Google

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Googleopoly II: Google’s Predatory Playbook to Thwart Competition — a new White Paper

September 28, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

My new Googleoply II White Paper (see www.googleopoly.net) identifies and documents the twenty-six sources of Google’s market power and the five different anti-competitive strategies Google employs to foreclose competition.

This original and trenchant analysis brings into sharp focus the moorings of a potential antitrust case against the Google-Yahoo ad pact. The White Paper also should give pause to even the biggest apologists and cheerleaders for Google — if they are ‘open’ to reading it. Simply, it is a must-read piece for anyone trying to understand why the DOJ’s investigation of the proposed Google-DoubleClick is so serious and important.

Continue reading “Googleopoly II: Google’s Predatory Playbook to Thwart Competition — a new White Paper”

00Publius Contributor - Abortion - Democrats/Leftists - Family - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Warner Todd Huston

Google Folds, Will Allow Anti-Abortion Ads on Service — But a Victory for Anti-Abortion?

September 18, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

Google has had a bit of its arrogance forced from it today. In the face of a costly lawsuit the on-line giant has made a reversal of its standing rule saying that it now will allow anti-abortion ads to run in its advertisement services.

Until now, Google has imposed its own political agenda by disallowing any ad to be taken out by anti-abortion advocates while allowing all ads for abortion pushers to go through without question. Google has, however, reversed that decision in the face of a legal challenge that its policy breached the Equalities Act of 2006 in the USA.

Google spokesmen said that they reconsidered this policy to create “a level playing field” and to enable “religious associations to place ads on abortion in a factual way.”

But, let me warn that this is not a victory signed, sealed and delivered for free political speech just yet. Google did not outline what this new policy of determining what presenting abortion “in a factual way” would mean. We will have to wait and find out to see how Google will use this new tactic to silence abortion advocates, if they indeed do so.

At this point, Google could easily continue to reject anti-abortion ads using this ill defined claim that the ads would somehow violate this new policy of “factuality.”

However, even this admission from the Internet giant that they were being grossly unfair is a hopeful sign that the moral position against abortion will get a fair hearing from among the advertisement viewing public. Abortion agencies have had a monopoly on readers on Google until now, but this new policy might do what Google is claiming they are suddenly interested in, “leveling the playing field.”

Let’s all hope that Google is being truthful and not just looking for a new sly way to continue to push its own political agenda on an unsuspecting public.

Continue reading “Google Folds, Will Allow Anti-Abortion Ads on Service — But a Victory for Anti-Abortion?”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Exposing the Biases in the Broadband Policy Debate — My new white paper

September 17, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Invited to speak at the ITIF forum on ITIF’s white paper, “It’s Time to End the Broadband Policy Wars”, I so strongly disagreed with the framing bias of that white paper and the broadband policy debate in general that I decided I needed to counter it by writing my own white paper:

Don’t be Fooled by the National Broadband Policy “Straw Man”
Exposing Three Hidden Policy Biases of Broadband Policy Proponents

The abstract of my six page paper is below:

Abstract: Don’t be fooled by the straw man argument and hidden biases in the assumptions undergirding the call for a more government-centric national broadband policy. Their argument cannot withstand common sense, penetrating analysis, or ‘open’ public scrutiny. There are at least three major hidden biases in their pillar assumptions, that when exposed, make it clear that proponents of a more government-centric national broadband policy need to go back to the drawing board to find a legitimate rationale for their policy approach.
Continue reading “Exposing the Biases in the Broadband Policy Debate — My new white paper”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Socialism - Society/Culture - Technology

Google’s dominance grows, But Don’t forget DOJ investigation

September 9, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google’s online advertising dominance grows — Don’t forget the pending DOJ investigation…

Google’s dominance of the Internet’s business model for monetizing content only grows.

“Gap widens in online advertising: Rivals struggle to catch up to Google as buyers favor search over display” reports Jessica Vascellaro in the Wall Street Journal.

The article’s conclusion is dead on and ominous — the gap between Google and its competitors in online advertising is widening and will continue to do so because the business that Google dominates, search advertising, is growing significantly faster than display advertising is.

While the article focused on the different growth rates of online advertising, the article missed the opportunity to highlight what else the numbers tell us:

Continue reading “Google’s dominance grows, But Don’t forget DOJ investigation”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

How the FCC Comcast Decision Limits Net Neutrality

August 29, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the FCC’s order on Comcast’s network management practices, reined in the net neutrality movement much more than it advanced their agenda. The old adage is true here, be careful what you ask for — FreePress/Public Knowledge.

At its rawest level, the chest-beating petitioners got the FCC to reiterate what the FCC has long said it would do, and also order Comcast to do what Comcast already publicly committed to do. When the dust settles and the rhetoric cools, the petitioners will better understand the old adage: be careful what you ask for.

In this instance, they hoped to advance their agenda for sweeping net neutrality legislation and regulation, and what they ended up with was the expert agency taking much of the wind out of their sails.

How does the FCC Comcast decision limit Net Neutrality?
Continue reading “How the FCC Comcast Decision Limits Net Neutrality”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

What 3Q earnings tell us about Google-Yahoo Antitrust Review

July 30, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

GOOG-YHOO earn ~100% of profits

With the 3Q08 earnings releases by Google, Yahoo and Microsoft in the last few days, DOJ antitrust investigators of the Google-Yahoo partnership now get their first fresh look at the most recent revenue and profit market shares for this market.

While many, including myself, have focused on the proxy market share measures of searches from ComScore, Nielsen and Hitwise to track Google’s relentless taking of share on a monthly basis, antitrust investigators will likely look past proxy search shares and focus on the truer and more accurate measures of market share–actual, reported revenues and profits.

There are strong reasons why antitrust investigators will shift from the market’s obsession with the monthly search share proxy figures to real financial numbers.

First, users do not pay for search, advertisers and website publishers do; this makes search share an indirect and less relevant measure of true market power.

Second, all searches are not equal, some lead to clicks and some clicks are dramatically more valuable than other clicks.

Third, the search shares are third-party proxy estimates based on samples; they are not auditable and accountable as publicly-reported financial data are; moreover, SARBOX requires CFOs/CEOs to personally sign that the finances are accurate, subject to severe penalties if they are proven to be fraudulent.

Continue reading “What 3Q earnings tell us about Google-Yahoo Antitrust Review”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans’ Privacy:

July 25, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The Detailed Case from my House Testimony

In my testimony Thursday on Internet privacy before Chairman Markey’s House Internet Subcommittee, I documented for Congress the detailed case of how Google, which is subject to no Federal privacy laws, is the single biggest threat to Americans’ privacy today.

The evidence assembled here shows how Google’s mission and culture are hostile to privacy, how Google’s unprecedented scale and scope enable a breath-taking collection of intimate “blackmail-able” information, and how Google’s track record is not worthy of trust.

From my testimony:

Case Study: How Google Systematically Threatens Americans’ Privacy

To begin, I am not alone in believing Google’s privacy practices are a particularly serious consumer protection problem.

  • Privacy watchdog, Privacy International, ranked Google worst in its world survey on privacy in 2007 and described Google as “hostile to privacy.”
  • EPIC, CDD, and USPIRG filed suit with the FTC last year challenging Google’s privacy practices as deceptive trade practices.

    *

  • Recently, a broad coalition of privacy advocates pressured Google to finally comply with California privacy law and put a link to their privacy policy on their home page.

First, Google’s mission is antithetical to privacy

Google’s megalomaniacal “mission is to organize the world’s information and make it accessible and useful.” Google’s mission is so uniquely antithetical to privacy–it actually warrants the creation of a new term: “publicacy.” Google’s unique and radical “publicacy” mission believes “the world’s information,” is (and should be) public not private. (Note the mission statement puts no qualifier on “information” other than “the world’s”.)
Continue reading “Why Google is the Biggest Threat to Americans’ Privacy:”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Debunking the Google-Yahoo Antitrust Myths

July 20, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In advance of the Senate and House antitrust hearings on Google-Yahoo, I thought it would be useful to debunk some of the primary antitrust Myths you will likely hear.

Myth #1:

There can’t be an antitrust problem as long as consumers are just one click away from a competitive search engine.

This is intentional misdirection. Google does not get paid by users, but by advertisers and websites. The antitrust concern here is not about “competition” for free search engine use, but competition for paid search advertising.

Google is exploiting the “Internet choice paradox” (PDF file) where because users have near infinite choices to reach Internet content, they assume content businesses must have as much choice in advertising to Internet users as users have in reaching content. They don’t.
Continue reading “Debunking the Google-Yahoo Antitrust Myths”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Google’s Cerf floats trial balloon: “Why not nationalize the Internet?”

July 8, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google’s Internet Evangelist, Vint Cerf recently asked publicly: “Should the Internet be owned and maintained by the government, just like the highways?” according to a post by Erick Schonfeld on TechCrunch.

  • Since the Government neither owns or maintains the Internet today, Google may have much grander plans for ‘nationalizing the Internet’ than anybody appreciated.
  • Maybe we should take Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt much more seriously when he declares: “The goal of the company is not to monetize anything,” and “The goal is to change the world — and monetization is a technique to do that.”

Let’s dissect how radical and destructive Google’s notions for nationalizing the Internet are.
Continue reading “Google’s Cerf floats trial balloon: “Why not nationalize the Internet?””

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Transcript of Lecture on Google, Net Neutrality, Monopolies, Click Fraud, Privacy

June 20, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Unleashed: Transcript of Griffin/Cleland talk on Google, net neutrality, monopolies, click fraud, privacy

For those who like the written format, here is the transcript of ChipGriffin’s interview of me on all things Google.

The transcript is just below the podcast button to hear the interview.

This interview turned out to be one of the most comprehensive and in-depth discussions I have had on all things Google — that’s been captured for web listening or reading.
Continue reading “Transcript of Lecture on Google, Net Neutrality, Monopolies, Click Fraud, Privacy”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why a Lack of Openness Sullies the Integrity of Google’s Ad Auctions

June 9, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Does Google warrant the current exceptional leap-of-faith in the integrity of its dominant ad auction model, given its near total lack of openness, transparency, independent auditability or third party oversight? There is a growing body of evidence that Google does not.

The New York Times article today by Miguel Helft, “The Human Hands behind the Google Money Machine,” is a must read for anyone following Google or concerned about the openness and transparency of public markets. It is also a little treasure trove of fresh information on Google.

Why a lack of openness sullies the integrity of Google’s ad auctions.

First, it is widely accepted that public markets operate best when open and transparent.

Google’s ad auction model has become one of the world’s most important public markets. Google is increasingly becoming the world’s primary public information broker. Google brokers:

  • Information for over 700 million search users worldwide, over three to six times their nearest rivals;
  • Advertisement placement for over a million advertisers several times more than their nearest competitors;
  • Monetization for over a million websites several times more than their nearest competitors.

Google is also not open or transparent.
Continue reading “Why a Lack of Openness Sullies the Integrity of Google’s Ad Auctions”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Constitution - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Can you trust Google to obey the rules? Is Google accountable to anyone?

June 4, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In monitoring Google as closely as I do, it has become increasingly clear that Google does not believe it has to obey the rules, standards, regulations and laws that others routinely obey and respect. Google increasingly operates like a self-declared, virtual sovereign nation, largely unaccountable to the rules and mores of the rest of the world.

There is plentiful evidence of Google’s unaccountability; see the following analysis peppered generously with source links. The impetus for this analysis and documentation was Saul Hansel’s outstanding New York Times Blog: “Google fights for the right to hide its privacy policy.”

In a nutshell, Mr. Hansel spotlighted how Google is refusing to abide by the rule that its members must display a link to their privacy policy on their home page; and that this industry self-regulatory body is expected to bend its rules specifically to accomodate Google. This is not an isolated incident. Shirking the accountability that most everyone else respects is near standard operating procedure for Google.

Is Google accountable to anyone?
Continue reading “Can you trust Google to obey the rules? Is Google accountable to anyone?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why the EU’s concerned with a Google-Yahoo pact—Google is close to monopoly share in Europe

May 15, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

A Yahoo-Google search outsourcing pact arguably faces even more problems with European antitrust authorities than with the reported U.S. DOJ antitrust investigation, for two reasons:

First, this Yahoo-Google pact represents a horizontal market problem of collusion between leading direct search competitors; this is very different from the recent approval of the Google-DoubleClick merger, which was a vertical merger where DoubleClick was not found to be an actual direct competitor of Google. (Yahoo is universally viewed as one of Google’s top two direct competitors.)

Second, the market facts of search concentration in Europe put Google perilously close to the unofficial definition of a monopoly, which is 90% share of a market.
Continue reading “Why the EU’s concerned with a Google-Yahoo pact—Google is close to monopoly share in Europe”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Comcast-Pando Networks’ “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” solves multiple problems

April 23, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

In a breakthrough agreement and announcement (read the release at bottom), Comcast and Pando Networks, (the leading managed P2P content delivery service) agreed to:

  • Lead creation of a “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” for P2P users and ISPs; and
  • Create a process to better “share test methodologies and results” among all P2P providers and ISPs so everyone can:
  • Learn how P2P providers can optimize their applications for all types of networks; and
  • “More efficiently deliver legal content.”

This is a profoundly significant development because it solves multiple thorny problems:
Continue reading “Comcast-Pando Networks’ “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” solves multiple problems”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why “White Spaces” is just corporate welfare innovation

April 16, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The Hill has a good article highlighting the growing “battle” over “White Spaces,” or the potential for use of the buffer spectrum bands in-between TV channels to ensure that there is no interference with TV signals.

What I want to spotlight here is how many in the tech industry seem to think they can carry the word-banner “innovation,” like the biblical Ark of the Covenant, to defeat anyone standing in the way of their quest for corporate welfare.

The Wireless Innovation Alliance, led by Google and its “Information Commons” poodles (the New America Foundation, FreePress, and Public Knowledge), has apparently suckered other tech companies (Microsoft, Dell and HP) into shielding and giving cover for Google’s broader information commons public policy agenda, which is needed in order for Google to fulfill it’s megalomaniacal mission “to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”

Moreover, many tech companies must think that “playing the innovation card” in Washington is like an all-you-can-eat ticket to feed at the public trough.

Let’s get down to brass tacks here.
Continue reading “Why “White Spaces” is just corporate welfare innovation”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Google is not warning its users of its role in one of largest cyber-security breaches ever on the Net

April 6, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

USA Today broke a much under-appreciated and potentially blockbuster Internet security breach story: “Google searchers could end up with a new type of bug.” Kudos to Byron Acohido and Jon Swartz, who reported it in USA Today, and also blogged on it at ZeroDayThreat.com, a site for their book “Zero Day Threat” which defines a Zero Day Threat as “a threat so new that no viable protections against it exist.”

In a nutshell, the article and blog post explain how cybercrook hackers have figured out how to use and leverage Google’s search engine results “to spread spam, and carry out scams. Typically it also lets the attacker embed a keystroke logger, which collects and transmits your passwords and any other sensitive data you type online.”

This new cyber scam ring is expected to spread rapidly, increasing from a “few dozen major websites” today, to “hundreds of high-profile websites” in the next few weeks.

“…in March alone… security researchers found several hundred thousand corrupted Web pages returned in common Google search queries.”

Why this is a big deal?
Continue reading “Google is not warning its users of its role in one of largest cyber-security breaches ever on the Net”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Society/Culture - Technology - Warner Todd Huston

Google to ‘Shut Down’ Capitol Switchboard Over Global Warming

April 3, 2008 by 1 Comment

Warner Todd Huston

Ah, Earf Day. The day when all the Chicken Littles and the occasional boy who cried wolf can get their fifteen minutes of attention. Don’t we just love the warm and fuzzies of claiming the mantle of God and “saving” the Earf from global warming? Well, The Washington Times Fishwrap blog reports that Google has joined the fray to save the Earf and they are going to do it by helping Kathleen Rogers of Earth Day Network to shut down the phone switchboard at the Capitol in Washington D.C. with the calls from “concerned citizens” who think that calling Washington on the phone can somehow stop global warming..

A group of environmental activists has enlisted Google to help flood the congressional switchboard with one million phone calls on Earth Day urging lawmakers to enact eco-friendly measures.

I’m tingling with excitement already. If I thought I could alter the solar activities really responsible for global climate change just by making a phone call… well, imagine the power? Maybe I could use my house phone to stop a hurricane or tornado, or better yet, use my cell phone influence the scores of the next few Superbowls. Well, I’d just be in heaven.

Naturally, our Earf Day prez thinks global warming is the “biggest threat” we’ve ever faced. No hyperbole there.

Continue reading “Google to ‘Shut Down’ Capitol Switchboard Over Global Warming”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology

Why ultimate FCC decision on Comcast network management is expected to be unanimous

March 5, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

(See end of this email for bottom line on why there will be a unanimous FCC decision on Comcast’s network management practices.)

It’s obvious that there is much more that is uncertain than certain after listening to the five-hour FCC En Banc hearing at Harvard on the FreePress and Vuze petitions on Comcast’s network management practices.

Professor Tim Wu, who coined the term net neutrality, was a panelist and framed the Harvard spectacle in CNET as a “…trial of the Internet. … Comcast is in the docket accused of crimes against the public interest.”

Well if this was a trial, Wu/FreePress et al did not prove their case, and certainly did not prove it “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Only in the “make-it-up-as-you-go-along” world of net neutrality is it an alleged”crime against the public interest” for an ISP to protect the quality of service for many users by imperceptively delaying the packet delivery of non-time sensitive applications for a few users.

FCC Commissioner Tate got all the first panelists to agree that there was a baseline need for “reasonable network management.” Even Professor Wu conceded that there was “good discrimination and bad discrimination,” just like there is “good cholestorol and bad cholestorol.”

Then the specific question before the FCC: was Comcast “reasonable” in its network management of p2p traffic in this instance?
Continue reading “Why ultimate FCC decision on Comcast network management is expected to be unanimous”

00Publius Contributor - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Security/Safety - Society/Culture - Technology - UN - Warner Todd Huston

Google De-Lists Prominent UN Critic Blogger

February 19, 2008 by

-By Warner Todd Huston

In another blow against freedom of speech on the Internet, Fox News is reporting that Google has taken the measure of de-listing the work of an anti-UN blogger named Matthew Lee. For several years, Lee has run the Inner City Press, a small news/opinion site that is focused on criticizing the United Nations. But since Google has teamed up with the UN on recent initiatives, Google has found that Lee’s criticism is too much for them to handle.

Mr. Lee has been taking after big targets for a long time, so he is no newcomer to the scene. In 1987 he went after Citigroup with his corruption exposes, but since 2005 the United Nations has been his favorite target. He has especially focused on the “inner workings of what could be called the practical-applications arm of the international organization, the United Nations Development Programme.”

As Fox News reports:

Many of Lee’s stories were featured prominently whenever Web users looked for news about the U.N. using the powerful Google News search engine, a vital way for media outlets both large and small to get their articles read… But beginning Feb. 13, Google News users could no longer find new stories from the Inner City Press.

After the Government Accountability Project discovered the plight of Inner City Press and raised their own stink about the de-listing, Google claimed that the de-listing was a mistake but that it would take “a couple weeks” to fix the “glitch.”

“We acknowledged our misunderstanding … but it takes time for the restoration to occur,” [Google spokesman Gabriel] Stricker said. “The glitch will be resolved as soon as possible. We’re working on it.”

The GAP, however is none too happy about Google’s “glitch.” GAP’s international-program director Bea Edwards told Fox that Inner City Press was “the most effective and important media organization for UN whistleblowers.”

“We’re alarmed. The question is, is what user sent the complaint? And it’s probably not too hard to guess. We would guess the complaints came from the UNDP (United Nations Development Programme).”

This isn’t something new for Internet organizations like Google, however. Google and other Internet organizations like Newsvine and Digg have been embroiled in efforts to eliminate the conservative voice from the Internet for quite some time.

For instance, Newsvine recently canceled the account of the conservative news/opinion site called The New Media Alliance. And, as Noel Sheppard reported back in May of 2006, the conservative opinion site called The New Media Journal was removed from search engines by Google because Google deemed the commentary site a “hate site.”

So, far from being the wild west of opinion, the Internet is seemingly more and more in the grip of leftist organizations that are out to eliminate conservative expression on the net. Add to this the liberals in Congress who want to reinstate the inaptly named “Fairness Doctrine,” and we get ominous signs of the left’s oppressive ideas of “freedom of speech.”

It’s just one more example that Jonah Goldberg is right. Liberals are closer to fascists than any conservative.

Continue reading “Google De-Lists Prominent UN Critic Blogger”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Bursting its own stock bubble: Why Google is its own worst enemy

February 12, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Since the beginning of the year, Google’s stock has fallen over 25%–about 2-3 times the fall of the relevant indexes.

The good news for Google shareholders is that most all of Google’s stock price problems are self-inflicted, so they could fix them—if they wanted to.

The bad news for Google shareholders is that Google is unlikely to change its problematic bahavior—because “leopards don’t change their spots.”

Why is Google its own worst enemy?

First, Google routinely alienates its friends and allies.

The New York Times editorial board, which should be a natural ideological ally, busted Google badly in its editorial today: “Who’s the 800-Pound Gorilla?”

The NYT saw through Google’s anti-competitive complaints about Microsoft-Yahoo, labeling them as”self-serving,” “disingenuous,” and “so much empty whining.”

Google has badly alienated its shareholders (it’s most ardent believers) who wanted to believe that Google would reward them for their investment.

Despite Google’s torrid revenue growth (51%) for a company its size, investors are learning that Google already has spending plans for whatever revenue that comes in.
Continue reading “Bursting its own stock bubble: Why Google is its own worst enemy”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

FTC paved way for approval of Microsoft-Yahoo in approving Google-DoubleClick 4-1

February 11, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

I can’t say I’m at all surprised to see Microsoft seek to acquire Yahoo.

It makes obvious business sense for both Microsoft and Yahoo — it is the only viable and strategic option for either company to become a serious and credible competitor to Google-DoubleClick’s rapidly increasing dominance of search and Internet advertising.

And given the FTC’s surprisingly strong consolidation-endorsing analysis of the Google-DoubleClick merger — previously-perceived as a yellow antitrust light to such a merger by Microsoft — there is now a bright blinking green light for approval.

Timing-wise, it’s obvious to Microsoft to get approval now while the getting is so good.

Moreover, Yahoo’s faltering stock begged Microsoft to “Come on down! and play ‘The Price is Right!'”

Essentially, the FTC paved the road for antitrust approval of a Microsoft-Yahoo combination with its recent 4-1 approval of Google-DoubleClick.

The FTC ruled definitively two months ago that the Internet advertising market has “vigorous” competition, which “will likely increase.”
Continue reading “FTC paved way for approval of Microsoft-Yahoo in approving Google-DoubleClick 4-1”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology

Google’s Regulatory Outlook 2008

January 29, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

The big question for investors is why?

Why has Google felt the need to build up a new lobbying operation in D.C. (rivaling Microsoft’s in size) so rapidly and why did Google just unveil, with great fanfare, its new cutting-edge office space in DC with a party that attracted 650 people and many VIPs?

What does Google know that investors may not?

Google’s Regulatory Outlook

Federal Trade Commission:

Antitrust:

  • In gaining the 4-1 FTC approval of the DoubleClick acquisition, Google earned a probationary warning from the FTC: “We want to be clear however, that we will closely watch these markets and, should Google engage in unlawful tying or other anti-competitive conduct, the Commission intends to act quickly.”
  • Both the Democratic Chair and Ranking Republican of the Senate Judiciary Committee overseeing the FTC now believe: “Antitrust regulators need to be wary to guard against the creation of a powerful Internet conglomerate able to extend its market power in one market to adjacent markets, to the detriment of competition and consumers.”
  • Many in Washington now fear Google may be becoming the next Microsoft.
  • The EU still must approve the Google-Doubleclick merger by spring. Google’s market concentration is much greater in Europe than in the US and the EU has much more legal latitude to block or condition a merger than the FTC does. The EU approval hurdle is more difficult than the FTC’s was.
  • Overall, this is not a good precondition for Google to enter 2008. It is especially not good, if there is a Democratic Administration in 2009, because Democrats generally believe that this Administration has been too lax on competition and antitrust matters.

Privacy:
Continue reading “Google’s Regulatory Outlook 2008”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - The Law

Net Neutrality Blocks Innovation

January 17, 2008 by

-By Scott Cleland

Why net neutrality would block cloud computing innovation; computers must prioritize/schedule apps

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that net neutrality proponents have not thought through the logical and practical implications of their call for mandating net neutrality.

Practically, net neutrality is about codifying Internet architecture design rules for the first time, which would have the real world effect of blocking, degrading, and impairing innovation towards allowing the Internet to support “cloud computing” — the future of computing according to Google, IBM and many others.

Why does net neutrality theory not work in practice?

First, net neutrality is really backward-looking, trying to take the Internet back to the dial-up/pre-broadband days when there was monopoly telecom regulation and not inter-modal broadband competition like there is today.

Second, consider net neutrality’s definition by its primary proponents:
Continue reading “Net Neutrality Blocks Innovation”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - News - Scott Cleland - Technology - Uncategorized

Busted again! Google ranked worst!

December 13, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Google ranked worst in “One World Trust” survey on openness and transparency

The Financial Times reported that One World Trust is publishing the results of a new world survey that ranks Google worst in the world on openness and transparency.

This worst in the world ranking comes on the heels of a recent Privacy International survey that also found that Google was worst in the world on privacy. Now two independent and respected non-governmental groups have independently found that Google is worst in the world on the values that it claims are very important to the company: openness and privacy.

One World Trust “conducts research on practical ways to make global organisations more responsive to the people they affect, and on how the rule of law can be applied equally to all. It educates political leaders and opinion-formers about the findings of its research.”

  • Out of a possible score of 100 Google got a 17. Ouch. Even the math whizes at Google can see that is not a good score.
  • And since the top performer, UNDP, got an 88, there is no grading curve that will save Google’s bacon on this one.

It is good to get additional third party confirmation of many of the themes I have been blogging about for over a year and a half related to Google. A central theme I have harped on is Google’s hypocrisy and double standard: where it has one standard of behavior it expects of others and another for itself.

The most galling has been its push for “open” access and net neutrality for its broadband competitors but not for Google — even though Google has more market share in its market than the competitive broadband industry has.
Continue reading “Busted again! Google ranked worst!”

00Publius Contributor - Budget - Google - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

Senators Kohl/Hatch write FTC on Google-Doubleclick merger — conclude Google has market power

November 30, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

The top Senators overseeing antitrust matters, Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Ranking Republican Member Orrin Hatch (R-UT), wrote a strong letter to the FTC urging serious scrutiny of the Google-DoubleClick merger (see pasted copy of the letter at the bottom of this article).

Having testified before their Senate Subcommittee in opposition to the merger September 27th, I was gratified to learn of the subcommittee’s serious bipartisan concern about the merger and also their very strong grasp of the potential anti-competitive issues arising from the merger.

There are three big takeaways from the letter.

First, the Subcommittee defines the relevant market as Internet advertising: “…combining these two companies’ leading positions in these two forms of Internet advertising could cause significant harm to competition in the Internet advertising marketplace.”
Continue reading “Senators Kohl/Hatch write FTC on Google-Doubleclick merger — conclude Google has market power”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Democrats/Leftists - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - Scott Cleland - Society/Culture - Technology - Uncategorized

Google’s wireless folly? or hubris?

November 26, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

The WSJ article, “Google has even bigger plans for mobile phones,” appropriately addresses the big “open” question of whether Google is serious about becoming a wireless carrier, because if it is, it will need to bid and win substantial spectrum in the upcoming FCC 700 MHz spectrum auction.

The WSJ article states: “the behind-the-scenes moves illustrate just how serious the Internet giant is about trying to reshape the wireless world.” The evidence in favor of Google’s serious entry into wireless is significant, as Google:

  • Successfully extracted unprecedented FCC auction rules that would favor Google’s advertising business model over the existing wireless subscription model, and that would likely depress the business utility of the spectrum so Google could acquire it at below market value;
  • (Google understands it broke a lot of china at the FCC and in Washington this summer in order to win the “Google spectrum concessions.” Hopefully, Google also understands it would be more than bad form to slap the hand that tries to feed you, by not bidding on the band specially tailored for Google’s model.)
  • Has repeatedly pledged it would bid almost $5B in the auction;
  • Acquired a test wireless license, built towers and is operating a wireless service at its headquarters using “googley” phones;
  • Has hired game theorists to game out its strategy;
  • “Discovered Wall Street was enthusiastic about the company’s ability to raise any needed cash;”
  • (Truly amazing that Wall Street bankers would in fact loan a company money that already has ~$10B in cash in the bank and the number one brand in the world. Good for Google for clearing up that big uncertainty…) and
  • Had discussions with a variety of potential partners like Clearwire, but is reportedly likely to go it alone to maximize its bidding flexibility.

Let me add another reason that the Googlers may bid: EGO. Googlers believe they are the smartest of the smart, and they must be drawn to the challenge and complexity of this “high-level chess game” in auction game theory. What better forum to showcase their intellectual, algorithmic, and business acumen superiority?
Continue reading “Google’s wireless folly? or hubris?”

00Publius Contributor - Business - Congress - Democrats/Leftists - Economy/Finances - Google - Inernet - Media Bias - News - Scott Cleland - Technology - Uncategorized

A Bogus Attack on Cable Giant, Comcast

November 9, 2007 by

-By Scott Cleland

Bogus petition against Comcast’s reasonable network management is a back door ploy to reinstate common carriage for broadband

The Moveon.org/FreePress petition to the FCC to declare Comcast’s reasonable network management illegal is a deceptive back-door scheme to reverse FCC deregulation of broadband as an information service and to (de facto) reinstate common carriage for broadband.

The petition will be found to be a bogus and manufactured scheme to deceive the FCC and the public that necessary, responsible, and “reasonable network management” — that serves consumers and the Internet public by delivering quality of service and protecting consumers from the harm of viruses, spam etc. — should be declared illegal “degrading” of an Internet application.

Upon full FCC airing of this issue, it will be clear that the offending P2P application traffic is the culprit that is in fact harming the overwhelming majority of Internet consumers by “degrading and impairing” the responsiveness and utility of the Internet for the many because of the irresponsible bandwidth hogging of the few.

First, if managing out-of-control p2p traffic that is degrading and impairing the responsiveness and utility of the Internet for the many by the few is not “reasonable network management,” then no network management is reasonable.

The petitioners have made a grave error in choosing to put all their “eggs in one basket,” defending spiraling p2p traffic, because there is probably no more widespread “rotten” Internet application than most p2p traffic.
Continue reading “A Bogus Attack on Cable Giant, Comcast”