Yes, but there is two dimensions to the problem, one is the excessive market share Google has on some markets, the other is the vertical integration transferring that excessive market share to other unrelated markets.
Take for example Google Maps. You could argue that it competes with Apple Maps and Bing Maps, but that’s just saying that if you want to be in the online mapping business, you also have to own a leading operating system. You’re right, if you break Maps off Google, it will most likely not be competitive with Apple or Bing, but does that mean that we’ll never have real open competition on this space? And there is a lot of other markets like this that have an oligopoly at best cornering the market. Online document editing. Email providers. Browsers. Google Chrome specifically is shaping the whole Internet in Google’s image, against ordinary people.
Is there really no way to reestablish free markets on these sectors?
But that’s a good example. Google Maps’ biggest competition is probably Yelp, which Apple Maps leans heavily on for review content. Yelp has been involved in some very, very unsavory practices. Yelp has basically extorted small businesses for positive reviews. It did so, presumably, because on its own it’s a very hard business to be in. Yelp’s sales team is under pressure to generate revenue in a way that Google Maps’ sales team, frankly, is not.
Google Maps, for all its faults, does not seem to have the same widespread abuse problem that Yelp does. But it might if you break it off into its own business.
As for Google favoring its own properties: that is challenging, because they all do it. Apple Maps is arguably more favored by Apple than Google Maps is by Google, and in markets like the US, there are more iPhone users than Android users, so Google is arguably at a disadvantage. I think for that, a good starting place would be regulation to control that. For example, both Google and Apple should be prohibited from using APIs in their constituent properties that aren’t available to third party competitors.
Yes, but there is two dimensions to the problem, one is the excessive market share Google has on some markets, the other is the vertical integration transferring that excessive market share to other unrelated markets.
Take for example Google Maps. You could argue that it competes with Apple Maps and Bing Maps, but that’s just saying that if you want to be in the online mapping business, you also have to own a leading operating system. You’re right, if you break Maps off Google, it will most likely not be competitive with Apple or Bing, but does that mean that we’ll never have real open competition on this space? And there is a lot of other markets like this that have an oligopoly at best cornering the market. Online document editing. Email providers. Browsers. Google Chrome specifically is shaping the whole Internet in Google’s image, against ordinary people.
Is there really no way to reestablish free markets on these sectors?
But that’s a good example. Google Maps’ biggest competition is probably Yelp, which Apple Maps leans heavily on for review content. Yelp has been involved in some very, very unsavory practices. Yelp has basically extorted small businesses for positive reviews. It did so, presumably, because on its own it’s a very hard business to be in. Yelp’s sales team is under pressure to generate revenue in a way that Google Maps’ sales team, frankly, is not.
Google Maps, for all its faults, does not seem to have the same widespread abuse problem that Yelp does. But it might if you break it off into its own business.
As for Google favoring its own properties: that is challenging, because they all do it. Apple Maps is arguably more favored by Apple than Google Maps is by Google, and in markets like the US, there are more iPhone users than Android users, so Google is arguably at a disadvantage. I think for that, a good starting place would be regulation to control that. For example, both Google and Apple should be prohibited from using APIs in their constituent properties that aren’t available to third party competitors.