Then the search company buy the ad service from the ad company, as all other search engines can then do as well. Isn’t that the point of breaking up a big company?
Because the ad monopoly is subsidizing the other businesses.
Breaking up Google to smaller companies but leaving the ad market as is the same just creates more Mozillas, companies technically independent but still relying on the same revenue stream.
If there is money to be made those companies would make deals for data/ad-space, it’s just that they will do it in competition with other ad services and search services for example. That’s how a healthy market works, no? (Aside from the problematic data brokerage which is another issue)
And if they can’t survive that, then the business should probably not exist.
In that sense you could argue the market is “hurt” but I think consumers will benefit in the long run when competition can thrive, and monopolies do not exist.
Then the search company buy the ad service from the ad company, as all other search engines can then do as well. Isn’t that the point of breaking up a big company?
I’m a layman, but how is that harming the market?
Because the ad monopoly is subsidizing the other businesses.
Breaking up Google to smaller companies but leaving the ad market as is the same just creates more Mozillas, companies technically independent but still relying on the same revenue stream.
If there is money to be made those companies would make deals for data/ad-space, it’s just that they will do it in competition with other ad services and search services for example. That’s how a healthy market works, no? (Aside from the problematic data brokerage which is another issue)
And if they can’t survive that, then the business should probably not exist.
In that sense you could argue the market is “hurt” but I think consumers will benefit in the long run when competition can thrive, and monopolies do not exist.