Live data from Hacker News

EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

theverge.com

21–30 of 361 posts

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#21
>EU is “concerned that Google has made it harder for rival online advertising services to compete in the so-called ad tech stack.”

There are plenty of competitors in the ad tech space. China created TikTok. Korea created KaoKaoTalk. Even Japan created Line. Meanwhile, the EU, for all it's antitrust regulation, hasn't created anything substantial. Perhaps, it's the burdensome regulation that's the problem.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#23
post #11

Is there anyone who would seriously disagree ?

I disagree. I think this sets a bad precedence. Who's next? Apple? Microsoft? There needs to be some formal process in which countries can vote/object to these things. Breaking up Google has ramifications for the entire world. Europe should not abuse this sort of power. I don't see Europe breaking up Luxottica, LVHM, De Beers Group.

Google can just break off its advertising branch in the EU and keep it integrated with the main company in the rest of the world.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#24
post #2

Before anyone makes the argument that the EU should have no jurisdiction over an American entity, please remember that Google sells its services in Europe. It's well within the jurisdiction of the EU to regulate how anyone does business here. Google Ireland alone had a 50B euro turnover. The breaking up of monopolies used to be in the toolbox of American antitrust policies, back when America enforced antitrust legisl…

I used to believe that company breakups should happen automatically when they reach 1% of the country's GDP. There are lots of ways companies could avoid having the government decide how to break them up such as issuing dividends instead of hording cash, spinning off non-core businesses, setting up independent IP companies that would license back IP to the core company (and as an indpendent company, be required to license to anyone else at similar rates), and things like that. The problem comes in if one country follows this paradigm but then you have a company like Samsung that's over 20% of their host country's GDP and there's no appetite in the host country to break them up. How can your domestic companies that are limited in size compete with those of other countries with no limit on their size?

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#25
post #13

Should the US break up LVMH given how dominant they are in luxury goods?

Can you give a reasonable argument why they shouldn't? I'm not sure you're making the point you think you're making.

They think that Google doesn't have enough competition right? So they want to regulate their markets.

But as we know, Google's entire business is hugely threatened by LLMs. Over time, all companies die and get outcompeted. Google won't be any different. You don't have to regulate.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#26
post #21

>EU is “concerned that Google has made it harder for rival online advertising services to compete in the so-called ad tech stack.” There are plenty of competitors in the ad tech space. China created TikTok. Korea created KaoKaoTalk. Even Japan created Line. Meanwhile, the EU, for all it's antitrust regulation, hasn't created anything substantial. Perhaps, it's the burdensome regulation that's the problem.

EU is repeatedly shooting itself in the foot. Same old story.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#27

These rulings for a company of Google's stature/importance are always funny to me. How quickly would public opinion change if Google decided to just shut off their service in the EU for a day? Monopolistic breakups that serve the public's best interest are one thing. But how many people actually care that Google might represent a monopoly? Does it actually affect people negatively if the result is a positive online u…

I don't think either one of those points are true. The result of unregulated Google is most definitely not a positive online experience, it's rampant tracking and hoarding of information, both of which have had very real negative real world consequences. Similarly, the world does not "run on Google", what does that even mean? Gmail is but one email provider out of many. Google search is the largest player in the space, but their technological edge is slimming by the day.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#28
post #2

Before anyone makes the argument that the EU should have no jurisdiction over an American entity, please remember that Google sells its services in Europe. It's well within the jurisdiction of the EU to regulate how anyone does business here. Google Ireland alone had a 50B euro turnover. The breaking up of monopolies used to be in the toolbox of American antitrust policies, back when America enforced antitrust legisl…

> breaking up of monopolies

What’s the monopoly here? There are tons of successful ad companies.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#29

These rulings for a company of Google's stature/importance are always funny to me. How quickly would public opinion change if Google decided to just shut off their service in the EU for a day? Monopolistic breakups that serve the public's best interest are one thing. But how many people actually care that Google might represent a monopoly? Does it actually affect people negatively if the result is a positive online u…

This is insane. This is how Standard Oil started.

The public is _currently_ getting a good experience, why enforce our laws?

Oh no, they're evil now, and the only option, and they're entrenched. How could we have ever foreseen this!

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#30
post #11

Is there anyone who would seriously disagree ?

Employees, shareholders, lobbyists, "researchers" who write academic "studies" favoring the company for money, nonprofit orgs which are principally funded by donations in exchange for political support, politicians whose kids work for big tech companies. (Only reason the US didn't pass regulation against tech recently is likely that Chuck Schumer's kids work for big tech and he just... never put the vote on the schedule...)

The only reason Google has survived today while operating as pretty much a criminal enterprise is because they spread a massive amount of money to the pockets of influential people.

Post reply on HN