On October 20, the U. S. government was able to do so. But it’s not the first time He filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google. One question is: was it because of abuses of antitrust law or was it just a matter of policies and scoring problems in US national elections. America?
And is Apple the biggest potential victim in an antitrust war between the U. S. government and Google?
“I think there’s now been consensus for some time between left and right that corporations like Google and Facebook have too much strength in the market,” Greg Sterling, Uberall’s vice president of knowledge, recently told me on the TechFirst podcast. « In addition, there is a political element. I think Trump then sought to show that it was difficult from generation to generation before the U. S. election, and I think there’s some kind of resentment in the component of many right-wing lawmakers that those corporations are in the left pocket. “
Sterling is a former search attorney and journalist, and Uberall occupies this familiar position for many marketing companies: whether working with Google and fighting Google as the tides of what Google makes it reflux and flow.
One challenge, of course, is that the US government is not going to be able to do that. But it’s not the first time It is a 130-year law as the basis of its argument that opposes what is arguably the most complicated high-tech company on the planet. The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was enacted to combat anti-competitive collusion and advertising behavior at a time when railways were the pinnacle of innovation. The operation of corporations and the existing festival are very different. The same goes for economies of scale and the marginal burden of new uses of what software necessarily is.
Listen to the interview for this story on TechFirst:
Another challenge is that the Sherman Act is not explicitly afraid of festivals between companies and advertising festivals, as ruled by the Supreme Court in 1993, by stating that “the goal of the Act is not for companies to function in the market; it’s public about market failures and it’s hard to say that consumers feel harmed by Google’s scale.
“The damage caused to consumers is difficult to resolve right now. Consumers decide on Google, they prefer Google,” Sterling says. But at the same time, Google has used some of those mechanisms to make sure others don’t have the same kind of access to distribution as them. “
Perhaps most attractive is what corporations stand to lose from antitrust action. Google itself, just like Microsoft a generation ago, will probably come out with a slap on the wrist and a huge bill to Uncle Sam.
But Apple may be the most brutal.
The focal point: the $8 billion to $12 billion that Google will pay Apple to be the default search engine on iPhones and Macs.
“I mean, the irony of Apple dating is that, you know, we’ve noticed the revelation that a lot of Apple’s service profits come from Google,” Sterling says. “Then, if the government demanded or was given a concession to end this dating, the situation was amortized, I don’t think it would affect the use of Google and Google very much. I think Apple hurts a lot more than Google, and other people would come back without delay, as Google’s problems with Mozilla and Yahoo were resolved, and they would reinstall Google and put Google there. “
Apple’s wonderful story for the press and aging monetary communities has been its wonderful functionality to expand service revenue. Revenue generated through products such as Apple Music, News, the company’s upcoming Fitness product and other products makes Apple less dependent on consumers who buy some. another iPhone for $1,000 or more each year.
In Apple’s most recent monetary statements, the company said it earned $18. 3 billion in service profits during the 12 months ended September 2020.
The recent antitrust case indicates that Apple earns between $8 billion and $12 billion directly from Google in exchange for a preferential remedy as a default search partner.
Although these figures are estimates only, they are probably approximate. The amount for the UK alone is $1. 5 billion, according to a UK government report.
If the estimate of $8 billion to $12 billion is accurate, this represents between 44% and 66% of apple’s total service revenue and a significant portion of Apple’s overall revenue. In a word, it’s huge.
Ultimately, the time for the trial is likely to be political: only 11 state attorneys general joined and all were from Republican states, Sterling points out, there are genuine problems.
But unless things go wrong with Google, the worst consequences of the simpler outcome of the antitrust effort are likely to affect Apple more. Forcing Google to avoid paying for location is a simple and easy-to-deploy solution. they charge Apple more than Google.
Other members of the high-tech world are also in the spotlight, after the election dust has settled. The maximum target probably maximum? The big blue social network.
“I’d be next,” Sterling says.
I anticipate and analyze trends affecting the cellular ecosystem. I’ve been a journalist, analyst and business executive and I’ve done a chronicle
I anticipate and analyze trends that affect the cellular ecosystem. I have been a journalist, analyst and business executive and have recorded the expansion of the cellular economy. I created the VB Insight curriculum team at VentureBeat and controlled groups that create software for partners like Intel and Disney. In addition, I ran technical groups, created social sites and cellular applications, and consulted on cell phones, social media and IoT. In 2014, I named one of folio’s 100 most sensitive, marketers and most advanced market players on the media. industry. ” I live in Vancouver, Canada, with my family, where I train baseball and hockey, but not at the same time.