^^ this is possible because the ads are delivered digitally, not because of any magic power google has.
Even if every website was its own independent advertising space (an extreme opposite), they could all still be open to advertising companies big and small by using “open standards”.
Okay so you have group A who has ads they want to put in front of potential customers and group B who has digital billboards and wants to sell them. Group A doesn't know where to advertise and can't identify customers, and Group B knows about their users but doesn't know what kinds of buyers might be interested in them.
I genuinely don't know how this doesn't precipitate a market-maker who can match up the two groups and who naturally becomes huge because the best matchmakers will be the ones with the largest populations of both groups. The bigger they are the more and better matches that can exist and everyone (theoretically at least) gets better prices because buyers and sellers are in competition in a larger pool.
This is incredibly fair. Where would you make the incisions? Google's own billboards, their own ads, and the brokers seem easy to cut but the rest is real messy.
If a device company can be forced to deploy browsers or search engines from competitors,
Can a search company be forced to allow users to choose their as network? Show me whatever results but I want facebook's ads, or bing's ads and so on.
Pretty sure google's going to ask for 30% of what Facebook makes I guess but that's fine, let's start building a business model on that.
Assumption is that search is a monopoly and that's why they will be saddled with regulations. Frame any other constraints and market solutions can be figured.
> Can a search company be forced to allow users to choose their as network? Show me whatever results but I want facebook's ads, or bing's ads and so on.
> Pretty sure google's going to ask for 30% of what Facebook makes I guess but that's fine, let's start building a business model on that.
Why wouldn't Google ask for the equivalent of what they make with their own ads? Which is likely to be more than what a 3rd party ad provider would make.
Search doesn't make money by itself, it makes money by displaying ads. Why should another company get to capture the profit from that?
The “at least” is unwarranted, and even the “theoretically” is being far too kind.
Of course if you allow a monopoly to develop they will protect their own interests to the exclusion of others, and use their power to entrench their position. Even the oldest theories about markets point out the dangers of monopolies.
Doubleclick existed before Google bought them.
Apple has an ad network.
Meta has an ad network.
Breaking google’s ad network off doesn’t change anything for the small businesses who want to spend $50 to reach 100 millennial women interested in home goods.
The ad exchange buys user profile data from those who collect it (which also happens today in addition to first party collection)
^^ this is possible because the ads are delivered digitally, not because of any magic power google has.
Even if every website was its own independent advertising space (an extreme opposite), they could all still be open to advertising companies big and small by using “open standards”.
The innovations are all technological.