Google: Monopolistic?

[Syrus28]

I read this thread over at TechCrunch, detailing What An AntiTrust Case Against Google Might Look Like

I believe the Department of Justice will be able to establish monopoly power and the abuse of that power. Ultimately, the Department of Justice will seek to demonstrate consumer harm, direct or indirect, caused by the high fees charged for sponsored search, and, ultimately, I believe that the DoJ will succeed in establishing this, but these are not essential to establishing the presence of and abuse of market power.

Again, I am not approaching this as an attorney would, nor have I discussed this with lawyers for any of the concerned parties, but I expect that attorneys both at the DoJ and at Google headquarters are already addressing these issues.

What do you think?

 

[PlaceofDis]

Google maybe approaching monopoly status, but that in and of itself isn't an issue, is it? its abusing that market position that can land them in hot water.

 

[zap2]

Yea, I don't know...the high fees for sponsored search might be arguable...how higher are they then Yahoo, Live or MSN?

But honestly I don't know how much this hurts the consumer in the end.

It seems to me Google is still more more open then MS or even Apple(although they really don't have a monopoly anywhere...maybe iTunes, but the fact its mostly DRM free now really makes that case weak)

I'll say this
I love Google Search, Google Docs, Google Books, Youtube and Android(although thats not all google)

 

[Syrus28]

I didn't realize it, but Google subsidizing it's numerous *free* products with its revenue from search, effectively cutting out new competitors does make me suspect.

I mean, why have MobileMe, with its superior (yet SLOW) interface for a $100 asking price, when Google offers it all for free?

 

[Demosthenes X]

I don't think the amount Google charges for ads or sponsored search makes it "monopolistic". It's basic economics, supply and demand in the internet age. Google has the biggest "supply" of users, so there is more demand to advertise with them, and thus they can charge more.

As for subsidizing free services with revenue from another area, I'm not well-versed in business law, but my guess is this: a company can fund the development of those services however they like. Think about it: companies obviously do not develop new products using only revenue from that product... by that logic, they could never develop new products.

But, the actual delivery of those products must be funded by those products themselves. In International Trade Law, selling a product in a foreign market for less than you sell it for at home, or for less than it costs to manufacture, is called dumping, and is illegal. I imagine a similar argument could be made for internet services: the actual delivery of those services must be funded by user-fees, or, with free services, advertising within those services, otherwise it's "dumping".

But that's only a guess. As I say, I am not well-versed in business law, so...

 

[clevin]

just be cautious, so far so good.

I do found some of google's recent behavior suspicious tho.

Push google updater, auto run google update in background, discontinued direct download of google earth.

I do feel uncomfortable that I have so many stuff with google alone. So Im making intentional changes bit by bit.