Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can Google ruin your business?
I've seen countless examples, e.g. a business that depends on online advertising gets its account suspended for incorrect reasons and there is literally no-one to reach at Google to get unsuspended.
Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
121–130 of 510 posts
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#122the FTC is like Jim Cramer. Once they judge a business to be a monopoly, the business falls apart and the monopoly is irrelevant. Look at the hundreds of millions wasted on the Windows / IE monopoly trial. the AT&T break up set American technology back by decades and killed our domestic chip production.
AT&T was broken up in 1982. Our manufacturing peaked around 1990 and what really pushed it downward was China joining the WTO. We also halted a lot of fab construction domestically after the GFC of '08.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#123the FTC is like Jim Cramer. Once they judge a business to be a monopoly, the business falls apart and the monopoly is irrelevant. Look at the hundreds of millions wasted on the Windows / IE monopoly trial. the AT&T break up set American technology back by decades and killed our domestic chip production.
the AT&T break up ... killed our domestic chip production That's an interesting take that I've never heard before. Do you have any source that goes into detail?
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah. The problem with splitting up Google is that Google products, taken in isolation, are themselves keys to preventing other monopolies. Split off Android to swim on its own and we get an iPhone monopoly. Split off Workspace and we go back to the days of MSOffice's monopoly. Splitting out Chrome essentially kills the World Wide Web as an application platform as no one else wants to support it. Cloud would probably…
Split off Android to swim on its own and we get an iPhone monopoly. Why? Android appears to be profitable.
Which is to say, the parts of Android that are "profitable" are the parts tied to the broader corporate product suite.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a recommendation of an alternative that I can switch to easily and on short notice? The site I'm having trouble with gets 95% of its traffic for the year this week so I'm scrambling.
Sorry I don't - I was purely prompting the idea that there should be no anti-trust related issue that would stop you switching.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen countless examples, e.g. a business that depends on online advertising gets its account suspended for incorrect reasons and there is literally no-one to reach at Google to get unsuspended.
If you made your business become completely dependent on a third party, you were already a failure and shouldn't have a business. Being a successful businessman is not a right. It's competition.
Is a farmer "a failure who shouldn't have a business" if some asshole buys up every single railroad, port, and truck in the country he lives in?
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen countless examples, e.g. a business that depends on online advertising gets its account suspended for incorrect reasons and there is literally no-one to reach at Google to get unsuspended.
If you made your business become completely dependent on a third party, you were already a failure and shouldn't have a business. Being a successful businessman is not a right. It's competition.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#128Is this lowest percentage of market for a company being found monolopy?
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#129I would love to see a company compete in the ad space with the goal of making ads less intrusive . If ads didn't attack me and cause the viewport to jump and become obscured while reading, my first impression with the products would be better, and the sites the ads are on would get more viewership. Quality ads would be at a huge premium.
Convincing all of these sites that Google, Meta, or other services, are "superior" for ads genuinely seems like incredible marketing. They've siphoned up enormous amounts of money and in return put in place a miserable user experience while making media companies wholly reliant on them.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#130I don't think this article explains it well. Google sells ad space on behalf of the publishers and also sells the ads on behalf of the advertisers. It also runs the auction that places the ads into the ad space. See this graphic https://images.app.goo.gl/ADx5xrAnWNicgoFu7 . Parts of this can definately be broken up without destroying Google.
Breaking those parts away from google absolutely wouldn’t destroy them, over the years I’ve been so surprised from googlers at most levels explaining how much money they make from all their different services. While advertising is absolutely a big one, it’s by no means the only one, and if i understand the situation correctly, the more advertising options that are actually viable for companies will not even kill thei…