Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 524 posts

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#451

Post by jnwatson »

nhumrich wrote: post #432
missedthecue wrote: post #334

I think we need a better term than monopoly, that separates it from what people usually mean which is 'the best product'. I literally cannot think of any sort of product or service with lower switching costs than internet search. Typing bing.com takes 0.8 seconds and costs $0. Hundreds of orders of magnitude easier than switching to a different railroad if only one goes through your town. Google is a big ass company…

Monopoly is not "large, even 100% market share". Monopoly is when they use that market share to compete in _an entire different market_ without actually earning the "best" spot. Or using their dominance to prevent competition entirely from succeeding. For example: Blocking all ad-tracking on its own browser, except ads purchased through its own ad network. Remember, _you_ are not the customer of Google. You are the p…

No, that's abuse of monopoly power. It isn't illegal to be a monopoly. It is illegal to a abuse that position.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#452

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

nine_k wrote: post #409
t0mas88 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google is offering a free browser, while making a good browser costs money. They are subsidising that by their huge ad-business. And by no surprise, their browser is the only major one that has no privacy protection features and last month decided to abandon the plan to deprecate cookies and tracking. That browser is competing with someone like Opera (used to be a paid for product) and Mozilla in an unfair way, becau…

There was exactly the same kind of lawsuit in France some years ago: free Google Maps insidiously put paid cartography companies without any special features out of business. The antitrust legislation protects consumers, not businesses. If Linux provides for free what a proprietary software offered for money, it's a net win, even if that company goes out of business. The problem with Chrome is not that it's free. The…

> Ironically the default search engine deals is how Firefox acquires most of its funding.

Note that this also makes Chrome look like it dominates the market less which is presumably why they keep spending this money on FF.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#453

Post by layer8 »

gerash wrote: post #423
layer8 wrote: post #320

The root of all the “evil” here is ads. I have no particular solutions to suggest — though banning paid ads altogether sounds like a worthwhile idea, apart from the definitional difficulties — but I believe that’s the aspect that needs to be tackled one way or the other.

Of course you think this way because you're the consumer of the free ad-funded internet services.

I'd gladly pay for all internet services I use in an ad-free world. Indeed I already do pay for a quite number of services.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#454

Post by antihipocrat »

chipdart wrote: post #438
antihipocrat wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not quite what the parent meant. There is a choice between very few phone manufacturers, and even less mobile operating systems. Don't want to sign up to one multinational behemoth? Well, your choice is to sign up to one other multinational behemoth.

> There is a choice between very few phone manufacturers, and even less mobile operating systems. I don't think that the manufacturer assertion is true at all. You can go to any random online store and get dozens of brands and manufacturers. It just so happens that popular demand focuses only on a hand full of manufacturers who are outcompeting everyone in the free market. Take a look even to Android's market share.…

Parent used the word oligopoly. Your comment and links seem to agree?

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#455

Post by wizzwizz4 »

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #323
nox101 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without Google subsidizing Chrome, a real competitive market for browsers might emerge Without Chrome there will be only be Safari and Edge

I don't that Edge would survive without Chrome. I think it would be more fair to say that without Chrome, there will only be Safari, Firefox, Ladybird, and Verso. Yes, the latter two aren't ready yet, but I get they would gain fast traction in Chrome's absence.

You're forgetting Dillo, lynx, elinks and NetSurf.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#456

Post by bentice »

jonhohle wrote: post #175
bentice wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To exist on the internet you need to pay Google. Google is essentially the government of the open web. The problem is that government like monopolies do arise especially when there are network effects. We need to regulate search and app stores like it is a public utility. Pricing should be dutch auction or something provably fair. 20-30% for in-app purchases is obviously insane when credit cards do 1.5-3.5%. I worry…

Credit card companies do one thing - process payments. What cut do VOD or music hosting sites take? Bandcamp takes 15%. eBay takes 15% on things they never physically touch. It’s hard finding hard data, but it seems like YouTube, on average charges $15CPM and pays $5CPM to the highest paid YouTubers. What is the value of download hosting and store platform?

If the app is free they still have to maintain the app store. I have a free app apple checks it. Running an app store is part of the cost of the phone. No one would buy the phone if they couldn't download apps.

If they must charge 20% why don't they also let apps take credit cards? 20% is for the payment, its a tax. Why should Spotify have to pay 20% and Apple music effectively doesn't.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#457

Post by bentice »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #169
bentice wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To exist on the internet you need to pay Google. Google is essentially the government of the open web. The problem is that government like monopolies do arise especially when there are network effects. We need to regulate search and app stores like it is a public utility. Pricing should be dutch auction or something provably fair. 20-30% for in-app purchases is obviously insane when credit cards do 1.5-3.5%. I worry…

The question then becomes: Are users going to be willing to pay google (or whatever search) now instead? I don't think the vast majority of the internet understands how the business model of the internet works.

Let them make profit. We probably should have to pay for traffic and advertisement on the web. But regulate it so that there cannot be price gouging. For instance there are maximum interest chargeable on loans. You should be able to loan money at interest but there is a point where you are just using your power to economically exploit others. Especially if there is no option.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#458

Post by randomdata »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #430
fooker wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point. The actual customer is the one buying ads. It's comically difficult to avoid Google if you're the one who wants to show ads.

Nope, you missed the point. Google isn't paying apple for advertisers, they are paying for distribution of eyeballs. You get the eyes, you get the ads.

You’re right that there is a cost to producing a product, but the question was about the switching cost to the customer. At very least there is a direct labour cost to move the ads from Google to something else, so it is obviously not 0 like the out-to-lunch comment claimed earlier. Although I think we all know the switching cost is going to be way higher than that as the aforementioned spend on building the product isn't fruitless.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#459

Post by bentice »

thehappypm wrote: post #256
bentice wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To exist on the internet you need to pay Google. Google is essentially the government of the open web. The problem is that government like monopolies do arise especially when there are network effects. We need to regulate search and app stores like it is a public utility. Pricing should be dutch auction or something provably fair. 20-30% for in-app purchases is obviously insane when credit cards do 1.5-3.5%. I worry…

What are you even talking about? you actually do not need to pay Google a dime to be on the Internet, if you have good SEO you can be on the top of the page

Why does anyone pay google to advertise? Most people don't have adblocker they get a paid for link often.

There are also a range of topics google will not return the best ranked information. There are a ton of political issues (due to advertiser pressure) where the different results are huge when you search in duckduckgo vs google. This is monopoly power to decide what gets seen and what doesn't get seen.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#460

Post by throwaway743 »

missedthecue wrote: post #334

I think we need a better term than monopoly, that separates it from what people usually mean which is 'the best product'. I literally cannot think of any sort of product or service with lower switching costs than internet search. Typing bing.com takes 0.8 seconds and costs $0. Hundreds of orders of magnitude easier than switching to a different railroad if only one goes through your town. Google is a big ass company…

In terms of the control they have over people's livelihoods when it comes to the play store and admob, and their incredible lack of care/customer service, yeah they're getting away with murder and totally a monopoly and acting like one.
Post reply on HN