EU Hits Google with €2 billion Fine

jimbo said:

I didn't say that. I said the quest for mediocrity seems to be the purpose of this ruling.

Google is not a Monopoly. By its nature the World Wide Web tends to create competition. I've got three search engines loaded, but most often use Google.

Being the best does not necessarily mean you are the only.

Click to expand...

Google has a monopoly on searches and internet advertising. The reason they have that monopoly is because they are the best.

Carjosse said:

Google has a monopoly on searches and internet advertising. The reason they have that monopoly is because they are the best.

Click to expand...

A monopoly is a single player in the market. Google is not a single player. They are dominate because they are perceived as the best among the many. So they are being fined because they did the best job.

jimbo said:

A monopoly is a single player in the market. Google is not a single player. They are dominate because they are perceived as the best among the many. So they are being fined because they did the best job.

Click to expand...

It essentially is, Standard Oil was not the only player, it just had more than 90% of the market but that is still a monopoly. None of the options are viable because they are inferior.

Carjosse said:

It essentially is, Standard Oil was not the only player, it just had more than 90% of the market but that is still a monopoly. None of the options are viable because they are inferior.

Click to expand...

So the solution is a rush to inferior?

jimbo said:

So the solution is a rush to inferior?

Click to expand...

They are inferior because no one uses them, Google will still have a dominant market share no matter what, just less so.

Carjosse said:

They are inferior because no one uses them, Google will still have a dominant market share no matter what, just less so.

Click to expand...

Backwards. No one uses them because they are inferior.

Carjosse said:

They are inferior because no one uses them, Google will still have a dominant market share no matter what, just less so.

Click to expand...

They are inferior because people believe they have an inferior product.

Henrin said:

You clearly don't understand business. A business has no reason to not put their products first. Demanding they do something that is counterproductive to their business is just dumb and shows me that the EU has no concept of business.

Click to expand...

And you dont understand the rule of law it seems... that trumps business. Google broke the law. Deal with it.

Also, lets be clear... for google to change their practice wont have much impact on their business, but it certainly does have on their competitors. You do realise that Google got busted on putting competitors links on page 4 of searches and their own as the first few right? I doubt the EU would have bitched too much if it was happening on the same page, but page 4?

jimbo said:

I didn't say that. I said the quest for mediocrity seems to be the purpose of this ruling.

Google is not a Monopoly. By its nature the World Wide Web tends to create competition. I've got three search engines loaded, but most often use Google.

Being the best does not necessarily mean you are the only.

Click to expand...

Again it has nothing to do with any of this.

It has to do with the fact that Google put competitors business search results on page 4 and their own on page 1 and less competitors wayyy back on page god knows. You have to remember, Google almost sells nothing in Europe. It has its play store, so music, movies and books. Its tech is limited to Chromecast these days (depends on the country).

The real issue for me is that if they do it with something as small as this, then what else do they do it for that they dont publicly state.

jimbo said:

A monopoly is a single player in the market. Google is not a single player. They are dominate because they are perceived as the best among the many. So they are being fined because they did the best job.

Click to expand...

Text book answer that does not apply in the real world anymore. What Google is, is dominant and that is defacto the new "monopoly". You are not allowed to abuse your dominate position in the EU, as it hurts competition and the consumers. And they are not being fined for doing the best job, they are being fined for abusing their dominant position and hurting overall competition.

joG said:

I think I said that bad behavior must be punished. But this amounts to a non tariff trade barrier and a travesty of justice in some ways. Or was the fine levied on VW for its international fraud proportionate? After all, a recent Studie calculated 10.000 extra dead per annum from the difference to allowed and exhaust level in the Eu alone. If you take the whole picture including the animosity Europeans have been building towards the USA for a while this fits a very nasty picture developing in Europe. True, they need a foreign enemy/threat to stabilize the Eu, but this is getting out of hand.

Click to expand...

No more out of hand than what america is doing in a feckless attempt to divert americans away from the state of their own society/empire.

Fenton Lum said:

No more out of hand than what america is doing in a feckless attempt to divert americans away from the state of their own society/empire.

Click to expand...

Now that was cryptic and quite an attempt at I am not sure what. But I am sure you probably had something in mind.

PeteEU said:

Text book answer that does not apply in the real world anymore. What Google is, is dominant and that is defacto the new "monopoly". You are not allowed to abuse your dominate position in the EU, as it hurts competition and the consumers. And they are not being fined for doing the best job, they are being fined for abusing their dominant position and hurting overall competition.

Click to expand...

So don't load Google. Google is an American company. It doesn't come permanently embedded on any system I know of.

How does being the best, which the naysayers here acknowledge, hurt consumers?

jimbo said:

Google is an American company.

Click to expand...

And it is doing business in the EU, which means following EU laws.

It doesn't come permanently embedded on any system I know of.

Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

How does being the best, which the naysayers here acknowledge, hurt consumers?

Click to expand...

For the love of god..

You do a search for a product. Page 1 is full of Google products and mentions of the product. Page 2 has more mentions, reviews and other things, but still no competitors products. Page 3 has the same as Page 2. On Page 4, the "other companies" who provide the same product start poping up.

You dont see a problem competitive wise with this? Why are the competitors products sale sites on page 4, and irrelevant drivel on the 3 pages before it but Googles sale site for the product is on page 1? That is highly odd no?

How about this then... You search for the GOP. The first page has an explanation of what is is, and tons of anti-GOP sites. Page 2 has more anti-GOP sites and then on Page 3 the main GOP site comes up. Would that be fine by you?

Or how about this. You google.. "where to get an abortion".. the first 3 pages is full of anti-abortion pages and only on page 4 you get the correct result? Got no problem with that?

Or how about this. Say Apple had a search engine with the same size as Google. You searched for computer and the first 4 pages was about Apple products. Dont see a problem with that?

All of the above are anti-competitive.. Google search is NOT an advertisement platform.. it is a search engine and one has to expect the most relevant results come on page 1 not on page 4. Anything else is outright manipulation and illegal in the EU as it hurts competition.

PeteEU said:

Text book answer that does not apply in the real world anymore. What Google is, is dominant and that is defacto the new "monopoly". You are not allowed to abuse your dominate position in the EU, as it hurts competition and the consumers. And they are not being fined for doing the best job, they are being fined for abusing their dominant position and hurting overall competition.

Click to expand...

That is like making Harrods sales people to notify the clients that at Harvey Nichols the grass is greener. After unsuccessfully trying to build their own internet platforms they are angry, but have accepted that they aren't yet that developed. So all they want right now is a better cut of the profits and so that they do not have to increase the taxes for all companies they go this route. As so many of the tricks of non tariff trade barriers it is all got up pretty. But it is exactly the way these people work.

This is not to say that the large companies do not do naughty stuff. But this is probably not the evil that would justify a fine of that kind, if the company were EU based.

joG said:

Now that was cryptic and quite an attempt at I am not sure what. But I am sure you probably had something in mind.

Click to expand...

"If you take the whole picture including the animosity Europeans have been building towards the USA for a while ...."

Well try to make an effort instead of playing the victim.

Fenton Lum said:

"If you take the whole picture including the animosity Europeans have been building towards the USA for a while ...."

Well try to make an effort instead of playing the victim.

Click to expand...

Victim?

Fenton Lum said:

"If you take the whole picture including the animosity Europeans have been building towards the USA for a while ...."

Well try to make an effort instead of playing the victim.

Click to expand...

Methinks that is the crux of the problem.

That and a couple billion other problems.