Breaking up Google

[jkuest]

Google has a monopoly on internet search of about 80% in some countries. At the same time they offer clients advertising plans using their "inside knowledge" to mastermind the desired campaigns for the client. Its just not correct. They use their monopoly and knowledge to make money in a market, which is controlled by them. Considering the high puplic interest in internet search, this monopoly should be broken up like other monopolies in the industry before. I dont see the difference, especially referring to the Premium Campaigns.

[Marcia]

Just what could a search engine be broken up into? How do you break up a website?

[moltar]

html, images, css.. etc :)

[drewls]

There's a big difference between being a monopoly and just being the favorite of the majority. Of course it's very difficult to tell this to the 'sour grapes' crowd who chooses to have a different favorite, as they are always screaming 'monopoly'.

Laws against monopolies don't exist to stifle success. They exist to stop companies from having an unfair advantage. Does google have an advantage? Yes. Is it unfair? No. Any other search engine could have been or could be as powerful as Google. All it takes is being good enough for the people to take notice.

All I can say is, learn what a monopoly is before you go around accusing Google of being one.

[OntheEdge]

like other monopolies

They may be dominant, but they are not a monopoly. A monopoly is 100%, no competition whatsoever. The internet is free enterprise, despite the perception some have. Google started from scratch and earned every bit of the stronghold they have. Nobody forces a user to use Google, they chose to because they offer what they're looking for.

[Yidaki]

> They use their xyz and knowledge to make money in a market, which is controlled by them.

Honestly, wouldn't you do the same? What'd be *your* response to such customer's concerns about your huge market share, then?

[stcrim]

And every time something gets broken up - the price goes up while quality and service go down.

There is no such thing as equality in business! And every time the government tries to steal from those working hard and doing well and give to those not working as hard or doing as well - we the consumer lose.

Remember - no one even heard of Google a few years ago and yet they were smart enough to climb to the top by building a better product.

Google is a prime example of what living in a free society is all about...

-s-

[edited by: stcrim at 4:12 pm (utc) on Aug. 10, 2003]

[Shak]

Considering the high puplic interest in internet search, this monopoly should be broken up like other monopolies in the industry before. I dont see the difference, especially referring to the Premium Campaigns.

Had it not been for companies such as Google, there would be NO high interest in search, and we would be having flash banners pop-up out of our morning cereal.

as for premium campaigns, well they are due to stop on 31st december 2003, but is the real reason not because you are having to pay more than early-thinkers who secured cheap CPM campaigns?

if they do break it up, can I have all the servers please, and a few friends of mine would like the algo ;)

Shak

[kelvinhui]

Agree with Shak :)

[Yidaki]

>a few friends of mine would like the algo

Didn't know that we are friends, Shak. You're welcome! :)

[richardb]

jkuest

If you don't like G's monopoly, champion another SE and let people know about it. I cannot even begin to count the number of people that I "told about" G and the money that they have subsequently spent... ...hell I should be on a commission.

---

we would be having flash banners pop-up out of our morning cereal.

Quite a vision Shak, must have been an OTT weekend ;)

Rich

[claus]

hmm... monopoly has become such a bad word lately, even dominant position is a bad word it seems. In strict economic terms, neither is bad for society as a whole, unless the costs of letting the company do it's business is higher than the return of that same business to society as a whole.

I'm not sure if Googles dominant position is really such a good thing or if it is really a bad thing, i'm just stating that a monopoly or a dominant market position need not be a bad thing in all cases.

/claus

[JasonHamilton]

1) Google does not own the market. They have a large percentage of the market, but they do not have a monopoly. Remember a few years back, Altavista was king, and some people said it was futile to challenge their search.

2) I don't see what google could do in order to prevent competition. In fact, since there are search engines from MSN, Inktomi, AllTheWeb, AskJeves, etc, I can't see this argument being anything other than flame bait.

[Perplexed]

Be fair guys. makes a change from ODP bashing.

[BigDave]

Monopolies ARE NOT illegal by themselves. There are many additional actions that need to take place for it to be actionable (at least in the USA)

I recommend that before you decide that google is an *illegal* monopoly, you need to read the US Code and learn the definitions. It needs to be a monopoly of trade or commerce that illegally restrains trade *in a specific market*.

Not only do they need to be a monopoly in a specific market, but they need to use that advantage illegally. It is really hard to show damages in a market where everything is free, and the company that is being accused is the only one in the market that never seems to violate any laws. In fact they have the market share that they do largely because they have never sold their search results.

There was noting illegal about Microsoft having a monopoly on desktop operating systems. What was illegal was using that position to force computer manufacturers to not include other software on the system (netscape). They have also gotten in trouble for price fixing.

Now it will be almost impossible to charge google with anything given they run a FREE SERVICE. And it sounds like in the search advertising business, Overture sells as many ads as google does.

If Google were to start controlling 90+% of the ads on the entire web, it would be a different story. But even then, they would have to still have to break specific laws to get in trouble. If they keep their 90% by dealing fairly, they will be acting within the law.

[EquityMind]

There is no monopoly with Google although the perception may be so. With Yahoo's acquisition of Overture and Inktomi, you will see a shift in power soon but then with the impending Google IPO, the balance could shift back into the majority. This industry moves too fast for anyone to be considered a monopoly and monopolies take time to build. By the time the federal government even launches an investigation, the competitive landscape could change yet again.

EquityMind

[g1smd]

>> A monopoly is 100%, no competition whatsoever. <<

I used to think that, however I have seen it said that a monopoly is an entity with a big enough share to give other competitors problems. A industry where one company had a 40% share, and 4 other companies only 15% each, could be branded a monopoly.

However, all that being said, Google isn't a monopoly in the business sense of the word.

[mrguy]

Yes, anytime someone loses in the SERPs and doesn't get the position they think they deserve, suddenly Google becomes a monopoly.

But if they hit #1 on all their terms, that very same person thinks Google is the greatest SE in the world.

Funny how that works!

[Perplexed]

There used to be a story going the rounds about Rolls Royce cars. ( probably not true ) Apparently someone had broken down on the roadside and had the bonnet up looking at the engine. He later received a letter from Rolls Royce asking him not to do so again because it gave a bad impression. Rollers never break down.

Seems to me that until Google get so full of themselves that they start doing stuff like that we dont have too much to worry about.

Apart from which. If you start calling for monopoly regulations as soon as a company becomes over (?) successful, there would be no point in companies improving themselves.

[SinclairUser]

It seems to me that google is a choice - you can always use MSN or some other engine. Google does not have the monpoly of crawling pages either - anyone can do it.

If people choose to use something because its better does not make it a target for dismantling.

I have read articles recently that MSN may be interested in google - perhaps if it is absorbed by a monolithic corporation then we should worry.

[Herenvardo]

Of course Google is not a monopoly: there are many competitors. But it is true that, since google has an advantaged position in the Web, they are using it to accommodate themselves in the top of the market.
In other words, google is not playing very nice, but it is still within the law: it can not be broken up... by now.

Herenvardö

[jkuest]

In Germany Google now has a monopoly on internet search.
Other search engine have become absolutely irrelevant. Now even T-Online is supplying Google results. Its like there is one TV-Channel everyone is watching, their is no real competition anymore. And Google offers clients Premium Campaigns including their special knowledge on search tech.
If its your own system that isnt very hard, is it?
So who does this situation any good?

[juniperwasting]

The only reason to start breaking up companies is when said company is actively inhibiting fair trade. If google were bulling other SEs from starting up, or buying out any competition, then yes, an investigation would be in order. As it stands IMHO Google made a better mousetrap, and the people are buying it.

[Shak]

And Google offers clients Premium Campaigns including their special knowledge on search tech.

back to where we started then :)

trust me many members here on Webmasterworld know a lot more about premium campaigns than Google staff.

Shak

[jkuest]

And a company doesnt have to engage in anything illegal or not. That isnt and has never been the point in breaking up monopolies..
A controlled market is always negative for the consumer and the public. Google is making money on advertising, so webmasters and companies are consumers.

[Herenvardo]

jkuest:
You said that in Germany Google has the Internet Search monopoly. But I've entered without any problem in de.altavista.com, de.yahoo.com, etc. So, there are other search engines in Germany. So there is no monopoly anywhere.
Why most of you don't want to understand that Google has been simply successful? Of course, some of their techniques are morally questionable, but all of them are lawful.
Remember that, after all, Google is no more that a private enterprise that offers some services to earn money. The search engine is only the way to get traffic and receive more for advertisings. Since they have the most used search engine, businessmen agree to pay greater fees for sponsored links or other ads. So google is a business, not a service. The service is only a tool to make the business more reliable.

Regards,
Herenvardö

[Gus_R]

Only one can be at top, this is not a monopoly.
If google loses quality and other se improves, people will simply switch.
IMO google deserves the 80% comparing the rest.

[egomaniac]

Socialism and communism are thoroughly discredited. All they do is destroy freedom, people's wealth, and people's lives.

Google is #1 because people like it.

No monopoly can exist for very long. Someone will always out innovate it. In the industrial age, this took many years for people to see the effects of change. Sometimes this took so long it felt as if a monopoly was permanent - it never was. Now in the information age, a "monopoly" only lasts a short amount of time before a new competitive threat can put a company out of business.

That's why smart companies constantly reinvent themselves. They "put themselves out of business" every few years.

Stop whining about monopolies and make a better search engine if you don't like the situation.

[Herenvardo]

Gus_R:
I completely agree :)
You have summarized in two lines what I tried to explain. Wonderful!;):):):)
Egomaniac:
I completely agree with you, too: If somebody doesn't like it, they are allowed to try to make someone better!;) :P

Herenvardö

[ritualcoffee]

well - there are plenty of grass roots research going on in the personalization, natural language, voice search etc.

all it takes is for one of these to break and google has a run for its money.

monopoly? nah...just sitting pretty until the next big thing.