3 ms·

The large profit margins newspapers enjoyed in the past were built on an artificial scarcity: Limited choice for advertisers as well as readers.. Ironically, t

by ajg1977 16y ago

The large profit margins newspapers enjoyed in the past were built on an artificial scarcity: Limited choice for advertisers as well as readers.. Ironically, that sounds rather like the state of online advertising today, where Google's large profit margins come from. I wonder if/when we progress to discovering information that don't involve typing a string into a box for a list of results, we'll see Google's profit margins gradually begin to erode.

wmeredith 16y ago
You're exactly right. The difference between the papers and Google is that Google is well aware of the situation and is using those stratospheric profit margins to enter dozens if not hundreds of other markets looking for revenue streams. They aren't trying to bribe their way into a government enforced status-quo.
hristov 16y ago
That is not really a good parallel. Online advertising is very competitive and much cheaper than newspaper advertising used to be. You cannot possibly say that google creates an artificial scarcity by buying out competitors as the papers used to do. Google makes money by simply ensuring they are the best solution for the fields they are in. But it is a market that anyone can enter and google cannot stop them.
houseabsolute 16y ago
To your last point: we already have such engines, and Google indeed does not do well in those areas. For example, academic research is an area where Google's take on search does not work as well. But it will take more than the existence of such areas for Google to falter. It would take people in general not being able to find what they are looking for by typing a text query in a box, or finding such a means less efficient than some other. I doubt we will see anything like that before either neural interfaces or devices that can anticipate what you want without any interaction at all.

by ajg1977 16y ago

wmeredith 16y ago

You're exactly right. The difference between the papers and Google is that Google is well aware of the situation and is using those stratospheric profit margins to enter dozens if not hundreds of other markets looking for revenue streams. They aren't trying to bribe their way into a government enforced status-quo.

hristov 16y ago

That is not really a good parallel. Online advertising is very competitive and much cheaper than newspaper advertising used to be. You cannot possibly say that google creates an artificial scarcity by buying out competitors as the papers used to do. Google makes money by simply ensuring they are the best solution for the fields they are in. But it is a market that anyone can enter and google cannot stop them.

houseabsolute 16y ago

To your last point: we already have such engines, and Google indeed does not do well in those areas. For example, academic research is an area where Google's take on search does not work as well. But it will take more than the existence of such areas for Google to falter. It would take people in general not being able to find what they are looking for by typing a text query in a box, or finding such a means less efficient than some other. I doubt we will see anything like that before either neural interfaces or devices that can anticipate what you want without any interaction at all.