4 ms·

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. J

It should be clear to anyone paying attention that Google is using their dominance in search to support their businesses at the expense of their competitors. Just do a search for "Chicago Hotel" on a desktop browser. Unless you have a gargantuan screen, you will not see a single organic result. You will be given a list of paid ads, and then links to Google's local results. Clicking one of those local results will take you to another screen where you will see more paid ads, a Google Map, and a few seemingly organic results. But if you click on one of these "organic" results, Google then shows you a page where you can book a hotel room - and pay Google a fee for that.

bpodgursky 11y ago
I tried this, and it's true there are barely any organic results visible. 75% of what I do see are paid ads, either right bar or top bar. But I don't see how paid ads are an example of using dominance to support their business though; paid ads are just a market that both hotels and resellers bid for space in. In fact, in my results above the google-box results are - booking.com (ad) - expedia.com (ad) - priceline.com (ad) - hotwire.com (ad) - trivago.com (ad)
- lilbarbarian 11y ago
  All of those companies have to pay Google the instant you click on any of those ads. In the past (when Google was touting their "Do no evil" slogan), you would have seen at least as many or more organic results to go along with the paid ads. By pushing the organic way below the fold, Google is drastically increasing the odds someone will click on their ad. In fact, a lot of these companies are in the organic results but instead of getting their traffic for free, they'll have to pay Google for it. I'd like to make clear - I have no problem with Google doing things that it deems good for it's bottom line. They have every right to do that, but that is why regulators exist - to make sure that when someone becomes the dominant player, they don't then use that position to eliminate competitors and extort customers.
wvenable 11y ago
It's almost as if Google's business was somehow entirely supported by advertising.
thomasahle 11y ago
I tried it: http://i.imgur.com/a45wZdf.png http://i.imgur.com/a45wZdf.png And while the top 'results' were not 'organic', they were not ads either. They were simply the top rated hotels on google maps near Chicago. When I clicked on 'More hotel', I was taken to google maps, which showed me top rated hotels as well as ads for hotels. In terms of giving me the most relevant results, I think this is pretty close.
- Spivak 11y ago
  You have an ad blocker. This is what the actual results are on a 1080p screen. http://i.imgur.com/5Te0gmG.png http://i.imgur.com/5Te0gmG.png
  - aruggirello 11y ago
    Isn't it funny Google even states "About 650.000.000 results" in that page!?
raldi 11y ago
If you ran a search engine, what would your search results page for "chicago hotel" look like, and why would that be better for users than Google's?
- lilbarbarian 11y ago
  If I ran a search engine it'd probably look exactly like Google's. That's not the point I'm trying to make. Was Microsost wrong to use their position as the dominant OS to kill Netscape by effectively banning it from Windows installations? Was Standard Oil wrong to force railroads to not only give them massive discounts but also force the railroads to hurt Standard competitors? What Google is doing and what Microsoft or Standard Oil did are fantastically profitable tactics that insure their long-term success. The question is, should they be allowed to do that without any restrictions?
  - raldi 11y ago
    During Microsoft's heyday, if your company used Windows and you wanted to try some other OS, you were out of luck: It would be enormously expensive to transition to another one -- you'd have to buy or write all new software and retrain all your employees. But if you're a Google user and you want to switch to some other search engine... you just switch. Instantly.

bpodgursky 11y ago

I tried this, and it's true there are barely any organic results visible. 75% of what I do see are paid ads, either right bar or top bar. But I don't see how paid ads are an example of using dominance to support their business though; paid ads are just a market that both hotels and resellers bid for space in. In fact, in my results above the google-box results are - booking.com (ad) - expedia.com (ad) - priceline.com (ad) - hotwire.com (ad) - trivago.com (ad)

lilbarbarian 11y ago
All of those companies have to pay Google the instant you click on any of those ads. In the past (when Google was touting their "Do no evil" slogan), you would have seen at least as many or more organic results to go along with the paid ads. By pushing the organic way below the fold, Google is drastically increasing the odds someone will click on their ad. In fact, a lot of these companies are in the organic results but instead of getting their traffic for free, they'll have to pay Google for it. I'd like to make clear - I have no problem with Google doing things that it deems good for it's bottom line. They have every right to do that, but that is why regulators exist - to make sure that when someone becomes the dominant player, they don't then use that position to eliminate competitors and extort customers.

wvenable 11y ago

It's almost as if Google's business was somehow entirely supported by advertising.

thomasahle 11y ago

I tried it: http://i.imgur.com/a45wZdf.png http://i.imgur.com/a45wZdf.png And while the top 'results' were not 'organic', they were not ads either. They were simply the top rated hotels on google maps near Chicago. When I clicked on 'More hotel', I was taken to google maps, which showed me top rated hotels as well as ads for hotels. In terms of giving me the most relevant results, I think this is pretty close.

Spivak 11y ago
You have an ad blocker. This is what the actual results are on a 1080p screen. http://i.imgur.com/5Te0gmG.png http://i.imgur.com/5Te0gmG.png
- aruggirello 11y ago
  Isn't it funny Google even states "About 650.000.000 results" in that page!?

raldi 11y ago

If you ran a search engine, what would your search results page for "chicago hotel" look like, and why would that be better for users than Google's?

lilbarbarian 11y ago
If I ran a search engine it'd probably look exactly like Google's. That's not the point I'm trying to make. Was Microsost wrong to use their position as the dominant OS to kill Netscape by effectively banning it from Windows installations? Was Standard Oil wrong to force railroads to not only give them massive discounts but also force the railroads to hurt Standard competitors? What Google is doing and what Microsoft or Standard Oil did are fantastically profitable tactics that insure their long-term success. The question is, should they be allowed to do that without any restrictions?
- raldi 11y ago
  During Microsoft's heyday, if your company used Windows and you wanted to try some other OS, you were out of luck: It would be enormously expensive to transition to another one -- you'd have to buy or write all new software and retrain all your employees. But if you're a Google user and you want to switch to some other search engine... you just switch. Instantly.