Home > Computers & Technology > Internet > Internet Troubleshooting
Results so far:
| Completely | 47% | 123 votes | Total: 264 votes | |
| Partially | 53% | 141 votes |
Completely
Created on: January 31, 2009
A monopoly is a company which, according to dictionary.com, has "exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices."
First, one must understand that Google made $5.7 billion dollars in net revenue in the fourth quarter of 2008, and $6.63 billion in profit for the entire year. Their primary business, for those uninitiated, is charging "per click" for those links on the right hand side of a search under the heading "Sponsored Links." Advertisers pay between $0.10 to $20 or more for a single "click" which represents a qualified web site visitor.
Compare this with its closest competitor, Yahoo!, which made $1.38 billion in net revenue in Q4 2008, and suffered a $303 million dollar loss in gross revenues. (Annual gross revenues are still to be announced at writing.)
Consider this: Google receives 72% of all Internet searches, compared to 17.8% for Yahoo, and 5.5% for Microsoft. And, Google shows ads for almost half of Internet searches performed on its site.
Is Google a monopoly? Of course not. Is Microsoft a monopoly? Of course not. But they both are near-monopolies.
A monopoly has relevance when it pertains to a few things for consumers and businesses alike:
- The lack of any choice in choosing a vendor for a particular service
- The consolidation of power into the hands of a single entity with whom we must trust
So, given the above, where does Google stand?
For example, say I am a small business owner who wishes to attract customers to my web store. I would consider doing pay-per-click marketing and have a choice of Google AdWords, Yahoo! Search Marketing, or Microsoft Advertising AdCenter (a.k.a. MSN AdCenter), and some smaller players.
Given a limited budget and limited time to manage my advertising, which one would you choose? 72% of the market? Or 17%?
Now, let's change the scenario and we're a large company which wants to attract more customers: Would you NOT advertise on Google?
I think the "choices" above (or lack thereof) shows that Google is a near monopoly. In short, you have to advertise on Google to play in their space, because they are the dominant player in the market. You have no choice.
Now consider the volume of online traffic that Google "sees" through its servers:
- Google sees 72% of internet searches out there
- Any site which uses AdSense (which are those "Ads by Google"), including this site
- Any site which uses their free analytics (formerly Urchin, now Google Analytics)
- Any web browser with the Google toolbar installed sends every page view back to Google
- Any web browser which uses "auto suggestions" in the search box sends the keys you type into that box to Google
Given the above: Can you estimate how much of the total internet traffic that passes through the Googleplex in Mountain View, California?
Some will state that Google can be trusted to be on the receiving end of so much browsing information (and personal information that is typed into a search engine). Would you want some engineer at Google to know that you search for "Yeast Infection?" How about "Divorce Lawyer?"
The question is not whether we can trust Google, it's whether it's a good thing to have so much power and information in the hands of a single company.
Finally, like other "near-monopolies" out there, when a company has $6 billion dollars in profit each year, it puts them in a position where they can buy other companies to further cement their position, making it almost impossible for them to have any reasonable competition. Google has recently purchased the number one video site on the internet, YouTube, the number one banner advertisement firm, DoubleClick.
Of course, calling Google a monopoly or near-monopoly does not discount what Google has accomplished, nor does it blame them for performing well. Google has exceptional technology, fast and comprehensive search, and they offer a myriad of tools which make many people's lives easier and better.
This debate is also not about what the government should do about a monopoly or near-monopoly.
However, like the checks and balances of the United States Federal Government, it is important to have anti-trust laws which protect consumers and businesses alike when a company is in a position of power.
Learn more about this author, Kent Davidson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Partially
Created on: November 14, 2009
Google does not hold a monopoly over anything at the moment, this is true simply by definition of monopoly, which is:" exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices" according to www.dictionary.com. Google does not have any particular power in controlling anything. This is because many other companies also have a good foothold in many of the same areas as Google. Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL each have a large user-base when it comes to e-mail. Each also has their own search tools. Google, in no way, controls the search engine, or email worlds.
In addition to this, Google also has no control over prices. In fact, almost everything Google offers is free, barring things such as the G1 phone. Extending this idea, Google has no total control whatsoever. It is simply a search engine at heart, it scours the Internet archiving what pages are where, and what they are about. Then allowing users to browse this vast archive. Google has no power to change anything on the Internet drastically, and if they started to omit or edit results too heavily based on totally commercial interests, people would simply move on to a different search engine. The same goes for the other services that Google offers.
It is also necessary to understand that it is almost impossible to have a monopoly over anything on the Internet. The Internet is all about freedom, and the second that a company tries to take away a large chunk of freedom, or fails to deliver well with their services, hundreds of open source and various other alternatives start popping up. This happened fairly recently when the popularity of Linux skyrocketed as a reaction to Microsoft's monopoly over the Desktop O/S market. The difference between the two is that Google is mostly a web-based company, and so they cannot try to strong arm anyone, because more reliable alternatives will spring up quickly, and Google would become obsolete. So, not only does Google not have a monopoly, it would be nearly impossible for it to develop one.
However, it is also important to understand that Google is in fact a major player in the internet world. It has gained a huge amount of support and popularity, both from the average user, and from the "computational elite". Many people rely on their services because they are reliable, quick, and easy to use. Many other companies may take an example from Google, but Google is still far away from having a monopoly over anything as yet, especially in the official, and correct use of the word.
Learn more about this author, Patrick Darski.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.