4 ms·
So there are rival ad networks that charge way less than google? How does this fit with the anti-trust narrative? The customer clearly has choices. You're enti
by nova22033 5y ago
So there are rival ad networks that charge way less than google? How does this fit with the anti-trust narrative? The customer clearly has choices.
You're entitled to a choice...you are not entitled to the ad network with the most reach.
- dantyti 5y agomight have something to do with Alphabet’s subsidiaries winning their other subsidiary’s auctions
- whimsicalism 5y agoI agree that this is problematic - although in principle since they are paid by the click they would be incentivized to direct the bids towards the site most likely to generate a click.
- Retric 5y agoNo, Google receives 100% of the profit from directing traffic to their own properties. However, they receive whatever percentage their competitors chose to allocate to advising which can’t be 100% while maintaining profitability.
- prepend 5y agoI think it fits the anti-trust narrative in that they are charging above the “natural” price because of their market dominance. A bit part of US antitrust law is harm to customer. And higher prices is a harm to customers. I assume the argument is something like “Google is monopolizing search and charging higher prices as a result”
- JAlexoid 5y agoFor an ad network it's a B2B market. You're the person seeing the ad, but you're not party to the transaction. Websites often run an auction at request time. The ad networks are actually competing, even if you get targeted by Google exclusively, personally.
- pessimizer 5y agoHow does it fit with the pro-trust narrative? A single company controls most of the market, yet prices haven't fallen.