The Google Monopoly - Are They Too Dominant?

  • Andrew Scherer
  • Born
  • Born
  • Andrew Scherer
  • Posts: 2

Post 3+ Months Ago

9/10 searches in the UK were powered by Google. Yahoo and MSN were 4 and 3 percent respectively.

Google has definitely changed the face of the internet - some believe for the good of the net, others would argue with that.

People critical of Google point to their domination of natural search as well as PPC advertising. At this point in time, who could possibly com from from under the rug to challenge Google at what they're doing?

What are your thoughts?

Would you want to see a serious Google competitor break through or are you completely satisfied with Google and what they do?

:?:
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

I don't think Google is a monopoly. A monopoly is when there are no other choices and there are.

Before Google, my favorite search engine was cyber411 which was unknown to most people. I also used Alta Vista for strange queries to obtain passwords. Google has topped those and more for any query and it's rare that I click on sponsored links.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

It's not really a monopoly, there will always be other browsers, other search engines and other applications and programs. But to tell the truth I wouldn't mind. Google has high quality products and services, and they don't have the Microsoft 'in it for the money' approach or image. Even if there is a decent competitor in the future I couldn't see too many people making the switch, for reasons stated above.
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13496
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Google search works well for me.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I think the only people who have a problem with Google search-wise are failed businesses and con artists that can't get one by Google.
  • Jenie0109
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 410

Post 3+ Months Ago

Honestly I prefer Google over yahoo and msn.
I think searches in Google are more comprehensive.
  • bermuda
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • bermuda
  • Posts: 144

Post 3+ Months Ago

I really do not think Google as the online monopoly because the guys working at the company have already proved to be professionals at what they are doing.

For example, all of the standards they have created in the SEO and web marketing world have proved to be useful and used by thousands of webmasters as well as other search engines.

Google is still leader in offering high quality content pages when people make searches and they are regularly working on their rankings algorithms.
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

So far, no one agrees with the OP.
  • MidGe48
  • Novice
  • Novice
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 27

Post 3+ Months Ago

I like and use Google almost exclusively for searches and for other things as well.

Overall, to-date, the company has behaved well, in fact better than some of the companies they have literally replaced.

Having said that, there are inherent dangers ib having a single operator dominating one or more fields. And Google is not perfect. A particular beef of mine for which I have a lengthy post on my site is its over enthusiasm for marking genuine e-mail as spam if their origin is not a large company. It can and does introduce a barrier to entry to the Internet and that isn't good. The post I refer to can be found at http://zunob.com/content/gmail-and-spam ... ogle-power. It is in the form of an open letter to Google, which was the only way I could find to try contacting them about my genuine concern.
  • Cerebro
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 209
  • Loc: Michigan & Mackinac

Post 3+ Months Ago

Just because Google is behaving right now, does not mean it should "not" be considered a threat. For example the Rothschild Index is used as a measurement to determine if companies have to much market share within their product group. I read a book called "The Essence of Capilalism". It says how our society is moving away from monopolies, and towards a monopoly of capitals (aka P&G, Pepsi and Coke). Where will Google fit within this model 10 even 20 years from now? I am sure they will have many successful projects that will take more market share from other browsers.

My friend and I have decided the only way to become an industrial philanthropist & help benefit society was to beat the system. The only way you could beat the system & gain enough market share was to break through the market saturation (similar products from the same company), economy of scale (price breaks for running multiple ads), & brand loyalty (million $ contracts with global chains) is to take advantage of the consumer.

If you do not take advantage of the consumer, then your company may go under (due to market saturation, eco of scale, and brand loyalty). If your company goes under how do you become competition? Let's say your company does not go under, they they will make an attempt to buy your company/product out.

Catch 22... that is not necessary yet. I would say that Google is currently behaving. However never say never, the leadership of the company might change direction down the road.
  • Breeze
  • Photographer
  • Guru
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1029
  • Loc: Australia

Post 3+ Months Ago

Imagine how scary the world will be if Google goes to the dark side. Blade Runner comes to mind.
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Cerebro I see you call yourself the brain but you made one mistake. It's not taking advantage of the consumer that put's one ahead, it's taking advantage of the worker. The consumer can boycott a product but the worker can't boycott work. Read "Capital" by Karl Marx and other thinkers at:
http://www.marxists.org

Secondly, society is moving towards monopolies, not away from them. One example is in the media. Clear Channel and Murdock are two prime examples. Mom and Pop shops are on the decline. Look at all the lumber yards that Home Depot destroyed. There are many other examples.

Google doesn't pose that threat. They never get a dime out of me no matter what they do.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23455
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Breeze wrote:
Imagine how scary the world will be if Google goes to the dark side. Blade Runner comes to mind.


Imagine what little attention this post may have gotten if I hadn't headlined it (given the current state of the search engine forums -i.e. predominantly worthless posts). Now think on that for a second and wonder why Google is so popular? Because everyone caters to it. Everyone watches what it does. Everyone wants to learn how to manipulate it, overpower it, beat it to death and feel they have "won"! Even in the other search engine forums here people constantly compare to Google.

Why don't people pay as much attention to the other engines? Because right now Google does it better. How did Q-Tips become a generic name for a branded name? After all Johnson and Johnson makes an equally good "cotton swab" product. But I bet you ask anyone that has J&J Cotton Swabs in their house for a Q-tip, guess what they go get. Same thing with Kleenex.

Google is permanently branded. Bet you most of us can't go a day without "Googling" something. Not to mention their other products work. I've used Google desktop since it came out and am about to install the enterprise version on my network. Why? Because it works and nobody else offers it like they do.

Monopoly? No. Just a better product that people currently prefer. I think somebody a few posts up mentioned a monopoly is when there is no other choice. And noted there are plenty of other choices.

Google, right now is just plain downright better. And as long as they stay better, I'll continue my preference for them.
  • ablaye
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • ablaye
  • Posts: 230

Post 3+ Months Ago

Google is Number 1 because they deserve it. Their search results are relevant.
Google is also a more benign company compared to Microsoft. They don't try to bully the competition and don't have an unfair advantage.
They are Number 1 because they are the best and deserve that spot.
  • Cerebro
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 209
  • Loc: Michigan & Mackinac

Post 3+ Months Ago

Don2007 wrote:
you made one mistake. It's not taking advantage of the consumer that put's one ahead, it's taking advantage of the worker.


You go to a restaurant, are you a consumer or a worker? What choices do you have for non alcoholic beverages? Pepsi or coke. Are you a worker or a consumer when forced with these 2 alternatives. You are not a customer to coke, their primary focus is on brand loyalty with franchises and restaurants. However, it is part of your daily lifestyle to ask "do you have pepsi or coke products?" As of right now, you do not have to work for these 2 900lb gorillas in order to feel the effects of their product dominance.

I will agree that maybe down the line, they will a stronger influence on the worker. Currently, coke is stirring up trouble in 3rd world countries with union repression. There are those who say, union activists in their work camps (yes folks they live at the factory) have been killed for these reasons. Coke is avoiding the unions since it will bite into their profit margin.


Don2007 wrote:
Secondly, society is moving towards monopolies, not away from them.

Coke and PepsiCo are 2 separate companies that are considered independent confectioners. They are past the stage of monopolies... they are monopoly of capitals. This means that instead of having one product and dominating the market with that, they are dominating the market with multiple products aka capitals. Coke has more than 450 brands in 200 countries. Proctor and Gamble is another example instead they are horizontally integrated (it is scary just how many capitals aka products they are trying to monopolize http://www.pg.com/common/product_sitemap.shtml).

The mission statement for PepsiCo is to basically sell you everything that you put into your body. Not just beverages, but food. I would consider them a monopoly if they dominated the market for 1 product, however they are talking about everything that you consume. This is a monopoly of capital.


Don2007 wrote:
Google doesn't pose that threat. They never get a dime out of me no matter what they do.

They do not pose a threat yet, however their leadership may change down the road (ie new board directors with special interests). Never say never. Since the goal of anyone in management is profit maximization, there is nothing wrong with checks and balances.

Don2007 wrote:
Cerebro I see you call yourself the brain


I'm not a brain, I just have mad skill.
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

First of all, I like Pepsi but I would probably order a mixed drink anyway. First you said that we are moving away from monopolies, then you gave me 3 examples of monopolies, Coke, Pepsi and P&G and how they have me cornered. What about when I go to the health food store and order carrot juice or wheat grass juice, which I do quite often? Coke and Pepsi are nowhere to be found.
  • Cerebro
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 209
  • Loc: Michigan & Mackinac

Post 3+ Months Ago

Don2007 wrote:
First of all, I like Pepsi but I would probably order a mixed drink anyway.


I'll stick with generic products... The scenario did not include mixed drinks
Cerebro wrote:
What choices do you have for non alcoholic beverages?

...but if it did I would get a Ginger Ale with Whiskey, splash of lime please.






Don2007 wrote:
First you said that we are moving away from monopolies, then you gave me 3 examples of monopolies

I should have clarified, we are moving into a new bread of monopolies (aka much different and powerful). We are moving towards a handful of companies controlling everything. That is a monopoly of capitals... If you would like to only look at one side of a rubric cube, then you can call this a monopoly.






Don2007 wrote:
Coke, Pepsi and P&G... have me cornered.

Cerebro wrote:
You are not a customer to Coke, their primary focus is on brand loyalty with franchises and restaurants







Don2007 wrote:
What about when I go to the health food store and order carrot juice or wheat grass juice, which I do quite often? Coke and Pepsi are nowhere to be found.

That is because either these health food stores are:
A.) not major players in the restaurant/franchise business (Coke/Pepsi haven't noticed them on their radar yet).
B.) These health food stores center their strategic vision without Coke/Pepsi in mind. However, your health food store is a fluke comparison when considering other restaurant/franchise businesses (mom and pop diners, Taco Bell, Subway, Applebee's, Dairy Queen, Sushi restaurants, Walmart, CVS). This list can go on and on with majority of places having to decide between Coke and/or Pepsi. They have created a self-sustaining market that should be monitored to enhance the competitive environment. This is just one example of what can happen with companies that boast a boatload of brands.
  • ATNO/TW
  • Super Moderator
  • Super Moderator
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 23455
  • Loc: Woodbridge VA

Post 3+ Months Ago

This post is starting to remind my of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged"
  • Moebius87
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 7
  • Loc: Bangkok, Thailand

Post 3+ Months Ago

Google is still my search engine of choice, but that's the important operative term... I choose to use this service. At times, when I am looking for more esoteric information that I cannot find using Google, I will turn to Cuil, which turns up some very unusual results.

To a certain extent they are a monopoly by default, simply because the alternative choices that exist just don't return the consistent results that Google delivers.

— Möe
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13496
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Capitalism encourages monopoly.

Until everything is produced by machines and the only jobs that humans do are entertainment jobs, someone must be taken advantage of in order to turn a profit whether it's the consumer or the worker.

Most businesses tend to lean on one untill that one begins to buckle under the pressure, then they switch to the other. Since people are a renewable resource thanks to sex, the other side tends for lose sight of how things work until they begin to feel the pressure again and the switch goes the other way.

Once in awhile a company leans the other way too soon, or leans on one for too long and the company crashes.
  • Moebius87
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 7
  • Loc: Bangkok, Thailand

Post 3+ Months Ago

That sounds absolutely "dystopic" in a strange and wonderful way — but I think you will find, going down that route, that manufacturing efficiency and rabid consumerism have no staked interests in the welfare of anyone... one way or the other.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a monopoly (per se), right?

— Möe
  • joebert
  • Sledgehammer
  • Genius
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 13496
  • Loc: Florida

Post 3+ Months Ago

Monopoly is a sign of near perfect efficiency, on its' own it's actually a good thing.

It's when people realize they can charge whatever they want and begin to get more credit than their product is reasonably worth where things turn sour.
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

"The scenario did not include mixed drinks"

What are talking about? The scenario was a restaurant. What restaurants do you frequent that only have Coke and Pepsi?

I've spent a lot of time studying economic structures and political super structures. You seem to be interested in that as well.
http://www.marxists.org is a good place to start. One can't understand capitalism until he understands Marxism. You don't have to be a Marxist but you have to understand the concept.
  • thomas_09
  • Novice
  • Novice
  • thomas_09
  • Posts: 19

Post 3+ Months Ago

Andrew Scherer wrote:
9/10 searches in the UK were powered by Google. Yahoo and MSN were 4 and 3 percent respectively.


That's showing popularity of Google and whenever we need to search something first we remember Google because it's search result is quite relevant and people are happy with it's services so Google is on top.
  • karmadir
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • karmadir
  • Posts: 103
  • Loc: India

Post 3+ Months Ago

It's not about google dominance, but the fact is that they are also providing good information in the internet.
  • Cerebro
  • Graduate
  • Graduate
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 209
  • Loc: Michigan & Mackinac

Post 3+ Months Ago

joebert wrote:
Most businesses tend to lean on one untill that one begins to buckle under the pressure, then they switch to the other.


I agree, companies try to lean out cost by the using a mixture of labor and capital. Depending on which is more efficient (cost min and production output) will determine what % of they use. I remember thinking about lights out factories that were completely automated by robots.

joebert wrote:
Once in awhile a company leans the other way too soon, or leans on one for too long and the company crashes.

To take your statement a step further (with monopolies in mind), all empires fail with time. They over extend their resources, become corrupt, or loss productivity. We live in a new cultural age involving information, how long will Google remain dominant? Since an uncompetitive market does not benefit the consumer, how long until Google will have a reasonable competitor?

They are providing good information right now. Google has only been around for 11 years, they are merely a toddler. What will be Google's role with information in the next 20 or 30 years?
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Normally, no one can see that far ahead. As you said, all empires eventually fail. Google's length of rule will depend on the length of capitalism which is in a state of decay, also over extending itself. I thought capitalism would limp along for another 50 years but it looks like it won't make it. All Americans should have a passport just in case. I have mine, do you have yours?
  • JCDenton
  • Born
  • Born
  • JCDenton
  • Posts: 3

Post 3+ Months Ago

Ups to Breeze and and Cerebro. Everything you have said is on point. But, honestly, I don't worry so much about Google. Anyone who can make The Giant back pedal is okay with me. The fear with Google, because it is a publicly traded company, is that the ownership of the company could alter very quickly and therefore change the current responsible practices of Google.

My fear is access to the internet by the large cable, telephone, and broadband companies. They have been trying for years to squealch, control, and capitalize on all traffic and democratic practices via the internet. Google and the search engines are no threat to web neutrality like AT&T, Cox, et al. are.

Don2007, please expand your political and social consciousness a bit more, or at the very least avoid ad hominem attacks to support your thesis.
  • Don2007
  • Web Master
  • Web Master
  • Don2007
  • Posts: 4924
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

My world view is based on the indisputable characteristics of capitalism, the study of economic structures, political super structures and the current decay that we see occurring in front of our eyes. It is not based on corporate news reports which are just a mouth piece for the government.

No matter what I see in this world, there is always a republican near by to tell me that I don't see it but I don't listen to them and I won't listen to you either.

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 28 posts
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
cron
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.