Live data from Hacker News

Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

nytimes.com

251–260 of 383 posts

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#251
post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is obviously the ask: why doesn't government unmix the omelet. Your very body unscrambles the omelet and makes you. It's what intelligent things do when they are moving agency into the proper places. what is the purpose of regulation except to resist entropy in such strategic places?

Progressive corporate taxation would give the market an incentive to do spinoffs and undo the merger wave. Or we could just roll antitrust policy back to what it was before Ronald Reagan and Robert Bork installed the Consumer Welfare Standard, the idea that companies must be allowed to merge if they can scribble a tall tale with crayons on butcher paper about how the merger will benefit consumers, for sure, pinky pro…

Progressive corporate taxation would lead to every company splitting its revenue and expenses across 50 shell companies, without actually splitting operations.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#252

We should just progressively tax monopolies. Companies will break themselves up to compete, no decade long DOJ case needed.

You may be surprised to learn that the US corporate tax (yes, that one, the main one we already have and everyone pays) was originally introduced in 1909 specifically as an antitrust measure, to clip the wings of US Steel and Standard Oil. Of course the best laid taxes always get abused or turn into something else entirely.

> Of course the best laid taxes always get abused or turn into something else entirely.

Can you explain this more?

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... for those who think that Trump is an outlier. No, just a slight acceleration to a very much established trend.

People used to joke that W was the bottom of the barrel, then the GOP did a hold my beer and dug a little deeper.

Crazy to think there were no GOP presidents between Bush and Trump. I first interpreted this as the new record low is lower than the old record low. But no, Trump was the very next one.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#254
post #2

That "Lake America" is doing a hell of a lot of work for Google

The judge was appointed by Clinton, so they've been in their role for decades now. It seems unlikely that someone who has served that long in her position would rule based on making the child in the White House happy.

Clinton was a neoliberal. Not an expert, but I thought for a long time the vision of anti-trust being democracy-preserving (or at least preventing corporations from being able to compete with the government for power) was replaced by a view "consumer harm" was the only concern of anti-trust law. Basically focusing on pricing competition.

Read more about SCOTUS justice Robert Bork who ushered in the modern anti-trust viewpoint.

E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antitrust_Paradox

> Bork argues that the original intent of antitrust laws as well as economic efficiency makes consumer welfare and the protection of competition, rather than competitors, the only goals of antitrust law.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#255

Slightly tangential thought: My belief is: legislation needs to either make it just as hard to merge two companies as it is to unmerge them, or make it just as easy to unmerge two companies as it is to merge them. It's insane to me that for how often companies merge and cause competition issues, we effectively never see the opposite happen. I know there's a ceremonial approval for merging two companies (at least in t…

This point of view has more to do with your information diet than it does with reality. Companies un-merge and spin out all the time, for many reasons. Mergers and acquisitions are more interesting because they are often associated with a growth story. We like success. Aswath Damodaran, who teaches corporate finance at NYU Stern, has a bunch of great talks and content about this where he discusses how companies shoul…

>What we are seeing with some of these big tech companies is that they are transitioning from an exciting growth story into an extractive dividend story in a way that's becoming harmful to consumers.

Alphabet is rolling out autonomous driving vehicles in many cities around the USA, potentially getting rid of the need to drive a car in 90% of today's use cases.

How is this not still an exciting growth story? My kids might never need to drive a vehicle, even though we live in a car dependent suburb.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#256

Slightly tangential thought: My belief is: legislation needs to either make it just as hard to merge two companies as it is to unmerge them, or make it just as easy to unmerge two companies as it is to merge them. It's insane to me that for how often companies merge and cause competition issues, we effectively never see the opposite happen. I know there's a ceremonial approval for merging two companies (at least in t…

This point of view has more to do with your information diet than it does with reality. Companies un-merge and spin out all the time, for many reasons. Mergers and acquisitions are more interesting because they are often associated with a growth story. We like success. Aswath Damodaran, who teaches corporate finance at NYU Stern, has a bunch of great talks and content about this where he discusses how companies shoul…

> This point of view has more to do with your information diet than it does with reality. Companies un-merge and spin out all the time, for many reasons.

That’s condescending and wrong. Mergers and acquisitions are hundreds of times more common than spinoffs.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This point of view has more to do with your information diet than it does with reality. Companies un-merge and spin out all the time, for many reasons. Mergers and acquisitions are more interesting because they are often associated with a growth story. We like success. Aswath Damodaran, who teaches corporate finance at NYU Stern, has a bunch of great talks and content about this where he discusses how companies shoul…

>What we are seeing with some of these big tech companies is that they are transitioning from an exciting growth story into an extractive dividend story in a way that's becoming harmful to consumers. Alphabet is rolling out autonomous driving vehicles in many cities around the USA, potentially getting rid of the need to drive a car in 90% of today's use cases. How is this not still an exciting growth story? My kids m…

Some cute tech projects do not justify a massive monopoly. Google is financing Waymo using the ~300 billion dollar it extracts annually from consumers via ad spending. I would rather pay substantially less on anything I buy, and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... for those who think that Trump is an outlier. No, just a slight acceleration to a very much established trend.

People used to joke that W was the bottom of the barrel, then the GOP did a hold my beer and dug a little deeper.

Crazy to think that, despite trump existing, the Democrats still lost two elections to him.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#259
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation needed. The idea that somehow my mum can't even find the space bar on her keyboard and yet is competent enough to go through several warning screens to install a custom .apk is just laughable.

> is competent enough to go through several warning screens What about "is incompetent enough to press the buttons when the nice man from Microsoft calls about the viruses on her USB"?

She's laugh at him and disconnect. She might not know where the space bar is but she's not an idiot.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#260
post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What we are seeing with some of these big tech companies is that they are transitioning from an exciting growth story into an extractive dividend story in a way that's becoming harmful to consumers. Alphabet is rolling out autonomous driving vehicles in many cities around the USA, potentially getting rid of the need to drive a car in 90% of today's use cases. How is this not still an exciting growth story? My kids m…

Some cute tech projects do not justify a massive monopoly. Google is financing Waymo using the ~300 billion dollar it extracts annually from consumers via ad spending. I would rather pay substantially less on anything I buy, and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

A product/service that can drastically reduce the top cause of injury and death, as well as give safe mobility to so many who do not currently have it is not a "cute tech project".

>I would rather pay substantially less on anything I buy, and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

Alphabet's entire revenue divided by the total amount of goods and services sold is miniscule, so I don't see how it could be mathematically possible to pay substantially less on anything you buy.

>and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

This is the free market sorting out self-driving cars.

Post reply on HN