4 ms·

It's like robbing a bank for a million dollars and the penalty for doing it is paying back 100K. Why would I ever stop robbing banks?

k8sToGo 5y ago
Because the penalty doesn't stop at 100k for repeating offenses?
- bastardoperator 5y ago
  Until it stops being profitable, it really doesn't matter what you fine them. Stock price is up 5.82% over the last 30 days...
  - edgyquant 5y ago
    It seems to me you’re just regurgitating something you’ve heard a million times. Stock price is irrelevant, the EU has ran the numbers on googles profit from their shop searches and determined this fine exceeds that profit.
    - bastardoperator 5y ago
      Which the EU fails to provide in their own document, so whos doing the regurgitation here? I think the top search results which convert to direct sales over the course of 8 years is worth more. Sorry... We can debate, but the reality is many companies ad spend per year is double this number and Google has quadrupled in value since this started which is in fact relevant.
AnssiH 5y ago
Do you believe Google benefited over $2.8B from showing its shopping comparison results above those of their competitors in the 13 affected EEA countries? I doubt it. The fining rules EC follows are intended to ensure the fines exceed the benefit received. There are more details about the calculation of the fines in the original EC decision of the (AT.39740), section 14 Fines starting from page 207: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/39740/39740_14996_3.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/39...
- bastardoperator 5y ago
  Absolutely, lol. They've been doing this for 8 years and are the masters (regardless of ethics) at ad revenue. Considering Google's market share has quadrupled (low estimate) since 2014, I have no doubts that google could have profited 350M year over year. When has google ever done anything in good faith or something that wasn't profitable for them long term? "The Commission concludes that the proportion of the value of sales to be used to establish the basic amount of the fine should be […]%." If it's not 100%+ percent, Google profited, even if it's a penny. This doc is missing way too much data (table 29) for it to make any real sense.
dahfizz 5y ago
This isn't a fine for Google generally. This fine is for a specific thing Google did wrong: prioritizing their own shopping results in search. The fine was specifically calculated to be greater than whatever revenue Google made from this behavior. To follow your analogy, they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined 2 million. Then keyboard warriors shouted that they should have been fined 10 million because of unrelated crimes which are still being litigated.
- Closi 5y ago
  > To follow your analogy, they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined 2 million. Then keyboard warriors shouted that they should have been fined 10 million because of unrelated crimes which are still being litigated. Well, more accurately they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined a million dollars.

k8sToGo 5y ago

Because the penalty doesn't stop at 100k for repeating offenses?

bastardoperator 5y ago
Until it stops being profitable, it really doesn't matter what you fine them. Stock price is up 5.82% over the last 30 days...
- edgyquant 5y ago
  It seems to me you’re just regurgitating something you’ve heard a million times. Stock price is irrelevant, the EU has ran the numbers on googles profit from their shop searches and determined this fine exceeds that profit.
  - bastardoperator 5y ago
    Which the EU fails to provide in their own document, so whos doing the regurgitation here? I think the top search results which convert to direct sales over the course of 8 years is worth more. Sorry... We can debate, but the reality is many companies ad spend per year is double this number and Google has quadrupled in value since this started which is in fact relevant.

AnssiH 5y ago

Do you believe Google benefited over $2.8B from showing its shopping comparison results above those of their competitors in the 13 affected EEA countries? I doubt it. The fining rules EC follows are intended to ensure the fines exceed the benefit received. There are more details about the calculation of the fines in the original EC decision of the (AT.39740), section 14 Fines starting from page 207: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/39740/39740_14996_3.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/dec_docs/39...

bastardoperator 5y ago
Absolutely, lol. They've been doing this for 8 years and are the masters (regardless of ethics) at ad revenue. Considering Google's market share has quadrupled (low estimate) since 2014, I have no doubts that google could have profited 350M year over year. When has google ever done anything in good faith or something that wasn't profitable for them long term? "The Commission concludes that the proportion of the value of sales to be used to establish the basic amount of the fine should be […]%." If it's not 100%+ percent, Google profited, even if it's a penny. This doc is missing way too much data (table 29) for it to make any real sense.

dahfizz 5y ago

This isn't a fine for Google generally. This fine is for a specific thing Google did wrong: prioritizing their own shopping results in search. The fine was specifically calculated to be greater than whatever revenue Google made from this behavior. To follow your analogy, they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined 2 million. Then keyboard warriors shouted that they should have been fined 10 million because of unrelated crimes which are still being litigated.

Closi 5y ago
> To follow your analogy, they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined 2 million. Then keyboard warriors shouted that they should have been fined 10 million because of unrelated crimes which are still being litigated. Well, more accurately they robbed a bank for a million dollars and got fined a million dollars.