Google really should start floating some plans for splitting itself up. Things worked out pretty well when Ma Bell was split up. Some people thought it would all fail, but the companies have done a good job competing and cooperating at the right times. If Google comes up with the plans, it's better than some antagonist.
Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
11–20 of 510 posts
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#12Google really should start floating some plans for splitting itself up. Things worked out pretty well when Ma Bell was split up. Some people thought it would all fail, but the companies have done a good job competing and cooperating at the right times. If Google comes up with the plans, it's better than some antagonist.
Google seems harder to split up than Bell to me. Bell was split regionally which makes sense since each region has it's own wires and can make money separately. Google has the problem that all their products other than adds lose money (or make money through integration with Google adds)
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#13Google really should start floating some plans for splitting itself up. Things worked out pretty well when Ma Bell was split up. Some people thought it would all fail, but the companies have done a good job competing and cooperating at the right times. If Google comes up with the plans, it's better than some antagonist.
Google seems harder to split up than Bell to me. Bell was split regionally which makes sense since each region has it's own wires and can make money separately. Google has the problem that all their products other than adds lose money (or make money through integration with Google adds)
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#14[flagged]
Water is obviously wet, depending on your definition of "wet". Likewise Google is obviously an online advertising tech monopoly, depending on your definition of "monopoly". There might be legal or technical rationals for why these statements are not true. But practically speaking, they are obviously true and that's what should matter.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#15Google really should start floating some plans for splitting itself up. Things worked out pretty well when Ma Bell was split up. Some people thought it would all fail, but the companies have done a good job competing and cooperating at the right times. If Google comes up with the plans, it's better than some antagonist.
In what way? They all just re-consolidated back into monopolies. I have one choice of telecom provider in my location: if I don’t like Xfinity, I get to eat shit. At least Ma Bell had to get the government’s permission to raise prices; frankly, I’d prefer having that back.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#16Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#17For example, prohibiting Apple-Style search deals would mean that Google gets a smaller amount of traffic, but that traffic would come with zero cost. That could end up being more profitable. A similar argument applies to Chrome or any other customer acquisition vehicle.
The real barriers to making Google competitive are fixable but require a different sort of regulation outside of antitrust.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#18Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#19Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#20The market is being unfairly defined based on how things worked decades ago instead of looking at the modern landscape. Tech evolved rapidly and the way things worked decades ago may not be optimal for the end user as things change.
you mean, before monopolies?