Apple should buy DuckDuckGo to limit reliance on Google, analyst says
Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi in a note to investors this week investigated a theoretical Apple acquisition of search engine DuckDuckGo, saying the tech giant could stand to benefit from major platform gains with minimal impact to its bottom line.
Relayed by Barron's, Sacconaghi in the investor note argues that, while Google is the world's dominant web search engine player, Apple is in a relatively strong position to apply pressure to the Alphabet company.
Currently, Google pays between $7 billion and $8 billion a year to be the default search engine for iOS and Siri, the analyst estimates. That figure equates to approximately 30% of an estimated $25 billion in ad revenue Google generates from Apple devices.
Alphabet is willing to pay the hefty sum in part to fend off attempts by Microsoft's Bing and Yahoo to replace Google as Apple's default search engine. Google also has the option to pull out of the deal if it can capture 70% of its current iOS search revenue by pushing users to Google.com, Sacconaghi says.
Google's position, however, might be less advantageous than it appears.
"However, we suspect the company's fear of rocking the boat' -- which could compromise $15 billion in profits it captures today from iOS -- may ultimately limit its freedom of action with Apple," Sacconaghi writes. "Conversely, Apple may be in a stronger position than at first glance, given it controls the keys to the kingdom on who can monetize iOS search. However, it remains uncomfortably dependent on Bing to act as a counterweight to Google -- hence our suggestion that Apple acquire its own search engine."
To that end, Sacconaghi floats the idea of a DuckDuckGo acquisition for under $1 billion. Along with a fairly small workforce of less than 100 employees, DuckDuckGo would be a good fit considering the firm shares Apple's views on user privacy and advertising strategies.
"To be certain, we doubt an Apple-owned DuckDuckGo could ever generate profits sufficient to make back the $7 billion to $8 billion a year currently paid by Google," Sacconaghi writes. "Nevertheless, Apple would still likely be better off than a worst-case scenario where it had no backup, and Google or Microsoft (one or the other) withdrew from the bidding process altogether."
The analyst notes such an acquisition could invite scrutiny from government antitrust agencies, and would still leave Apple somewhat reliant on Bing (DuckDuckGo uses Microsoft's web crawler). Overall, however, an Apple-controlled DuckDuckGo would provide the iPhone maker a prime opportunity to further detach itself from Google, a long and drawn-out process years in the making.
Apple first built DuckDuckGo integration into mobile Safari in iOS 8, allowing users to select the search engine, as well as alternatives Yahoo and Bing, in the Settings app. Bing was the default search engine for Siri until 2017, when Apple transitioned to Google for a more "consistent web search experience."
Relayed by Barron's, Sacconaghi in the investor note argues that, while Google is the world's dominant web search engine player, Apple is in a relatively strong position to apply pressure to the Alphabet company.
Currently, Google pays between $7 billion and $8 billion a year to be the default search engine for iOS and Siri, the analyst estimates. That figure equates to approximately 30% of an estimated $25 billion in ad revenue Google generates from Apple devices.
Alphabet is willing to pay the hefty sum in part to fend off attempts by Microsoft's Bing and Yahoo to replace Google as Apple's default search engine. Google also has the option to pull out of the deal if it can capture 70% of its current iOS search revenue by pushing users to Google.com, Sacconaghi says.
Google's position, however, might be less advantageous than it appears.
"However, we suspect the company's fear of rocking the boat' -- which could compromise $15 billion in profits it captures today from iOS -- may ultimately limit its freedom of action with Apple," Sacconaghi writes. "Conversely, Apple may be in a stronger position than at first glance, given it controls the keys to the kingdom on who can monetize iOS search. However, it remains uncomfortably dependent on Bing to act as a counterweight to Google -- hence our suggestion that Apple acquire its own search engine."
To that end, Sacconaghi floats the idea of a DuckDuckGo acquisition for under $1 billion. Along with a fairly small workforce of less than 100 employees, DuckDuckGo would be a good fit considering the firm shares Apple's views on user privacy and advertising strategies.
"To be certain, we doubt an Apple-owned DuckDuckGo could ever generate profits sufficient to make back the $7 billion to $8 billion a year currently paid by Google," Sacconaghi writes. "Nevertheless, Apple would still likely be better off than a worst-case scenario where it had no backup, and Google or Microsoft (one or the other) withdrew from the bidding process altogether."
The analyst notes such an acquisition could invite scrutiny from government antitrust agencies, and would still leave Apple somewhat reliant on Bing (DuckDuckGo uses Microsoft's web crawler). Overall, however, an Apple-controlled DuckDuckGo would provide the iPhone maker a prime opportunity to further detach itself from Google, a long and drawn-out process years in the making.
Apple first built DuckDuckGo integration into mobile Safari in iOS 8, allowing users to select the search engine, as well as alternatives Yahoo and Bing, in the Settings app. Bing was the default search engine for Siri until 2017, when Apple transitioned to Google for a more "consistent web search experience."
Comments
rob53 said: Google sells user data? I was unaware. Maybe you could provide some source for that claim. Just kidding, I know can't. If Google was actually selling user data, there's no amount of cash that they could pay Apple to be the search provider.
The other thing I’ve done is switched to private browsing. That combined with the fact that I almost never log into my google account means Google has very little information to go off of. Like viclauyyc said, part of the reason google gives better results is because they save data on you which is exactly why you would want to use DDG in the first place.
DDG does not track and we can put some faith in that because it is not owned by a giant tech company, unlike Google or Bing. If Apple bought DDG then it would be assumed they are tracking the data. DDG would lose its raison d'être and those of us that use it would abandon the platform.
The only thing that Apple buying DDG would do is to destroy DDG.
Without extraordinary efforts like ad blockers, vpns, and such, chances are good that you're being tracked.
I've switched to DDG as my default (so probably do 95% of my searches that way, now), but every so often, I do run into having a hard time finding what I need and have to switch to Google. Their search tech is still considerably ahead of the rest. But, most of the time, I just don't need that advanced level, so am not willing to make the trade for it.
I've been using DDG for years. If I have any trouble finding what I'm looking for, I can always switch to Google using one of the DDG bangs to tell it to search Google instead, like "testing 123 !g" (there are many other bangs you can use to search particular sites etc).