5 ms·

Oh, really, Google? Google may be producing massive value, but for the most part, it's THE online ads network in terms of PPC. They're gunning for the banner a

Oh, really, Google? Google may be producing massive value, but for the most part, it's THE online ads network in terms of PPC. They're gunning for the banner ads with their DoubleClick acquisition and they're trialing CPA ads. All these are online, and in February, they exited the radio ads market: http://google-tmads.blogspot.com/2009/02/google-exits-radio-but-will-explore.html http://google-tmads.blogspot.com/2009/02/google-exits-radio-... . In terms of dollars spent on online ads, Google gets the lion's share. I've seen some reports say 90%, but I'd wager it's closer to 70-80%. So it looks like a monopoly, walks like a monopoly, and acts like a monopoly. The key question is whether they've abused this monopoly. Being a monopoly in itself is not illegal, but using a dominant market position to stifle competition is very much so. I say let's investigate and make sure there is healthy competition.

kragen 17y ago
You fail to address the article's primary point, which is that they're in competition with offline media for ad buyers, and in this broader market, they have <3%. I think the stuff you wrote is mostly actually in the article.
- pierrefar 17y ago
  My point is that they're not in competition with offline media. My point is that such an assertion is absurd. As I pointed out, they're quitting offline ads. Not to mention the trend that more and more dollars are being spent online, not offline.
  - req2 17y ago
    Just because I only sell custom suits online doesn't mean I'm not in competition with people selling custom suits in brick and mortar stores with tailors and salespeople and such.
  - enomar 17y ago
    They still have TV ads (for now). And from what I understand, they pulled out of print and audio because they couldn't create a feedback loop on those formats. I'd bet anything they'll be back to audio and print when those formats become truly measurable.
  - Semiapies 17y ago
    "My point is that such an assertion is absurd." You assert that, but you don't appear to back that up with evidence or argument.
  - kragen 17y ago
    Well, it would be bad news if a medium that had only existed for a few years and had <3% of the marketplace were declining in its market share, wouldn't it? I don't know why you think the assertion is absurd. It seems like a pretty sensible assertion to me, but I don't know very much about marketing. Do you have time to share some of your marketing experience that makes it so obvious to you that online and offline ads aren't in competition? It seems like, at a minimum, online and offline advertisers are in competition. If online ads are sufficiently good at getting customers to buy from you, and your competitors are only advertising offline, then you're going to take market share away from them — and have more money to plow into online ads. If particular advertisers can shift part of their advertising spend between online and offline, that represents a more direct kind of competition between online and offline advertising.

kragen 17y ago

You fail to address the article's primary point, which is that they're in competition with offline media for ad buyers, and in this broader market, they have <3%. I think the stuff you wrote is mostly actually in the article.

pierrefar 17y ago
My point is that they're not in competition with offline media. My point is that such an assertion is absurd. As I pointed out, they're quitting offline ads. Not to mention the trend that more and more dollars are being spent online, not offline.
- req2 17y ago
  Just because I only sell custom suits online doesn't mean I'm not in competition with people selling custom suits in brick and mortar stores with tailors and salespeople and such.
- enomar 17y ago
  They still have TV ads (for now). And from what I understand, they pulled out of print and audio because they couldn't create a feedback loop on those formats. I'd bet anything they'll be back to audio and print when those formats become truly measurable.
- Semiapies 17y ago
  "My point is that such an assertion is absurd." You assert that, but you don't appear to back that up with evidence or argument.
- kragen 17y ago
  Well, it would be bad news if a medium that had only existed for a few years and had <3% of the marketplace were declining in its market share, wouldn't it? I don't know why you think the assertion is absurd. It seems like a pretty sensible assertion to me, but I don't know very much about marketing. Do you have time to share some of your marketing experience that makes it so obvious to you that online and offline ads aren't in competition? It seems like, at a minimum, online and offline advertisers are in competition. If online ads are sufficiently good at getting customers to buy from you, and your competitors are only advertising offline, then you're going to take market share away from them — and have more money to plow into online ads. If particular advertisers can shift part of their advertising spend between online and offline, that represents a more direct kind of competition between online and offline advertising.