> But if your goal is to have your content read by many people, have very fast load times, and spend a bit less on traffic, then it is beneficial. But that was

> But if your goal is to have your content read by many people, have very fast load times, and spend a bit less on traffic, then it is beneficial. But that was not the problem. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with Google offering AMP as a content hosting service subject to certain syntax and content limitations. The problem was that, however fast your load times were in practice, all else being equal Google's search engine would penalise your ranking compared to using Google's AMP—all under the pretence of favouring "very fast load times".