4 ms·

In parapgraph 29 of the response, with respect to "publisher ad serving", Google mentioned several competitors by name. In the roadmap paper the authors note t

In parapgraph 29 of the response, with respect to "publisher ad serving", Google mentioned several competitors by name. In the roadmap paper the authors note the publisher ad server market is "particularly concentrated" with Google having a "90% or higher share". Not sure I understand what you are thinking regarding the "policy choice" idea. Would need some more elaboration.

nl 6y ago
> In parapgraph 29 of the response Could you refer to page number or something? I'm not going through counting paragraphs. I searched for "publisher ad serving" and didn't find it, and searched for "Facebook" and didn't find anything that seemed to sound like what you are talking about. I don't understand the gist of your comments here either. You asked me why Google didn't refer to competitors in their response, but now you say that they do? > Not sure I understand what you are thinking regarding the "policy choice" idea. "they don't want to be seen as pointing regulators at competitors."
- pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
  The paragraphs are numbered for you. The legal field often prefers to reference numbered paragraphs instead of page numbers. It can be easier. Paragraph 29 is on page 8. You claimed the authors of the roadmap paper are "wrong". You cited a couple of purported Google competitors, Facebook and Verizon. I noted that in their response to CMA report Google did not mention those two competitors. They mentioned several other ones, none of them as prominent as Facebook or Verizon. Then you said there are "many other" competitors, too, besides Facebook and Verizon. I am wondering why Google did mention any of these competitors you are referring to in their response to the CMA report. Seems like it would be relevant to mention them.
  - nl 6y ago
    Page 8 has footnote 29. Paragraphs aren't numbered. It doesn't name competitors there so I'm pretty confused. However page 7 does say: The Market Study will need to take account of the ways in which other players are entering, expanding, or consolidating in the supply of digital ads Examples include Amazon’s growing ads business, Verizon (which purchased AOL and Yahoo!), the integrated AT&T/Time Warner/AppNexus businesses, AdForm, and Alibaba – one of China’s largest digital ad providers that recently... The reference in that quote include footnote 29. Perhaps you are confusing footnotes/references with the substantive response?

nl 6y ago

> In parapgraph 29 of the response Could you refer to page number or something? I'm not going through counting paragraphs. I searched for "publisher ad serving" and didn't find it, and searched for "Facebook" and didn't find anything that seemed to sound like what you are talking about. I don't understand the gist of your comments here either. You asked me why Google didn't refer to competitors in their response, but now you say that they do? > Not sure I understand what you are thinking regarding the "policy choice" idea. "they don't want to be seen as pointing regulators at competitors."

pwdisswordfish2 6y ago
The paragraphs are numbered for you. The legal field often prefers to reference numbered paragraphs instead of page numbers. It can be easier. Paragraph 29 is on page 8. You claimed the authors of the roadmap paper are "wrong". You cited a couple of purported Google competitors, Facebook and Verizon. I noted that in their response to CMA report Google did not mention those two competitors. They mentioned several other ones, none of them as prominent as Facebook or Verizon. Then you said there are "many other" competitors, too, besides Facebook and Verizon. I am wondering why Google did mention any of these competitors you are referring to in their response to the CMA report. Seems like it would be relevant to mention them.
- nl 6y ago
  Page 8 has footnote 29. Paragraphs aren't numbered. It doesn't name competitors there so I'm pretty confused. However page 7 does say: The Market Study will need to take account of the ways in which other players are entering, expanding, or consolidating in the supply of digital ads Examples include Amazon’s growing ads business, Verizon (which purchased AOL and Yahoo!), the integrated AT&T/Time Warner/AppNexus businesses, AdForm, and Alibaba – one of China’s largest digital ad providers that recently... The reference in that quote include footnote 29. Perhaps you are confusing footnotes/references with the substantive response?