Content that you have to sign in to see..but which is linked to from SERPs as if "what you click is what you'll get to" is , in my view, ( and in the minds of all of us who were on the web before Google ) "cloaking" ..That Google have redefined the word via "googlespeak" ( as they have many other words ) .."bait and switch" is still bait and switch, even when Googlespeak says it isn't..so that they can crawl what is hidden from visitors..I seem to remember Google saying on multiple occasions that it was bad user experience to hide content behind registration..But they always did give Pinterest "a pass" when it comes to misrepresention.. Case in point..I have many EMDs..I have many that are single pages..some of them I made Pinterest accounts for ( to block anyone else using the domain names there )..One of them in particular is a 6 letter word.com..One page of content..I made it a Pinterest account, which has no content at all..When you search for the word..the Pinterest account ( which is totally devoid of content ) ranks higher than the actual domain..Purely because Google and Pinterest share backers..and so Google "boosts" Pinterest in SERPs..
Another "view" of the Google AMP announcement..
I would recommend reading the comment from "thames" about three quarters of the way down this page..where "thames" gives the detailed figures for what is happening ( data used and "calls" made" by the browser ) when one views the first page of the article..the page I linked to above..
That is precisely where the problem is..There was a time when sites had content and ads which loaded fast and didn't annoy the users, or pose security risks, or track users from site to site ..
But that was before all the tracking crap that the ad networks now include..
Google and their pals have made the problem..
And now they are saying the solution is to have them running a white-listed ( by the adblockers ) walled garden content delivery network, for them and their content and image scraping friends, so that their ads and tracking can still get through..
Meanwhile sites which are not in AMP ( but whose content has been scraped to fill the sites who are in AMP ) will be seen as slower, and assessed by Google's algos as slower..and ranked further down SERPs..where they will slide still further as Google's friends get the "Google super fast highway just for our friends boost"..or maybe Google will offer to host all of us, for free..as long as we let them monetise all of our content, and place their unstoppable, unblockable, alternative replacement for adsense around it..Is becoming a digital share-cropper the future for independent webmasters, or will the "Google's super fast highway for our friends" just push independent webmasters aside, while taking their content to show the end users..
Yes ..their example pages and "example" landing pages look like crap..and are very user unfriendly in so many ways that the list would be long..But I don't think that the user friendliness nor the look was uppermost in their minds..pushing the ads as fast as possible down a fat exclusive tube for them and their friends was what was and is first and foremost in their minds..
They pay but lip service to the concept of think of the users..they now have the mindshare..the users are as cattle with mesmerised eyeballs to be sold or rented to the advertisers..or the ad agencies who are handling their "online ad spend/ budgets"..