clemynx

ike17055 said:

rotateleftbyte said:

ike17055 said:

The European elites continue to demonstrate that they have no real understanding of free markets and competition. 

You could not be more wrong. Google has a virtual monopoly of search (>80%) so they have to play fairly. Promoting their own products and services above those of a competitor is an abuse of that market.  That gives a freer and more equal market than otherwise.

In fact, it is You who could not be more wrong. "Freer" and "more equal" are essentially contradictory in the marketplace. The freedom to succeed, or fail, is dependent largely on individual or organizational abilities and desire to exceed and outperform the practices of all others, not equality. The power of the consumer to choose ultimately picks the winner, not socialist interventions toward equality. This is the fundamental piece of free markets that European decisionmakers are missing. 

ike17055 said:

wizard69 said:

This is a prime example of the EU's obsession with successful American companies.    Frankly i think the goverment here in the USA needs to take a more active roll in adressing this harassment.   

Google's success, and that of others, is in part how we can afford to continue paying the bulk of Europe's defense, while they sneer at us and laugh publicly at American admonishment for Europe's broken financial committment-- to itself. Trump gets a lot wrong, but he is right on this: if Europe wants to complain about how they cannot "depend" on America, perhaps they should stop shortchanging their own responsibilities, and quit always trying to play the U.S. for chumps, and begin to act like allies are supposed to act for once. 

foggyhill said:

bshank said:

BenC said:

bshank said:

gatorguy said:

They won't be allowed to put Google Shopping at the top of the results page, which I'm sure was an effort to address eBay and Amazon product searches. Understandable Google would wish to do so, but also understandable that it could be seen as affecting competitors unfairly. If Google Search wasn't as good as it is, reportedly over 90% share in the EU (really??!), this would have probably passed muster IMO but the success of Google Search means they just can't do some of the some things a smaller competitor might get by with.

While personally a $2B+ fine for favoring (I've seen zero evidence they were blocking anyone else despite Ms. Vestager's comments) seems just a tad excessive considering the goal is to force them to change the way they present product search results which the ruling itself does, it is what it is. The EU Commission is convinced they hold sway over companies no matter where they do business as long as some of that business is in Europe. (I'll have to do some reading to see how that came about as it seems very odd to me.) Google can well afford to pay it, and it doesn't have anything to do with general Google Search results as far as I've read so that should not be affected. But Google competitors do seem to have Ms. Vesteger's ear so this is just the first shoe to drop. 

Anyway, if anyone is curious how Google displays Google Shopping and how it can be seen as anti-competitive do a search for some product, perhaps a toaster, and see how Google displays the results. The EU feels the same ranking rules that apply to other shopping sites should also apply to Google's own products, even tho it is their search product that's being used. Once you get to the point of being seen as dominant in your field the EU believes you should play by stricter rules, and in some way I tend to agree. 

Now is the EU unfairly targeting big US techs? I've not really firmly formed my own opinion on that yet. The quick-take would be... maybe. The EU is still chasing Apple for a few $B, Facebook was fined there in recent months for misleading the EU Commission, Amazon had to change the way they market books there or face fines, and very recently Nike and Comcast also have had new antitrust investigations targeting their practices opened by Ms. Vestager and the EU Commission.

There's also the so far rarely mentioned look by the EU into possible anticompetitive practices in the Apple App Store and Google Play where Ms. Vestager may try to make many of the same arguments she did in this case.  More fun to come. 

Amazon is first in my Google search

See that word 'Sponsored' in the top right hand corner? Those are paid ads you are looking at. The EU's point is that this comparison shopping service (i.e., that whole box of product photos, links and prices) is given unfair prominence over other comparison shopping services in Google's results.

Whether you think that is fair or unfair is a matter of opinion. The EU is saying that under their rules it is illegal. Perhaps in the USA it is not illegal. No problem. Google is quite capable of (and indeed is obliged to) adjusting its product to reflect the regulations of the markets in which it chooses to operate.

The ones under the paid ads are also not Google. They are Amazon. As for the 'Sponsored' ones, this is Google's website and they can charge people to place an ad. You think that they should give away ads for free?  Why don't you build a website, spend billions of your own dollars, and let us put whatever we want on it for no charge?  Google has also been doing this since the beginning. It was OK when they were smaller, but now that they're bigger it's not OK?! I'm worried about you guys over there 

No they can't buddy, not if you're a god damn monopoly in search; that's the whole point of anti-trust legislation.

If the search is not returning the best result, but the one the lines their pockets, it's actual fraudulent to their own stated purpose.

bshank said:

foregoneconclusion said:

ike17055 said:

The European elites continue to demonstrate that they have no real understanding of free markets and competition. 

Uh, that's actually the point of the ruling: Google was intentionally subverting competition by giving their own shopping links the priority within a general search. 

 It is Google's website after all. The first two links are sponsored, not the first two pages of search results.  Why don't you spend billions of dollars to create a website and let us all post whatever we want on there for free where ever we want?!  It seems like you're saying every website everyone builds is free to everybody to use however they want to use it.  Completely ridiculous logic 

SpamSandwich said:

clemynx said:

SpamSandwich said:

clemynx said:

SpamSandwich said:

rotateleftbyte said:

ike17055 said:

The European elites continue to demonstrate that they have no real understanding of free markets and competition. 

You could not be more wrong. Google has a virtual monopoly of search (>80%) so they have to play fairly. Promoting their own products and services above those of a competitor is an abuse of that market.  That gives a freer and more equal market than otherwise.

Google has a large share of search because people are lazy and not well informed. That doesn't make them a monopoly. Plus, idiots voluntarily choose to buy cheap Android phones instead of Apple, so they are 100% responsible for contributing to the fortunes of Google.

This is just the same old EU blackmailing tactics they've pulled on Apple, Microsoft and others.

It's just a matter of perspective. 

You think that the American dream is real and that customers have a choice. I think you are naive, that the American dream has been shown to be a lie, that the US are a big scam, that consumers only have the illusion of a choice and that big companies prey on their consumers. 

All complete hogwash. No one is forced to buy or use any of the services in question here.

Incapable EU politicians are poison to free markets.

And here you prove that you do not get this at all. 
This is not about end consumers. It's about competing companies that want to appear in search results and can't compete with Google Shopping's prominent placement. 

Look, I know you're downvoting my replies. It still doesn't help your position.