Lack of choice harms consumers.
You can make yahoo.com your homepage and default search engine
The U.S Justice Department Opens Antitrust Review of Big Tech Companies
- Thread starter Anerdyblackguy
- Start date
-
- Tags
- justice department
You can make yahoo.com your homepage and default search engine
What exactly does breaking up google accomplish?
You prefer a 3 headed less efficient beast to a singular one?
You prefer a 3 headed less efficient beast to a singular one?
You're focusing on the search engine. I'm talking about advertising.That isn't an issue...
You can make yahoo.com your homepage and default search engine
Maybe that's why blue text bar failed, they advertised on yahoo.
Maybe that's why blue text bar failed, they advertised on yahoo.
Forcing them to share the data should be considered, but breaking google up doesn't seem like it will accomplish much outside of hurting consumers.
I didn't make that argument, you did.Forcing them to share the data should be considered, but breaking google up doesn't seem like it will accomplish much outside of hurting consumers.
Just jokes. I
Lol. Trump is a fool.
Amazon has 'destroyed the retail industry' so US should look into its practices, Mnuchin says
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday the Justice Department is right to be looking into Amazon's practices as part of its antitrust review of big technology companies.
"I think if you look at Amazon, although there are certain benefits to it, they've destroyed the retail industry across the United States so there's no question they've limited competition," Mnuchin told CNBC's "Squawk Box."
"I think it's very good that the attorney general is going to look into this. I think it's an important issue and I look forward to him reporting back to the president and hearing his recommendations," said Mnuchin.
The Justice Department said Tuesday it is opening a broad antitrust review of big technology companies, sending shares of Amazon, Alphabet and Facebook lower in off-hours trading. The DOJ said it is looking into how major online platforms have "achieved market power" and how their practices may have "reduced competition, stifled innovation, or otherwise harmed consumers."
At the company's annual shareholder meeting in May, Amazon chief Jeff Bezos said "large entities deserve to be inspected and scrutinized."
Shares of Amazon ticked about 1% lower on Wednesday morning but closed up 0.32%.
Mnuchin is no stranger to the world of retail. Prior to becoming Treasury Secretary for President Donald Trump, Mnuchin served on the board of directors for embattled department store chain Sears. Mnuchin's role at Sears and his relationship with former CEO Eddie Lampert have been criticized by left-wing politicians.
"There's areas where [Amazon] really hurt small businesses," said Mnuchin.
In comparing Amazon to big-box retailer Walmart, Mnuchin said the companies' competitive practices are similar and different.
"People had those concerns about Walmart. Walmart developed a business where small business could continue to compete with them," he said.
Mnuchin said it is hard to lump the FANG tech giant stocks together regarding competitive practices.
"I don't think you can talk about competition among all these companies in the same way," said Mnuchin. "People talk about the FANG stocks like they're all the same. Each company is very different."
Amazon responded to Munchin's comments on CNBC.
Amazon has 'destroyed the retail industry' so US should look into its practices, Mnuchin says
- "I think if you look at Amazon, although there are certain benefits to it, they've destroyed the retail industry across the United States so there's no question they've limited competition," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin tells CNBC.
- The Justice Department said Tuesday it is opening a broad antitrust review of big technology companies and their competitive practices.
- Mnuchin says it is "absolutely right that the attorney general is looking into these issues."
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday the Justice Department is right to be looking into Amazon's practices as part of its antitrust review of big technology companies.
"I think if you look at Amazon, although there are certain benefits to it, they've destroyed the retail industry across the United States so there's no question they've limited competition," Mnuchin told CNBC's "Squawk Box."
"I think it's very good that the attorney general is going to look into this. I think it's an important issue and I look forward to him reporting back to the president and hearing his recommendations," said Mnuchin.
The Justice Department said Tuesday it is opening a broad antitrust review of big technology companies, sending shares of Amazon, Alphabet and Facebook lower in off-hours trading. The DOJ said it is looking into how major online platforms have "achieved market power" and how their practices may have "reduced competition, stifled innovation, or otherwise harmed consumers."
At the company's annual shareholder meeting in May, Amazon chief Jeff Bezos said "large entities deserve to be inspected and scrutinized."
Shares of Amazon ticked about 1% lower on Wednesday morning but closed up 0.32%.
Mnuchin is no stranger to the world of retail. Prior to becoming Treasury Secretary for President Donald Trump, Mnuchin served on the board of directors for embattled department store chain Sears. Mnuchin's role at Sears and his relationship with former CEO Eddie Lampert have been criticized by left-wing politicians.
"There's areas where [Amazon] really hurt small businesses," said Mnuchin.
In comparing Amazon to big-box retailer Walmart, Mnuchin said the companies' competitive practices are similar and different.
"People had those concerns about Walmart. Walmart developed a business where small business could continue to compete with them," he said.
Mnuchin said it is hard to lump the FANG tech giant stocks together regarding competitive practices.
"I don't think you can talk about competition among all these companies in the same way," said Mnuchin. "People talk about the FANG stocks like they're all the same. Each company is very different."
Amazon responded to Munchin's comments on CNBC.
Amazon response to CNBC:
"Small and medium-sized businesses are thriving with Amazon. Today, independent sellers make up more than 58% of physical gross merchandise sales on Amazon, and their sales have grown twice as fast as our own, totaling $160 billion in 2018. Amazon's retail business competes in the worldwide market for retail sales and represents less than 1% of global retail and less than 4% of U.S. retail. And the vast majority of retail sales – 90% – still occur in brick-and-mortar stores according to the U.S. Census Bureau."
"Small and medium-sized businesses are thriving with Amazon. Today, independent sellers make up more than 58% of physical gross merchandise sales on Amazon, and their sales have grown twice as fast as our own, totaling $160 billion in 2018. Amazon's retail business competes in the worldwide market for retail sales and represents less than 1% of global retail and less than 4% of U.S. retail. And the vast majority of retail sales – 90% – still occur in brick-and-mortar stores according to the U.S. Census Bureau."
Amazon thinks facts matter.Your CEO is the worlds richest man... that's all they care about.
I bet Bezos thought raising wages for warehouse workers to $15/hr would get progressives off his back
T-Mobile and Sprint got the approval 
I've been keeping my eye on SoftBank lately. It's interesting how we consider one company gaining too much marketshare to be anticompetitive but, its completely fine for a holding company to own shares in multiple companies that people accuse of being too big. For those that don't know, SoftBank, and to a lesser extent, Saudi Arabia, basically has ownership of a gazillion different tech companies. Uber, WeWork, Pinterest, Cruise, Sprint, T-Mobile, Alibaba, Yahoo, Slack to name a few. Softbank owns 85% of Sprint
Another thing I find interesting is people have it out for the big banks but, nobody thinks about the nonbanks that aren't regulated as heavily but, have significant market exposure nonetheless. AIG we learned about back in 2008. General Electric was another one people overlooked. BlackRock, Vanguard and Fidelity are just as big. These three asset managers facilitate over two thirds of all domestic investments. Talking trillions of dollars. If anything happened to any of those companies, it would be disastrous.
I've been keeping my eye on SoftBank lately. It's interesting how we consider one company gaining too much marketshare to be anticompetitive but, its completely fine for a holding company to own shares in multiple companies that people accuse of being too big. For those that don't know, SoftBank, and to a lesser extent, Saudi Arabia, basically has ownership of a gazillion different tech companies. Uber, WeWork, Pinterest, Cruise, Sprint, T-Mobile, Alibaba, Yahoo, Slack to name a few. Softbank owns 85% of Sprint
Another thing I find interesting is people have it out for the big banks but, nobody thinks about the nonbanks that aren't regulated as heavily but, have significant market exposure nonetheless. AIG we learned about back in 2008. General Electric was another one people overlooked. BlackRock, Vanguard and Fidelity are just as big. These three asset managers facilitate over two thirds of all domestic investments. Talking trillions of dollars. If anything happened to any of those companies, it would be disastrous.This is all strange to me and I don’t see it not having massive repercussions
it’s hard to define what all these companies do.
content providers are one thing... social media hinges on the popularity of the platform
it’s hard to define what all these companies do.
content providers are one thing... social media hinges on the popularity of the platform
Hmmm... by definition this is a monopoly but the fact that they entered a browser space, dominated by others, with a compelling (free) product has me. It's other businesses being hurt by this. I, as a selfish consumer, am benefitting.
If Google wasn't able to use its search power to direct you to all the other products it owns. Or working in the other direction, to tie in physical devices to its web presence. Or to sell Google ads to other sites that google search will then direct you to.
Once you own something as all-consuming as google search, you really shouldn't be allowed to own anything else, there are far too many conflicts.
this is closer to what businesses wantForcing them to share the data should be considered, but breaking google up doesn't seem like it will accomplish much outside of hurting consumers.
but in reality its more nuanced than that, the ability to control the data is the problem
IE Google and Facebook have your data when you use their platforms. This is a technological advantage over say Pizza Hut. Pizza Hut has to pay Google for data that is gathered from users browsing Pizza hut.
Now take that situation x 100,000,000 businesses across the globe
