Google could be paying Apple $9B or more to stay Safari's default search engine

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in iPhone edited September 2018
A new estimate suggests that Google will end up paying in excess of $9 billion to stay the default search tool in Apple's Safari browser this year, and possibly far more in 2019.

Apple Safari and Google


The figure could potentially grow to $12 billion next year, according to analyst Rod Hall, cited by Business Insider. In 2017 Google is thought to have paid over $3 billion.

Access to Safari on iPhones and iPads is critical to Google, which generates most of its money from advertising. Safari does support Bing, Yahoo, or DuckDuckGo for search, but most people are likely to stick with the default option as long as it's functional.

For Apple, Google's dependence has been a boon to its services segment. The company has previously told the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that licensing fees like Google's are the main driver of the segment's growth, even with the popularity of Apple Music.

Another factor holding Google in place may be the potential backlash from ditching Google. While much of the engine's popularity stems from being a default, alternatives like Microsoft's Bing -- used in Siri searches -- have been criticized for sub-par results.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 33
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,259member
    I am team #ddg
    urashidbaconstangjdgazlostkiwipatchythepiratedysamoriawilliamlondonclaire1watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 2 of 33
    rare commentrare comment Posts: 198member
    This is why Google continues to support and improve Android without charging explicit fees but requiring adherence to Play and default app rules. Imagine how much Apple could charge for this positioning if Android did not exist.
    croprwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 33
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,591member
    rare comment said:
    This is why Google continues to support and improve Android without charging explicit fees but requiring adherence to Play and default app rules. Imagine how much Apple could charge for this positioning if Android did not exist.
    True but then again the vast majority of Android phone owners wouldn't use Apple iPhones if it didn't exist.  They'd be using some cheap flip phone had Google not purloined Apple's iOS.
    lkruppwilliamlondonclaire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 33
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    Shouldn’t Apple be paying Google for the privilege of having such a premier search engine available to its users? What say you @gatorguy? /s
    claire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 33
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    It baffles the mind how internet advertising can make so much money. I never click on sponsored links. I use ad block on both desktop and phone. Hell, even Google's Chrome blocks ads by default. Nearly everything Google offers is free except a couple devices. I don't get it.
    lostkiwicaladaniandysamoriaolswatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 33
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member

    MacPro said:
    This is why Google continues to support and improve Android without charging explicit fees but requiring adherence to Play and default app rules. Imagine how much Apple could charge for this positioning if Android did not exist.
    True but then again the vast majority of Android phone owners wouldn't use Apple iPhones if it didn't exist.  They'd be using some cheap flip phone had Google not purloined Apple's iOS.
    https://www.engadget.com/2013/12/19/when-google-engineers-first-learned-about-the-iphone-what-we-h/

    "Vogelstein relays a quote from Google engineer Chris DeSalvo, who said, "As a consumer, I was blown away. I wanted one immediately. But as a Google engineer, I thought, 'We're going to have to start over.’"

    Any questions?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 33
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,725member
    racerhomie3 said:
    I am team #ddg
    If Apple decided to go into search DDG would be the route :smiley: 

    lostkiwidysamoriawatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 33
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,748member
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. How about duckduckgo?
    baconstanglostkiwidysamoriaolswilliamlondonclaire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 33
    linkmanlinkman Posts: 1,029member
    AppleInsider said:
    While much of the engine's popularity stems from being a default, alternatives like Microsoft's Bing -- used in Siri searches -- have been criticized for sub-par results.
    Agreed. Google's search beats the pants off of the competition for most searches. Most of the time that I have to resort to Bing/Yahoo/DuckDuckGo I cringe. Bing's image search is fairly decent however.
    mwhitewilliamlondon
  • Reply 10 of 33
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    MplsP said:
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. 
    How does Google capture your personal data from a search box?
    williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 33
    jdgazjdgaz Posts: 395member
    DDG in this household. Try really hard to not do anything google. If a nearly as good youtube came around I think I could avoid those pesky Stanford grads that make you the product.
    lostkiwicaladaniandysamoriaclaire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 33
    gmgravytraingmgravytrain Posts: 881member
    Alphabet/Google is probably making more money from having Google Search to be the default on iOS than the amount of money Apple is receiving from them. Apple should purchase DuckDuckGo and tell Alphabet/Google to take a hike. If Google Search is that great then most consumers will personally choose it as their main search engine and Google will save $9B. I don't see why Apple doesn't at least try to acquire DuckDuckGo and give that programming team all the resources they need to at least give Google Search some serious competition. Google Search has free reign over the internet. I doubt Bing Search has much market share at all. It just seems that no one is even trying to knock Google Search down a peg. Has Bing Search improved at all over the last few years?
    ols
  • Reply 13 of 33
    FolioFolio Posts: 698member
    I'd like to know how this analyst derived $12B, which is between 3-4 times current estimates. Google's Traffic Acquisition Costs (TAC) have recently leveled over last several quarters if memory serves. If Google's TAC suddenly doubles or triples, it's stock price, all things equal, would tank. Just one reason I'm highly skeptical of this Rod Hall estimate, at least as it's presented here. Anyway if this is true, let's hope Apple divulges more about this deal in its privacy documents, like exactly how far is Google infiltrating the Apple ecosystem, regardless of a user's browser choices. For instance, what exactly would Google glean from Apple's Spotlight searches of one's personal files and documents?
    lostkiwislurpy
  • Reply 14 of 33
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,578member
    volcan said:
    MplsP said:
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. 
    How does Google capture your personal data from a search box?
    Ever hear of cookies and tracking?  If your entry point to the web is that search box, they can keep track of everywhere you go.  What you do in your browser is also personal data.
    dysamoriawilliamlondonclaire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 33
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,652member
    auxio said:
    volcan said:
    MplsP said:
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. 
    How does Google capture your personal data from a search box?
    Ever hear of cookies and tracking?  If your entry point to the web is that search box, they can keep track of everywhere you go.  What you do in your browser is also personal data.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/04/apple-limits-safari-tracking-gives-more-control-over-personal-data.html
  • Reply 16 of 33
    grifmxgrifmx Posts: 92member
    volcan said:
    It baffles the mind how internet advertising can make so much money. I never click on sponsored links. I use ad block on both desktop and phone. Hell, even Google's Chrome blocks ads by default. Nearly everything Google offers is free except a couple devices. I don't get it.
    until you use FaceBook, then all bets are off and you have targeted ads. but at least targeted ads have caught my interest - but then I go buy it on Amazon instead. 
  • Reply 17 of 33
    auxioauxio Posts: 2,578member
    gatorguy said:
    auxio said:
    volcan said:
    MplsP said:
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. 
    How does Google capture your personal data from a search box?
    Ever hear of cookies and tracking?  If your entry point to the web is that search box, they can keep track of everywhere you go.  What you do in your browser is also personal data.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/04/apple-limits-safari-tracking-gives-more-control-over-personal-data.html
    Yes, Apple has taken measures to prevent this from being done, which is great.  I'm just talking in general how it works if you don't have a browser which prevents tracking.
    edited September 2018 dysamoriawatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 33
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,748member
    gatorguy said:
    auxio said:
    volcan said:
    MplsP said:
    ...and this should show just how much your data is worth to Google. 
    How does Google capture your personal data from a search box?
    Ever hear of cookies and tracking?  If your entry point to the web is that search box, they can keep track of everywhere you go.  What you do in your browser is also personal data.
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/04/apple-limits-safari-tracking-gives-more-control-over-personal-data.html
    The funny thing is, even with those measures I still see websites using data that they can only have gotten from cookies from another web site. 

    Maybe I'm getting paranoid in my old age, but for the last month or so I've started using private browsing windows almost exclusively.

    (To be clear, Google also makes money from ads that come up at the top of searches, not just from personal data.)
    edited September 2018 dysamoriawatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 33
    kimberlykimberly Posts: 426member
    Maybe I'm brainwashed but ... the quality of search results from Google is much better than alternatives.  What has me astounded is the crap that is returned by Bing when the search is specific to Microsoft (I do mostly technical searches).  Do you want to install the BING BONG BAR over and over - I'll pass thanks.  I didn't realise that Siri used Bing ... talk about 'the plane is in the air but no-one is in the cockpit'.  That explains a lot of the negativity I read about Siri on this site.  Anyhow I digress.  Google is paying a lot of money to Apple to have their search engine as the default in Safari but Google's war chest is such that it is probably like you or me handing over a lazy grand.
    dysamoria
  • Reply 20 of 33
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,709moderator
    MacPro said:
    rare comment said:
    This is why Google continues to support and improve Android without charging explicit fees but requiring adherence to Play and default app rules. Imagine how much Apple could charge for this positioning if Android did not exist.
    True but then again the vast majority of Android phone owners wouldn't use Apple iPhones if it didn't exist.  They'd be using some cheap flip phone had Google not purloined Apple's iOS.
    However, just like the iPod Nano and shuffle, can we be certain Apple wouldn’t have gone downmarket had the only alternative to iOS been feature phones?
Sign In or Register to comment.