7 ms·
Google Paid Apple $1B to Keep Search Bar on iPhone
- SatoshiRoberts 11y agoI wonder how much Apple would pay for https://duckduckgo.com/ https://duckduckgo.com/ just to screw over Google.
- SatoshiRoberts 11y agoI wonder how much Google got charged for the opportunity in 2015
- SatoshiRoberts 11y agoThat's about 5% of what Google has made in profit from Android since ~2008.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- partiallypro 11y agoBing powers Siri, and I assume now powers all of the internet search functions (unsure about Safari.) So I wonder if Microsoft paid this amount, or if Apple decided that less money made more sense so they could harm their competitor?
- evanriley 11y agoI thought Siri only used Bing because Google doesn't allow services like Siri to use google.com?
- melted 11y agoPretty much. And Apple had to roll its own maps because Google would not allow Siri to use maps. Apple Maps are pretty darn good by now, so I think it's safe to assume that Apple started building their own search engine for Siri well before it made a deal with Microsoft, and Bing is a stop-gap measure. Apple likes to own its core technologies.
- ascagnel_ 11y agoNot really -- the Apple Maps vs Google Maps trouble started when Google refused to allow turn-by-turn directions until Apple started turning over more user data. If I remember right, Apple Maps launched "early" (before the deal with Google expired) in an effort to put Apple into a more powerful negotiating position.
- goatforce5 11y agoAnd if they don't control it, it makes sense for them to have multiple viable alternatives. i.e., spread the money around and don't let one player get too powerful.
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoBaidu powers Siri in China. It doesn't matter what language you set your device or Siri to.
- meepers 11y agoyou can also explicitly request Siri to search Google, and it will. you just have to ask, "Search Google XYZ" instead of "Search for XYZ."
- softawre 11y agoHeh, you made me realize I use "Google" as a synonym for search. "Google foo".
- such_a_casual 11y agoTitle is misleading. Google didn't pay up front to keep the search bar, but rather agreed to share a percentage of the revenue generated, which ended up being $1B.
- acchow 11y agoThe title should be changed to reflect this
- akvadrako 11y agowhy? It's effectively the same thing, except the risk profile is different. The resulting revenue wasn't a complete mystery so they probably knew the deal equaled about 1 billion.
- mbreese 11y agoBut the deal wasn't Google giving Apple $1B to be the default search on iOS. It was Google giving Apple a 34% share (perhaps - it's still a bit unclear in the article) of iOS search revenue. It is still a deal worth ~ $1B, but not a deal for $1B. The context is important. If the number is 34%, then Google's iOS revenue would be around $3B, of which Apple got a cut.
- danielhughes 11y agoTherefore the iPhone share of total search ad spend is about $3B. This link puts the overall market (inclusive of Android) at roughly $9B in 2014. That makes sense if you assume iOS to represent roughly 1/3 of devices. http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Mobile-Account-More-than-Half-of-Digital-Ad-Spending-2015/1012930 http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Mobile-Account-More-than-Ha...
- simonh 11y agoIsn't the $9B for all mobile advertising, not just mobile search advertising? According to a Glodman Sachs report for 2014, back then they estimated that iOS advertising accounted for 75% of Google's revenue on mobile. That would make the Android search ad space worth about $1B.
- ck425 11y agoDo you have a link to that report? I'd be curious to see if that's just the US or worldwide.
- simonh 11y agoIt's not available online. The story originally came from the NY Times, but I think Business Insider has the best info as they directly quoted a section from it. http://www.businessinsider.com.au/apple-walked-away-from-iad-to-starve-googles-core-business-into-irrelevance-2016-1 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/apple-walked-away-from-iad...
- Animats 11y agoGoogle also used to pay Mozilla to be the search engine there, until Yahoo outbid them. It's amazing that Google search, which is quite useful, has negative market value as content. In the cable TV world, there are channels cable systems pay to carry, such as ESPN, and channels that pay to be carried, such as the Jewelry Channel. How did Google end up in the latter category?
- notatoad 11y agoCable TV is a fundamentally wrong analogy here, because there is only one search bar and only one default search provider, not a near-infinite number of channels to be filled. Being the default search engine on iPhone means you can generate a lot of revenue, and so it is a valuable position to sell. As you say, Google got outbid by Yahoo a couple years ago for Firefox. If Google weren't paying, apple would sell the search bar to somebody else.
- hkmurakami 11y agoWith that in mind, a radio spectrum analogy seems to be more apt.
- ck425 11y agoI don't use an iPhone so have to ask, can users not select the search engine they want to use? Oneplus tried to change the default search on their phones to Bing and the first thing I did was switch back to Google.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- tianlins 11y agoIn a world so abundant of information, i think user attention is indeed a significant resource every major player should fight for. I guess the distribution of attention follows power law, that a few entrances take up most of the mobile use cases. For example, I use Uber, Wechat, GMaps much more often than the other apps. Search bar definitely is one of the most critical entrances.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- anfroid555 11y agoOracle is really letting out Google secrets. First Android earnings, now this. Both said not to be public knowledge. Google going to go after oracle now?
- Consultant32452 11y agoHow are they not being found in contempt?
- will_brown 11y agoThere are two types of contempt (civil and criminal) and as a general rule contempt is triggered by violating a Court's Order(s). What Court Order has been violated?
- Consultant32452 11y agoNone, because I didn't read the article before asking (shocker, right?). I think it's bad form for the judge to publicly release Google's financial information like that. I have a hard time believing that's normal.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- Mahn 11y agoWell there was this a few weeks ago: http://www.engadget.com/2015/12/30/google-will-strip-oracles-java-code-out-of-android/ http://www.engadget.com/2015/12/30/google-will-strip-oracles... Perhaps it pissed them off?
- sarkariresults 11y agoThis is gives me more esential information to me <a href="http://www.y2kjobs.com/p/sarkari-results.html/"title="Sarkari http://www.y2kjobs.com/p/sarkari-results.html/"title="Sarkar... Result">Sarkari Result</a> I affone following this site. Thank you..
- sarkariresults 11y agoThis is gives me more esential information to me <a href="http://www.y2kjobs.com/p/sarkari-results.html/"title="Sarkari http://www.y2kjobs.com/p/sarkari-results.html/"title="Sarkar... Result">Sarkari Result</a> I affone following this site. Thank you..