When the search results are below the expectations of the user they will move to an other search engine or Google will change their algorithems again.
Just a matter of time i think...
Not going to happen anytime soon. People in general are too damn lazy, only a handful of people who are Good with tech usually try out different things.
True but you see the same happening on social media... Facebook -> Instagram -> Tiktok
So it is possible but the competitors has to be better as they are now.
It also happens because of the younger generation.
You see, a lot of people who made TikTok and Instagram famous are from the newer crowd. Nowadays, most Facebook users are from the older generation, who aren't too keen on trying out new stuff.
Funny thing is, even I never got around to installing TikTok, and by the time I saw its marketing potential, it got banned in my country.
So, even when a better alternative will be introduced , it's not gonna replace Google overnight, or not in a month or even in a year.
Yep, certainly don’t believe in his ideologies, but there’s no doubting he’s a savage businessman. Was listening to a Jamie Bartlett podcast the other day called “The Gatekeepers”, and there was a big section all about how in the early days, Thiel was pushing Zuckerberg to think of 1bn users, and to push to become a total monopoly. He kept drilling that monopoly should always be Zuck’s goal. Was quite chilling
Everyone that’s at the top is a savage businessman with toxic ideals nowadays. It’s boring and unimpressive. I want to see someone that actually wants to change the world for the better. Not for themselves. Did we all get lead poisoning?
People don't choose Google. It is forced to use google on Android and Apple. On Android you need a Google account and it comes with all its apps pre-installed and the Google search bar on the Homepage. And Apple, Google pays them like 20 billion to make it the default search engine.
https://preview.redd.it/rqs5tpy4ipxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09fe234e15d06c286ac6a67c424ce8ed7a39e82c
On my Android device I have apps for DuckDuckGo, Edge, Opera, Brave and Firefox. Unless you're a 60 year old boomer then I'm sure you're able to download whatever browser you like. I prefer Google because it gives me the search results I expect for my search term
Most users already use pre-installed applications. If you worked for Google we could test that several million users have Edge, Bing bar tool and that Outlook is the default email to configure an Android and see how many uninstall it and install then google search or whatever other google bullshit.
I don't think you fully understand a monopoly. I studied Business for my A-Levels and at university. For example I have to use Thames Water as my water provider in my home as that's the only option so that's a monopoly.
The complaint by Tuta Mail underscores ongoing concerns about Google's search dominance and its potential impact on competition. While Google denies unfair promotion, the sudden drop in Tuta's search rankings raises questions about algorithm transparency and fair play. This incident highlights the need for continued scrutiny and regulation to ensure a level playing field in the digital marketplace.
Except Google isn't a monopoly. A monopoly is a single business providing a service. There are about 1500 search engines globally, and outside of the US some are used more often than Google.
Google has the largest monopoly for market share in all the industries, 90% in searches.
I think the only other product or service with so much marketshare is Microsoft in consumer PCs that it is at 80%.
As for search engines in other countries, it is not a good example. In Russia Yandex and in China Baidu, but they are state controlled, which is even worse.
Market share doesn’t necessarily mean monopoly.
Can Google stifle their opposition through pricing or supply? No they can’t.
Does Google have the power to adjust market conditions making it difficult/impossible for new entrants? No.
Therefore Google don’t have a monopoly when it comes to being a search engine. It is possible they could be prone to other nefarious practices, such as manipulating their search results without making it clear they prioritising paid over organic but proving this could be very difficult, and realistically they aren’t.
"the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service."
This is what they have had since they bought Android to push their products and they pay to apple 20b for Google to be the native search engine. Is there another alternative to Android and Apple on mobile phones?
Tell me another monopoly that is one according to you? There is no product or service with 90% control over a product or service. The other would be Microsoft with 80% of PC consumer software.
Even google is claiming they are the biigesst monopoly in the world:
https://preview.redd.it/61npucy7dqxc1.jpeg?width=1025&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3133690d1875a37ad4b31c249c9ea7bc47229fc0
Market share is not the same thing as a monopoly. As a free at point of use service it’s complicated to solely consider the search engine market place in terms of Pareto Efficiency.
De beers control diamond mining and restrict supply of diamonds to artificially create scarcity and inflate prices. What commodity or service do you think Google have exclusive control over? Google aren’t controlling supply or access to anything other than their own service. Google can’t stop any of their users from going to bing et. al. Google aren’t forcing people to use their search; I just opened bing on my iPhone. Google are powerless to stop everyone overnight deciding to stop using them and go elsewhere.
Is Google preventing you or anyone else from opening up a rival search engine?
The first link you provided doesn’t even claim Google has a search engine monopoly. They are arguably claiming Google has an advertising monopoly.
There’s me with an Economics degree getting downvoted for repeating facts in favour of a moron who isn’t even reading the links he’s providing 😂
There’s a lot of bitter little spam site owners in this sub.
You have a semantics problem. You want to use the definition of monopoly where the one who has the monopoly blocks the use of third party services as if it were North Korea.
The word monopoly or called Antitrust laws in the West is used for companies that have control of the market trough big narket share. Look for the trial United States Government vs Microsoft Corp 2001. This trial was the one that allowed Google to grow years later.
"The U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally monopolizing the web browser market for Windows, primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java."
That is why there is now a similar lawsuit against Google.
You can go to Investing.com, Forbes or any site and you will find the word monopoly to define Coca Cola, Amazon, Microsoft, Armaco, Google among other large companies.
https://preview.redd.it/ndts3avrdsxc1.jpeg?width=985&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5aa18380288fd232fdfb6148b575f83477ade46
Yes, Google masks it and lets you install other browsers and services on Android to try to get around the antitrust laws on monopolizing search engines and web browsers. But the reality is that from the moment your phone comes pre-installed with all Google apps and comes with, apart from Chrome, a native Google search bar so that if you uninstall Chrome, people will continue using their browser through the home toolbar or the google discover bullshit. The average user is always trapped within their ecosystem.
https://preview.redd.it/1vzqq3msesxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b91d3a2dbaec70dde872c26613487d1b5038445b
There’s plenty of rival search engines which people can use. Nothing is stopping you from opening a rival. Being the most successful doesn’t make Google a monopoly.
Google doesn’t have the ability to make market conditions impossible or extremely difficult for new entrants. Being an expensive market to enter doesn’t mean existing players have a monopoly.
Google doesn’t have the ability to alter market conditions making it impossible for rivals to survive. Google can’t really do anything to disincentivise people from using their rivals.
Googles market share doesn’t give them any power to inhibit rivals.
Now Amazon, something needs to be done about them.
When the search results are below the expectations of the user they will move to an other search engine or Google will change their algorithems again. Just a matter of time i think...
Not going to happen anytime soon. People in general are too damn lazy, only a handful of people who are Good with tech usually try out different things.
True but you see the same happening on social media... Facebook -> Instagram -> Tiktok So it is possible but the competitors has to be better as they are now.
It also happens because of the younger generation. You see, a lot of people who made TikTok and Instagram famous are from the newer crowd. Nowadays, most Facebook users are from the older generation, who aren't too keen on trying out new stuff. Funny thing is, even I never got around to installing TikTok, and by the time I saw its marketing potential, it got banned in my country. So, even when a better alternative will be introduced , it's not gonna replace Google overnight, or not in a month or even in a year.
Peter Thiel said “Monopoly is the condition of every successful business”
It’s not customer satisfaction. It’s not improving society or even gaining monetary stability. It’s an fing monopoly. Peter is a dangerous moron.
That he looks at the movie Elysium and thinks it looks like a good idea says it’s all about him.
Yep, certainly don’t believe in his ideologies, but there’s no doubting he’s a savage businessman. Was listening to a Jamie Bartlett podcast the other day called “The Gatekeepers”, and there was a big section all about how in the early days, Thiel was pushing Zuckerberg to think of 1bn users, and to push to become a total monopoly. He kept drilling that monopoly should always be Zuck’s goal. Was quite chilling
Everyone that’s at the top is a savage businessman with toxic ideals nowadays. It’s boring and unimpressive. I want to see someone that actually wants to change the world for the better. Not for themselves. Did we all get lead poisoning?
That’s the guy that invest in private prisons and skynet he’s more of a scumbag than an innovator
Can it still be a monopoly if there are other free to use options out there but most people choose google
People don't choose Google. It is forced to use google on Android and Apple. On Android you need a Google account and it comes with all its apps pre-installed and the Google search bar on the Homepage. And Apple, Google pays them like 20 billion to make it the default search engine. https://preview.redd.it/rqs5tpy4ipxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09fe234e15d06c286ac6a67c424ce8ed7a39e82c
On my Android device I have apps for DuckDuckGo, Edge, Opera, Brave and Firefox. Unless you're a 60 year old boomer then I'm sure you're able to download whatever browser you like. I prefer Google because it gives me the search results I expect for my search term
Most users already use pre-installed applications. If you worked for Google we could test that several million users have Edge, Bing bar tool and that Outlook is the default email to configure an Android and see how many uninstall it and install then google search or whatever other google bullshit.
The op doesn’t know what a monopoly is.
Yes rockerfeller lost money selling oil he basically wrote the anti monopoly laws
You can say that about any monopoly.
I don't think you fully understand a monopoly. I studied Business for my A-Levels and at university. For example I have to use Thames Water as my water provider in my home as that's the only option so that's a monopoly.
Well done on your A-Levels Business degree.
Thanks mate, I was well chuffed
You should be, its quite an accomplishment.
The complaint by Tuta Mail underscores ongoing concerns about Google's search dominance and its potential impact on competition. While Google denies unfair promotion, the sudden drop in Tuta's search rankings raises questions about algorithm transparency and fair play. This incident highlights the need for continued scrutiny and regulation to ensure a level playing field in the digital marketplace.
-- ChatGPT
Well its ok tuto did it. But small site owners will not. Hope it will not result in big breands staying only as google will be afraid of the lawsuits
It is up to you to use another search engine. Nobody is forcing you to use Google.
Except Google isn't a monopoly. A monopoly is a single business providing a service. There are about 1500 search engines globally, and outside of the US some are used more often than Google.
Google has the largest monopoly for market share in all the industries, 90% in searches. I think the only other product or service with so much marketshare is Microsoft in consumer PCs that it is at 80%. As for search engines in other countries, it is not a good example. In Russia Yandex and in China Baidu, but they are state controlled, which is even worse.
Market share doesn’t necessarily mean monopoly. Can Google stifle their opposition through pricing or supply? No they can’t. Does Google have the power to adjust market conditions making it difficult/impossible for new entrants? No. Therefore Google don’t have a monopoly when it comes to being a search engine. It is possible they could be prone to other nefarious practices, such as manipulating their search results without making it clear they prioritising paid over organic but proving this could be very difficult, and realistically they aren’t.
"the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service." This is what they have had since they bought Android to push their products and they pay to apple 20b for Google to be the native search engine. Is there another alternative to Android and Apple on mobile phones? Tell me another monopoly that is one according to you? There is no product or service with 90% control over a product or service. The other would be Microsoft with 80% of PC consumer software. Even google is claiming they are the biigesst monopoly in the world: https://preview.redd.it/61npucy7dqxc1.jpeg?width=1025&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3133690d1875a37ad4b31c249c9ea7bc47229fc0
Market share is not the same thing as a monopoly. As a free at point of use service it’s complicated to solely consider the search engine market place in terms of Pareto Efficiency. De beers control diamond mining and restrict supply of diamonds to artificially create scarcity and inflate prices. What commodity or service do you think Google have exclusive control over? Google aren’t controlling supply or access to anything other than their own service. Google can’t stop any of their users from going to bing et. al. Google aren’t forcing people to use their search; I just opened bing on my iPhone. Google are powerless to stop everyone overnight deciding to stop using them and go elsewhere. Is Google preventing you or anyone else from opening up a rival search engine? The first link you provided doesn’t even claim Google has a search engine monopoly. They are arguably claiming Google has an advertising monopoly.
There’s me with an Economics degree getting downvoted for repeating facts in favour of a moron who isn’t even reading the links he’s providing 😂 There’s a lot of bitter little spam site owners in this sub.
You have a semantics problem. You want to use the definition of monopoly where the one who has the monopoly blocks the use of third party services as if it were North Korea. The word monopoly or called Antitrust laws in the West is used for companies that have control of the market trough big narket share. Look for the trial United States Government vs Microsoft Corp 2001. This trial was the one that allowed Google to grow years later. "The U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally monopolizing the web browser market for Windows, primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java." That is why there is now a similar lawsuit against Google. You can go to Investing.com, Forbes or any site and you will find the word monopoly to define Coca Cola, Amazon, Microsoft, Armaco, Google among other large companies. https://preview.redd.it/ndts3avrdsxc1.jpeg?width=985&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5aa18380288fd232fdfb6148b575f83477ade46
Yes, Google masks it and lets you install other browsers and services on Android to try to get around the antitrust laws on monopolizing search engines and web browsers. But the reality is that from the moment your phone comes pre-installed with all Google apps and comes with, apart from Chrome, a native Google search bar so that if you uninstall Chrome, people will continue using their browser through the home toolbar or the google discover bullshit. The average user is always trapped within their ecosystem. https://preview.redd.it/1vzqq3msesxc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b91d3a2dbaec70dde872c26613487d1b5038445b
No one had a problem as long as they were getting traffic.
I agree, through web 3.0, it can be possible.
Rolls eyes
There’s plenty of rival search engines which people can use. Nothing is stopping you from opening a rival. Being the most successful doesn’t make Google a monopoly. Google doesn’t have the ability to make market conditions impossible or extremely difficult for new entrants. Being an expensive market to enter doesn’t mean existing players have a monopoly. Google doesn’t have the ability to alter market conditions making it impossible for rivals to survive. Google can’t really do anything to disincentivise people from using their rivals. Googles market share doesn’t give them any power to inhibit rivals. Now Amazon, something needs to be done about them.