6 ms·

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insi

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insight, it's been pretty obvious since they bought out DoubleClick in 2007.

Over2Chars 2y ago
I agree, I think it's not a deep insight, but Thiel notes (in his 'zero to one' speech he gave) that Google actively pretends not to be a search advertising monopoly, and instead pretends to be a competitive technology company, in a wide range of technology fields, to "hide" their monopoly. Thiel is openly advocating monopolies, and says competition is for losers. I think he's just calling GOOG out for their marketing, and noting their market strategy to deflect attention away from their monopoly. I, for one, have never heard anyone publicly mention this besides Thiel. Have you?
- alephnerd 2y ago
  I'm not sure I buy Thiel's argument becuase plenty of their non-search businesses such as Google Cloud, GSuite, Waymo, and Verily have become pretty successful in their own right, and vertical integration is another form of monopoly that tends to cracked down on.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    Check out the big blue box. I think Thiel's point is spot on: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-googles-revenues-by-segment/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-...
  - whatshisface 2y ago
    If I had a monopoly on sugar and traded in silver and healthcare, I would still have a monopoly on sugar.
    - tsunamifury 2y ago
      Yea but diversification is a critical business strategy not just a marketing ploy
      - brookst 2y ago
        Yeah there are far cheaper ways to “distract” from a monopoly than building Waymo from scratch. Alleging that whole project exists only as a smokescreen is pretty conspiratorial thinking.
        tsunamifury 2y ago
        I have had drinks with Peter Thiel. If you force him to answer more than one question about his theories it totally falls apart. Mostly the logic actually goes like this: oh if it doesn’t work I have the money to survive it and you don’t so I still win and claim I was right. I wish more people understood this.
        alephnerd 2y ago
        +1 on this. Ime he's a walking personification of "jack of all trades, master of none". That's the perfect trait for a VC (broad knowledge is critical to identify market trends), but it has its flaws such as extreme simplification of complex topics. That said, you can rightfully argue that this is why you are investing in egghead founders - so they can deal with solving those problems and logic gaps.
        crashabr 2y ago
        In the essay, _"The Silicon Valley Canon: On the Paideía of the American Tech Elite essays"_ the author writes > If the Washington intellectual aims for authority and expertise, the Silicon Valley intellectual seeks novel or counter-intuitive insights. He claims to judge ideas on their utility; in practice I find he cares mostly for how interesting an idea first seems. He likes concepts that force him to puzzle and ponder. > This is fertile soil for the dabbler, the heretic, and the philosopher from first principles.
  - wbl 2y ago
    Vertical integration is very proconsumer as it reduces successive markups.
    - BobaFloutist 2y ago
      Until they drive competitors out of business, and then it's not. Much like the horizontal integration of, say, Walmart.
      - wbl 2y ago
        When the prices are low it's predatory, the same it's collusion and higher it's exploiting the monopoly.
- WeylandYutani 2y ago
  I never had the illusion that Google makes their money from Pixel phones... It was always advertising.
  - Over2Chars 2y ago
    You are keenly insightful in this age of the willingly blind. Their technology products are free/low cost ways to get you to voluntarily opt in to their surveillance advertising model.
prasadjoglekar 2y ago
At this point in 2024/25, it's obvious to the point of multiple antitrust lawsuits against Google. If you want a POV on the most recent one involving Doubleclick, listen to the first part of this podcast with Brian Kelley of App Nexus - a competitor to Google ad tech. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8gPuwqFHk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8gPuwqFHk
dartos 2y ago
I mean… they’re as much search as Amazon is retail, no? Doesn’t GCP bring in big bucks? Not to mention gsuite. If your company don’t use Microsoft office they use gsuite.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  The big blue block is search advertising revenue: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-googles-revenues-by-segment/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-... the much smaller black box is GCP. Much smaller. much much smaller.
fuzzy_biscuit 2y ago
Don't forget when Google bought Urchin in '05. It's all been a part of the same broad strategy.

Over2Chars 2y ago

I agree, I think it's not a deep insight, but Thiel notes (in his 'zero to one' speech he gave) that Google actively pretends not to be a search advertising monopoly, and instead pretends to be a competitive technology company, in a wide range of technology fields, to "hide" their monopoly. Thiel is openly advocating monopolies, and says competition is for losers. I think he's just calling GOOG out for their marketing, and noting their market strategy to deflect attention away from their monopoly. I, for one, have never heard anyone publicly mention this besides Thiel. Have you?

alephnerd 2y ago
I'm not sure I buy Thiel's argument becuase plenty of their non-search businesses such as Google Cloud, GSuite, Waymo, and Verily have become pretty successful in their own right, and vertical integration is another form of monopoly that tends to cracked down on.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  Check out the big blue box. I think Thiel's point is spot on: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-googles-revenues-by-segment/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-...
- whatshisface 2y ago
  If I had a monopoly on sugar and traded in silver and healthcare, I would still have a monopoly on sugar.
  - tsunamifury 2y ago
    Yea but diversification is a critical business strategy not just a marketing ploy
    - brookst 2y ago
      Yeah there are far cheaper ways to “distract” from a monopoly than building Waymo from scratch. Alleging that whole project exists only as a smokescreen is pretty conspiratorial thinking.
      - tsunamifury 2y ago
        I have had drinks with Peter Thiel. If you force him to answer more than one question about his theories it totally falls apart. Mostly the logic actually goes like this: oh if it doesn’t work I have the money to survive it and you don’t so I still win and claim I was right. I wish more people understood this.
        alephnerd 2y ago
        +1 on this. Ime he's a walking personification of "jack of all trades, master of none". That's the perfect trait for a VC (broad knowledge is critical to identify market trends), but it has its flaws such as extreme simplification of complex topics. That said, you can rightfully argue that this is why you are investing in egghead founders - so they can deal with solving those problems and logic gaps.
        crashabr 2y ago
        In the essay, _"The Silicon Valley Canon: On the Paideía of the American Tech Elite essays"_ the author writes > If the Washington intellectual aims for authority and expertise, the Silicon Valley intellectual seeks novel or counter-intuitive insights. He claims to judge ideas on their utility; in practice I find he cares mostly for how interesting an idea first seems. He likes concepts that force him to puzzle and ponder. > This is fertile soil for the dabbler, the heretic, and the philosopher from first principles.
- wbl 2y ago
  Vertical integration is very proconsumer as it reduces successive markups.
  - BobaFloutist 2y ago
    Until they drive competitors out of business, and then it's not. Much like the horizontal integration of, say, Walmart.
    - wbl 2y ago
      When the prices are low it's predatory, the same it's collusion and higher it's exploiting the monopoly.
WeylandYutani 2y ago
I never had the illusion that Google makes their money from Pixel phones... It was always advertising.
- Over2Chars 2y ago
  You are keenly insightful in this age of the willingly blind. Their technology products are free/low cost ways to get you to voluntarily opt in to their surveillance advertising model.

prasadjoglekar 2y ago

At this point in 2024/25, it's obvious to the point of multiple antitrust lawsuits against Google. If you want a POV on the most recent one involving Doubleclick, listen to the first part of this podcast with Brian Kelley of App Nexus - a competitor to Google ad tech. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8gPuwqFHk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8gPuwqFHk

dartos 2y ago

I mean… they’re as much search as Amazon is retail, no? Doesn’t GCP bring in big bucks? Not to mention gsuite. If your company don’t use Microsoft office they use gsuite.

Over2Chars 2y ago
The big blue block is search advertising revenue: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-googles-revenues-by-segment/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-... the much smaller black box is GCP. Much smaller. much much smaller.

fuzzy_biscuit 2y ago

Don't forget when Google bought Urchin in '05. It's all been a part of the same broad strategy.