4 ms·
Are you arguing that it's non-linear? Because I'm pretty sure Firefox is paid based on a tiny 3% slice of market share.
by jldugger 3y ago
Are you arguing that it's non-linear? Because I'm pretty sure Firefox is paid based on a tiny 3% slice of market share.
- ethbr1 3y agoFirefox search revenue is more about keeping it alive and Chrome out of anti-trust crosshairs.
- jacquesm 3y agoFirefox isn't paid based on market share, they are paid to exist. It's a figleaf and it costs Google about 0.2% of their annual turnover. Compared to being broken up or fined that's much cheaper for Google.
- jldugger 3y agoOkay, then why did Yahoo outbid Google for placement?
- ethbr1 3y agoDoesn't that support the claim that Google doesn't actually care about ads on Firefox? Just that someone is paying them enough?
- jldugger 3y agoOr it signals that Google limits bids to what's profitable, and Yahoo outbid them. Which would suggest it does care, but only up to a limit. I don't know offhand how the contracts work, if there's a minimum traffic sent clause, or any other direct tie in to user behavior, or if this is a lump sum auction "give us a billion dollars and we'll make you default for a year" scenario. Either way, I expect Google would scale the amount they pay based on traffic sent. Happy to read details from anyone who has them =) But my question is: why did Yahoo outbid them? Yahoo doesn't need a fig leaf at all.
- ana_winters 3y ago[dead]