3 ms·
This was priced in last year when facebook said it would cost them $10 billion a year. Google has next to no presence in mobile apps/non-browser ads so I dont t
by colinmhayes 4y ago
This was priced in last year when facebook said it would cost them $10 billion a year. Google has next to no presence in mobile apps/non-browser ads so I dont think they care much.
- ramesh31 4y ago>Google has next to no presence in mobile/non-browser ads so I dont think they care much. Uh... what?
- colinmhayes 4y agoapple's changes made it harder to use a users profile from one app to target them on another app. All of google's ads are served on a browser so they weren't affected.
- KoftaBob 4y agoWhen you use a free app that shows you ads, whose ad network do you think is serving those ads?
- colinmhayes 4y agofacebook's...
- KoftaBob 4y agoAccording to stats like this one and many others, Google AdMob has a much larger presence in terms of serving ads on mobile apps: https://appfigures.com/top-sdks/ads/all https://appfigures.com/top-sdks/ads/all
- colinmhayes 4y agofair enough, thanks for the source.
- KoftaBob 4y agoSure thing!
- MonkeyMalarky 4y agoYeah that's crazy talk. Mobile search has represented over 50% of ad revenue for a while, hasn't it?
- itsoktocry 4y ago>This was priced in Ah yes, those perfectly efficient markets, where everyone is doing DCF analysis. Feels a little silly to be talking about things being "priced in" when a trillion-dollar-company loses a quarter of its market cap in 24 hours, no?
- colinmhayes 4y agoMark going rogue was not priced in. That's why the stock dropped 21%, not because their revenue was down 4%.
- whimsicalism 4y agoYeah, there's probably no other economic headwinds the low earnings could be due to. Must just be the thing you said.