Weird calling them a monopoly when they only control 26% of the market for digital marketing. For comparison when Microsoft was found guilty, they had 90% of the desktop market. Att was at 100% when they were broken up. Standard oil was at 90%. Is this lowest percentage of market for a company being found monolopy?
Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
131–140 of 510 posts
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#132the 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 fact that we actually were enforcing antitrust at the time absolutely prevented MS from getting a strangehold on the consumer internet as it was taking off. It's the reason you're posting on this forum in the first place, as it was essential to the success of tech startups in the first dot-com era.
Then we stopped enforcing antitrust laws, and after about 10 years or so the new market leaders had developed the stifling set of monopolies we're all dealing with today.
Breaking up Google (which seems inevitable, this is the third distinct recent case where they've been proven to be a monopoly) is likely to be good for literally everyone, including even Google shareholders.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#133The most surprising thing about big tech is that most of them seem to be less useful than ever and yet they are making more money than ever. For example, it seems like nobody uses Oracle products anymore, yet Oracle stock is at an ATH. Microsoft Windows is less popular than ever and yet Microsoft stock is at an ATH. Apple peaked years ago and yet ATH. Does anyone still use Facebook regularly? FB stock is ATH. Somethi…
This is the classic sign of a company that has achieved monopoly.
They don't serve their customers any more because they don't have to.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#134Weird calling them a monopoly when they only control 26% of the market for digital marketing. For comparison when Microsoft was found guilty, they had 90% of the desktop market. Att was at 100% when they were broken up. Standard oil was at 90%. Is this lowest percentage of market for a company being found monolopy?
Being a monopoly is legal, it's using your monopoly status at the expense of the competition is what isn't legal.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#135Earlier 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.
I'm sure you also believe that she was asking for it because she was wearing a short skirt and your dad was right to hit you because you wouldn't shut up.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything is a monopoly if you limit the market enough.
Monopolies in and of themselves aren't a problem, and aren't illegal. Unfair leverage to prevent competition is.
Both monopolies and monopolistic actions are illegal, each alone is enough to be in violation of the law.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#137I 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.
If we must have ads, the best quality ads I see online are dumb ads. Just an image as a link. The most effective ads I see are ones on blogs where the blogger sells ad space (side columns) and they're just images that directly link to the product. The ads are relevant to the blog and readers. 99% of other online ads I see are visual garbage and irrelevant. The "targeting" is abysmal. Convincing all of these sites tha…
Sell "dumb" ads with effort made to make the ads simultaneously stand out and fit into the theme of the site. Like how quality newspapers do it sometimes.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#138the 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.
We can't to any P2P shit on the internet, instead everything goes through a middle man who will take your money or flood you with ads.
We have bandwidth limitations on every connection, even though bandwidth is cheaper than it's ever been.
The only universal communications system is still... Regular-ass phone calls and e-mail, which is like 100+ and 50 years old respectively. Everything else is proprietary and doesn't work with other systems.
We have to launch tens of thousands of satellites and beam data into outer fucking space in order to get internet to people.
Most of the "internet" all runs in 1 of 3 cloud providers.
We are forced to use Chrome on Windows, or use a Phone to browse the web or deal with endless captchas and having to prove that we are humans.
Search engines are all fucked and barely work. Everything is full of junk and trash. Now we need that chip production to run massive data centers to train some AI on how to sift through all the trash.
I don't know who else to blame but the tech industry itself.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their business apps division is probably a billion dollar business. Their cloud generates a couple of billions in profit each year. Besides that, I don't think giving away anything for free justifies any activity. If we're trying to compare to Microsoft, remember that Internet Explorer was free, and modern day Microsoft literally owns Github.
Revenue is not really a consideration when talking about _illegal_ monopolies. That is an incorrect way to view this. It's about anti-competitive practices. That's what the laws are about (and the reason for their existence). Google is not anti-competitive. At no point am I forced or even "guided" into doing business with Google, at any stage, in any department. There are 8 billion other ad-networks out there, and th…
While you're welcome to this opinion you might want to address the fact that Google has recently lost THREE separate trials, each of which individually and separately produced a verdict that they are, in fact, in violation of laws against unfair competition.
Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules
#140The most surprising thing about big tech is that most of them seem to be less useful than ever and yet they are making more money than ever. For example, it seems like nobody uses Oracle products anymore, yet Oracle stock is at an ATH. Microsoft Windows is less popular than ever and yet Microsoft stock is at an ATH. Apple peaked years ago and yet ATH. Does anyone still use Facebook regularly? FB stock is ATH. Somethi…
Java is an Oracle product
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_(programming_language)
Oracle did what they always do, buy shit out and then milk people for money. That's all they do with it, and why nobody actually uses Oracle's JDK anymore.