Support NeoGAF

[SirRattleBalls]

Abusing your market position is not just coming with the territory. If anything, if you are a big company, you have a larger responsibility to not do that, since it has such a large impact.

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

 

[avaya]

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

Do you understand why regulation exists?

 

[Veins]

On the face of it, why is what google was doing bad? It's their search engine, of course they are going to promote their own services. That they have such a worldwide reach is their reward of becoming the only search engine anyone uses.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

If it's not a good thing, why are you hoping they'll win an appeal against this?

And because that is the corporate mindset, we need authorities like the EU to keep them in check, which is what is happening here.

On the face of it, why is what google was doing bad? It's their search engine, of course they are going to promote their own services. That they have such a worldwide reach is their reward of becoming the only search engine anyone uses.

Because of their dominant position as a search engine, them pushing their own products there is abusing their power and distorting a fair marketplace. If Google would have made their Google Shopping site and just put it between the results the same as every other site, and got their visitors because they simply offer a better product, it wouldn't be a problem.

 

[oti]

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

 

[Orcastar]

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

You're not saying that it's a good thing, yet you hope they appeal and win?

 

[Kabouter]

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

So why would you not intervene as a regulator when they abuse their position and you agree that is not a good thing? Just because some corporations choose to engage in such behaviour doesn't mean you shouldn't do anything about it.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

I see this suggested in everyone one of these threads but nobody has any idea how to pull this off with Google.

The EU could never force Google to break up alone. The US would have to be in on it too.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

Do you understand why regulation exists?

I do, which is why i prefer unregulated markets, especially when it comes to technology. But stuff like housing and health need regulation.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Here's a good thing on fake markets that tech firms are using

This is good. You should read it.

Btw Guys, stop using Uber as a noun. Its too late for google to not be a verb but we still have time on this one.

 

[Diprosalic]

I do, which is why i prefer unregulated markets, especially when it comes to technology. .

Dear lord. Stop.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Facebook, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Amazon should all be broken up. They're simply too large and their financial capabilities make it so hard to regulate them when they can overwhelm legislators with lobbyists and FUD. It's not healthy for democracy to have companies with so much influence.

 

[numble]

This penalty will not be enforced because Google will comply. That's why they should have gone for the max fine possible under regulation. Google hasn't got a leg to stand on when it comes to this.

Nevertheless Vestager is a truly excellent commissioner, she embodies the best of what the Commission was set up to do.

If the goal is to stop such practices, they have accomplished their job. The effective impact is to stop Google from engaging in the behavior. It is not a minor inconvenience if the behavior must stop.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I do, which is why i prefer unregulated markets, especially when it comes to technology. But stuff like housing and health need regulation.

So basically: "I prefer unregulated markets except in places that could have a negative impact on me."

 

[oti]

I do, which is why i prefer unregulated markets, especially when it comes to technology. But stuff like housing and health need regulation.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Be thankful for the EU. Your fantasy of a competition-less tech industry is a nightmare.

This is good. You should read it.

Btw Guys, stop using Uber as a noun. Its too late for google to not be a verb but we still have time on this one.

I'm uber the moon perplexed by some people believing the EU working for competition is bad.

 

[AbsolutBro]

TIL "promoting your own services" = "abusing market power".

 

[ClosingADoor]

TIL "promoting your own services" = "abusing market power".

Nice hot take, but yes, that is true if you are in a position that basically has become a monopoly.

 

[oti]

TIL "promoting your own services" = "abusing market power".

At this point I'm not sure if this is satire or not.

The EU had to teach you this?

 

[tuxfool]

I do, which is why i prefer unregulated markets, especially when it comes to technology. But stuff like housing and health need regulation.

what are your arbitrary reasons for wanting regulation in housing and health, but nowhere else?

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

TIL "promoting your own services" = "abusing market power".

If you're the market leader by a dominant margin it is.

 

[Doikor]

TIL "promoting your own services" = "abusing market power".

Yup. Just like what Microsoft did with bundling IE as the only choice of browsers and heavily marketing it in favour of other vendors products.

Replace Windows with Google search and IE with price comparison sites and you are literally at the exact same problem. There are (were) options to Windows back then. Nobody forced you to use Windows. But when 90%+ of people do use it then you are a monopoly and different rules apply to you.

 

[Messofanego]

Hope they appeal and win.

Comes with the territory of being a big company i guess

I cant think of any big company that has not been accused of abusing their position in any capacity, and when i say big i mean M$, Apple, Wal-mart, Google. That type of big. Its simply down the corporate mindset, why help others when you can line your own pockets with cash right. Not saying its a good thing, but its how the world works

Haha that's a pretty weak defence of Google. Just because other companies do bad things, Google shouldn't be punished? Absurd.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

So basically: "I prefer unregulated markets except in places that could have a negative impact on me."

Yes

You have no idea what you're talking about. Be thankful for the EU. Your fantasy of a competition-less tech industry is a nightmare.

I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years ago on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.

what are your arbitrary reasons for wanting regulation in housing and health, but nowhere else?

Never said anywhere else.

 

[Messofanego]

Yes



I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.

I do believe we're being trolled.

 

[Knugen]

That dough, though.

Spoiler

Please give me some.

 

[avaya]

If the goal is to stop such practices, they have accomplished their job. The effective impact is to stop Google from engaging in the behavior. It is not a minor inconvenience if the behavior must stop.

The goal is to stop the primary abuse but to also act as a deterrent to engage in similar practices in future. It took 7 years to deliver a fine that will barely move the share price and hardly impacts free cash flow. The scale of these companies requires full enforcement of the 10% rule, that in itself would not be much, only a 9bn USD fine. The EU will need to update the rules but thankfully such discussions are in very early consultation.

 

[Diprosalic]

MA dissertation

🤔

 

[numble]

Yes



I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.



Never said anywhere else.

What was your MA in? What regulations were you speaking about in your dissertation? This ruling is very specific regarding competition law and actions to encourage or discourage competition in the market. Can you quote the passages in your dissertation that talk about the negative economic effects of anti-monopoly and anti-competition laws?

 

[Doikor]

Yes



I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.



Never said anywhere else.

Ok lets say the automotive industry (and everything related to it) was 100% free for all market.

What if the few big auto makers together with the oil companies bought all the gas stations and car maintenance shops. Put very strong DRM into the car, the tank and pumps.

Now you can only take your car for maintenance to an approved shop, only pump gas from an approved dealer etc. Lets say they got into this position by being cheaper/more efficient. But once they get there who is there to stop them from just hiking up the prices as much as they want? What is the average consumer going to do when you literally cannot pump just any gas into your car even if someone tried to compete with that.

What Alphabet and friends have become is basically this but on the internet.

edit: I think the Apple app store and Google store are even worse then this price comparison case though. Both still have a thin vail of "we are not a monopoly" because both iOS and Android exist. But if one of them ever goes away you can be sure for regulation to crack down on the markets.

Point being that free markets work if there is enough competition. Over time in many industries the big players will just start buying the smaller ones and at some point each other. At some point you will end up with 1 to 3 really big ones that don't truly bother to compete with each other and the consumers are going to be on the loosing end of the stick in that case.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

Ok lets say the automotive industry (and everything related to it) was 100% free for all market.

What if the few big auto makers together with the oil companies bought all the gas stations and car maintenance shops. Put very strong DRM into the car, the tank and pumps.

Now you can only take your car for maintenance to an approved shop, only pump gas from an approved dealer etc. Lets say they got into this position by being cheaper/more efficient. But once they get there who is there to stop them from just hiking up the prices as much as they want? What is the average consumer going to do when you literally cannot pump just any gas into your car even if someone tried to compete with that.

What Alphabet and friends have become is basically this but on the internet.

You just described what happened to Street cars in America in a way.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Yes

I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years ago on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.

Never said anywhere else.

Nice trolling there, good job.

 

[SmartBase]

I do believe we're being trolled.

It definitely looks like it.

 

[daxy]

I wrote my MA dissertation 2 years ago on why less regulation helps economies grow, so i know a fair bit which is why i'm against it.

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.

This boggles my mind. Any reasonable economic theorist will tell you that anti-competitive behavior will cause market inefficiencies, and by extension stagnancy, so please do elaborate.

 

[Trickster]

Nightmare... You mean paradise right. A lawless market in which only the strong survive.

Because giant companies have shown time and again how responsible and pro consumer they are

 

[G.ZZZ]

First they came for the multi-billionaire corporations, and i said nothing.

Then they came for me, and no one was left to speak for me.

#corporationsrightsarehumanrights #defendtheamericandream #monopoliesaregood

 

[Ardenyal]

You just described what happened to Street cars in America in a way.

World would surely be a better place with a little bit of lead in all of us. Unregulate everything!

 

[MisterFalcon]

Ok lets say the automotive industry (and everything related to it) was 100% free for all market.

What if the few big auto makers together with the oil companies bought all the gas stations and car maintenance shops. Put very strong DRM into the car, the tank and pumps.

Now you can only take your car for maintenance to an approved shop, only pump gas from an approved dealer etc. Lets say they got into this position by being cheaper/more efficient. But once they get there who is there to stop them from just hiking up the prices as much as they want? What is the average consumer going to do when you literally cannot pump just any gas into your car even if someone tried to compete with that.

This is a classic gaming theory situation where for every participant in this grand conspiracy there is more to gain from being the first to break the pact then following the rules.

 

[SirRattleBalls]

I love the derailment this thread has taken over an opinion. Some people don't share your same thoughts guys.

 

[Frustrated_me]

Peanuts.

Google got away with everything for years, this sum means nothing for where Google is positioned in the market.

 

[AllGamer]

I love the derailment this thread has taken over an opinion. Some people don't share your same thoughts guys.

Yeah, but your opinion is wrong...

 

[Doikor]

This is a classic gaming theory situation where for every participant in this grand conspiracy there is more to gain from being the first to break the pact then following the rules.

If only markets were 100% game theory. Like in this case they obviously aren't. It was google that with its monopoly position just crushed everyone else by putting their own results first. Only realistic way for a price comparison site to compete with Google is to make a more popular search engine then Google and then put their price comparison results there. Chances of that happening are pretty much 0 and thus the EU fines for Google abusing its monopoly position.

The thing is that for my example there is no need for a conspiracy. You can do it in the open. Google did this trick in the open too. Though they have the advantage of being the only party involved so they can do whatever they want (up to the point of some regulatory agency stopping them)

 

[oti]

I love the derailment this thread has taken over an opinion. Some people don't share your same thoughts guys.

"Competition is bad" is not an opinion.

 

[AbsolutBro]

Yup. Just like what Microsoft did with bundling IE as the only choice of browsers and heavily marketing it in favour of other vendors products.

Replace Windows with Google search and IE with price comparison sites and you are literally at the exact same problem. There are (were) options to Windows back then. Nobody forced you to use Windows. But when 90%+ of people do use it then you are a monopoly and different rules apply to you.

I did not realize Google prevented you from removing Google and installing other shopping services.

Wait, that's not how websites work.

Trying to compare online sites, which are options not even native to a consumer's system, to onboard, unremovable software is disingenuous at best.

 

[numble]

The goal is to stop the primary abuse but to also act as a deterrent to engage in similar practices in future. It took 7 years to deliver a fine that will barely move the share price and hardly impacts free cash flow. The scale of these companies requires full enforcement of the 10% rule, that in itself would not be much, only a 9bn USD fine. The EU will need to update the rules but thankfully such discussions are in very early consultation.

I disagree that a 10% rule (or more) should be applied every time; the logical conclusion if that actually happened would be that companies would need to seek approval for every activity from the Commission for every new activity they take, because if they make a mistake or even if their lawyers think there is nothing wrong with an activity, that means that you automatically give up 10% of your revenue.

Like you said, it took 7 years for the Commission to determine whether or not this activity broke the rules, and they are still investigating Google's other activities. Even if it just takes 1-2 years for a Commission to make a determination on whether a proposed activity will break the rules, it would stifle activity and definitely be considered over-regulation if companies are afraid of getting a 10% fine without preclearance from the Commission. As an active example, Google has proposed implementing ad-blocking in Chrome by default. Hard to say whether it violates any anti-competition rules, but if there was always a 10% fine for violating anti-competition rules, it would stop Google in its tracks even if at the end of the day (after a 7 year investigation?) the Commission might clear it and say it is okay.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Can someone link me to some good reading on this? What is google doing exactly? Also how do you regulate a search company manipulating things on the website they invented? Doesn't any company want to push their products above all other competitors? Did they stop EU folks from using Bing?

And what's all this talk of breaking up large tech companies? Wouldn't that kill the innovation and tech race these companies are part of?

I'm largely ignorant on this subject.

 

[*Splinter]

Damn that's 14 DUP MPs

 

[Doikor]

I did not realize Google prevented you from removing Google and installing other shopping services.

Wait, that's not how websites work.

Trying to compare online sites, which are options not even native to a consumer's system, to onboard, unremovable software is disingenuous at best.

Nobody stopped you from installing another browser (many did) and just removing the IE icon from your desktop effectively making you not use it to the same degree as not using google search (seriously. Try to not use google search for like a year. Pretty much impossible). There are options. There will always be options. The question is are they meaningful options?

 

[hanspampel]

I did not realize Google prevented you from removing Google and installing other shopping services.

Wait, that's not how websites work.

Trying to compare online sites, which are options not even native to a consumer's system, to onboard, unremovable software is disingenuous at best.

I can't remove google apps
You can change the search engine in the browser, but not for the whole phone...

 

[TheDarkLord]

Yeah, but your opinion is wrong...

"Competition is bad" is not an opinion.

Someones opinion cant be wrong, its their opinion. You just don't agree with it, which is perfectly okay, does not make it wrong. Saying 1+1=4 is wrong. saying you don't believe in Government oversight and Regulation is an opinion, some markets that have less regulation work just fine others and the vast majority simply don't

 

[Ac30]

Damn that's 1425 DUP MPs

Lmao

Wait wasn't it 100 mil per