4 ms·
I disagree with a lot of what google is doing. It's unfair that google seems to have a free spot and do not have to compete in the bidding here [0]. IANAL, so
by Buraksr 7y ago
I disagree with a lot of what google is doing. It's unfair that google seems to have a free spot and do not have to compete in the bidding here [0].
IANAL, so I wonder if this really fulfils what Google is trying to achieve legally. They are giving users more choice but they are effectively using their market position (Android) to get more google search usage seemingly unfairly so I would think this would lead to more anti-trust issues for them.
That said, I agree with dahdum, I don't see why any of these providers should get any help in a competitive bid. If Ecosia sees value in being here there is a price to be paid, I would be surprised if they didn't pay for all the advertising they have done.
-0 "Search providers are required to apply for inclusion through a bidding process to become one of three alternative choices to Google Search" - from Article
- shkkmo 7y agoThe spot isn't really free. The spot has the same value as the spots they are auctioning. By not auctioning it off, Google pays an opportunity cost for the spot. Not that this even matters practically. I really don't understand people's obsession with this aspect of it. Google makes so much money from its search that there is no way that any potential cost to them from having to bid for this spot would have any real competitive impact on the search market. For default search on iOS, Google already pays Apple more per year than the EU fined Google on this issue.