free html hit counter Notable - Varney on Google | John Battelle's Search Blog

Notable – Varney on Google

By - February 21, 2009

I’ve been gone a week and most likely there is a lot of chatter on this, but this article is worth keeping in mind as the new administration gets non economic emergency work started (which could be years, I suppose.)

Antitrust Pick Varney Saw Google as Next Microsoft (Update2)

By James Rowley

Feb. 17 (Bloomberg) — Christine A. Varney, nominated by President Barack Obama to be the U.S.’s next antitrust chief, has described Google Inc. as a monopolist that will dominate online computing services the way Microsoft Corp. ruled software.

“For me, Microsoft is so last century. They are not the problem,” Varney said at a June 19 panel discussion sponsored by the American Antitrust Institute. The U.S. economy will “continually see a problem — potentially with Google” because it already “has acquired a monopoly in Internet online advertising,” she said.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

9 thoughts on “Notable – Varney on Google

  1. Rich says:

    Ugh. It’s long past time to repeal anti-trust laws. There’s no way to have a monopoly unless there is government enforcement and I don’t see any government-enforced Googleopoly.

  2. Tom says:

    Wonder if concerns about Ms. Varney’s take on GOOG are the reason Eric Schmidt appears to have become a permanent fixture in Washington?

  3. Excuse this language (rhetorically important): Varney is an idiot.

    MSFT was convicted … for good reason.

    The order to break MSFT up … was justified by the findings of the trial.

    The Bush Admin DOJ (which loves torture and hated Google,too) … let MSFT off the hook.

    Why does “last century” MSFT matter? … Because it continues to profit — and wield influence — from its (convicted) “criminal” behavior last century.

    Google — unlike MSFT — did not rise by strong-arming (coercing) deals (as was proven in the antitrust case.

    (enough for now:) Cheers.

  4. nmw says:

    Fascinating!

    ;D nmw

  5. Hey,

    It’s long past time to repeal anti-trust laws. There’s no way to have a monopoly unless there is government enforcement and there is nothing what can be seen as any government-enforced policy on Google.

    :)

  6. Artı says:

    A May 2008 research report by Merrill Lynch & Co. said Google and Salesforce.com are “leveraged to benefit from cloud computing because their core service delivery is based on the Internet.” They were among 10 companies, including Amazon.com, Sun Microsystems Inc. and Microsoft, that were positioned to capitalize on the shift to Internet-based software. Still, Google’s “revenues from these services are currently less than 1 percent of total revenues,” the report said.

    Varney said last June she was “deeply troubled” by Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick Inc., a maker of software for online advertising, and its proposed advertising alliance with Yahoo! Inc.

    The DoubleClick purchase was cleared by the Federal Trade Commission in 2007. In November, the Justice Department blocked Google’s proposal to share online advertising with Yahoo by threatening to file a lawsuit challenging the joint venture. Google and Yahoo canceled the deal.

  7. hekimboard says:

    Thanks Artı.Great idea.

  8. Matthieu Catillon says:

    http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=59970333419&h=146f5&u=w49Py

    “According to the visitor/visits data published by Compete and Quantcast, Google commands no more than a 40% market share.”

    “50% of Google’s traffic is produced by only 10% of the people who use Google”

    How do you guys feel about that?
    Is the 40% figure accurate?

  9. curtis says:

    For once, I bet Ballmer wasn’t offended by that slam on MSFT…….when the big G gets slammed harder….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>