilsedgh wrote: post #48

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

In the Google vs. Facebook discussion, I think people seem to forget a tiny detail: Google has some products that are market leaders with heavy usage, eg: * Search * GMail * Youtube * Android * Chrome * Maps * Docs Its just that Google is unable to monetize many of them. However, Facebook has only Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp. 1) Instagram _is_ what Facebook was 10 years ago. Its not a new product. They just boug…

Market leaders ? not really. They beat the competition with the oldest trick. They offered a good enough product for the cheapest price (ehm ehm for free).

I do not think these products should be free or offered at the expense of my privacy. Sadly most of the people do not feel that way.

Google is in many ways a cancer on the market (anyways most of the big companies that do it the same are like that).

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#68

Post by mtgx » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:15 PM UTC

sidcool wrote: post #11

defenestration wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Google is mostly an advertisement company relying on search. In 2015, Google's revenue amounted to 74.54 billion US dollars. It was largely made up (90%) by advertising revenue, which amounted to 67.39 billion US dollars in 2015. [1] A rough estimation is that 80% of Google's advertisement revenue comes from search. [2] 1: http://www.statista.com/statistics/266206/googles-annual-glo... 2: http://www.statista.com…

Android and GCP seem not to contribute enough yet.

Oracle seems to disagree:

http://www.businessinsider.com/oracle-google-generated-42-bi...

But while we can't take Oracle's statements at face value, how do you know Android isn't making Google money? It's also likely that without Android, Google's revenues would've declined a lot faster.

Even if say people would've still used Adsense/Admob on iOS or other mobile operating systems, look what Apple did - it allowed adblockers on its platform. Google doesn't allow them and Chrome, which is the dominant browser on Android doesn't support extensions, so no adblock there either.

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#69

Post by Theizestooke » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:20 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #64

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

It saddens me that so many smart people work for IT companies like Google and Facebook, while they could make a real difference doing medical or fundamental physics research.

To quote Jeff Hammerbacher, "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads."

Re: Google’s stock slid after report on search ad decline

#70

Post by tim333 » Sat, Jun 18, 2016, 12:23 PM UTC

amelius wrote: post #64

msoad wrote: post #2

As much as people like to consider Google revenu sources very diverse or dream about future of other Google bets, Google is mostly an advertisement company heavily relying on their search business. It's obvious that Facebook has a better position for growth and adding new channels for their ads business. I can see Facebook share of online advertising grow in the next couple of years.

It saddens me that so many smart people work for IT companies like Google and Facebook, while they could make a real difference doing medical or fundamental physics research.

Google probably makes quite a difference to medical research/treatment through its search facilities. Also this stuff http://www.forbes.com/sites/leoking/2015/08/24/google-sergey...