Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Against Google/Yahoo! - I’m not Buying It

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Against Google/Yahoo! - I’m not Buying It

jimharper — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 01:50:34 -0000

So if big bad G ever decided to kill off Linkshare, they can simply just remove them from the index, and then you won’t be finding sites as 'easily' anymore.

. . . and Google's credibility as a search engine would drop like a stone. Users would flee, advertisers would flee, investors would flee, and the Board would fire every executive responsible for that decision. "Delisting" by Google is just not a credible threat.

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Against Google/Yahoo! - I’m not Buying It

anonymous — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 01:37:08 -0000

''
This company brings advertisers and publishers together just like Google does, but with a different style and approach.
''

Linkshare doesn't possess their own search engine that boasts billions of websites.

Remember, Google turns things off and on at whelm, and nobody can do anything about it.

So if big bad G ever decided to kill off Linkshare, they can simply just remove them from the index, and then you won't be finding sites as 'easily' anymore.

It's time Google was put in their place. They are not above and beyond all.

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Against Google/Yahoo! - I’m not Buying It

Glenn Manishin — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:56:49 -0000

> Even if Google/Yahoo! were a monopoly - and I just
> don’t know how to gauge when that line is crossed - it
> wouldn’t matter.

The legal test for monopoly is monopoly power -- the power to exclude entry or raise price -- in a relevant product market. Goggle's high share of Intenet search advertising doesn't equate to anything close to monopoly power because (a) search advertising competese with display advertising, in which Yahoo! and Microsoft are far bigger, as well as, increasingly, traditional media advertising like newspapers and radio. Hence "Internet search advertising" is way too narrow to be a revelant market; and (b) Google has no technical or business ability to kep out rivals or raise prices. Unlike a Microsoft, for instance, Google has no interoperability entry barrier or even a "network effects" advantage; if other search platforms delivered more users/impressions for advertisers, those dollars would move instantaneously.

The only way Google stays ahead is by running faster than its rivals. That's the archetypical definition of a competitive firm, one without even a shred of market power.