Modern Australian

Google's huge market share doesn't automatically make it a monopoly

  • Written by Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW

This week the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) filed a lawsuit accusing Google of using “anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in the markets” for search and advertising.

It is the most significant antitrust case since the US government took on Microsoft in 1998 for using its dominant position as the provider of the Windows operating system to force PC makers to bundle its Internet Explorer web browser.

That case was fought out in US courts for years before Microsoft agreed to settle in 2001. This case will no doubt be heavily litigated, and likewise take years to conclude. But it’s not too soon to consider the basic economics.

The bottom line is more complicated than one might think. Yes, Google has a huge share of the search-engine market – 92% globally according to statcounter.com, compared with 2.8% for Microsoft’s Bing, 1.6% for Yahoo! and 0.5% for DuckDuckGo.

But does that give Google a lot of “market power” – the ability to charge high price or produce low-quality products? Probably not.

To judge if a company like Google is really a monopolist, it is crucial to understand the difference between ordinary markets (like those for clothes, cars, or breakfast cereal) and technology markets (like those for internet search, social media, or ride sharing).

Read more: The US is taking on Google in a huge antitrust case. It could change the face of online search

Markets with ‘network externalities’

Any introductory economics textbook will tell you a large market share is smoking-gun evidence of market power; and that with market power comes the ability to shut out competitors, charge high prices and even get away with producing low-quality products.

Economists of all stripes agree that regulating monopolies and making markets more competitive benefits consumers, through lower prices and better products.

Indeed, this was the motivation behind the so-called “trust-busting” movement in the US in the early 20th century. The most famous scalp was John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, which the US Supreme Court ordered in 1911 be broken up into 34 separate companies. (The break-up made Rockefeller the world’s richest man).

But internet search isn’t like oil. Neither is social media, ride sharing or platforms like Amazon. These are what economists call “markets with network externalities”. That is, when more consumers use the product, it becomes more valuable for other consumers.

Read more: Lawmakers keen to break up 'big tech' like Amazon and Google need to realize the world has changed a lot since Microsoft and Standard Oil

Facebook is useful because it connects one with lots of other users. A thousand little, disconnected social media platforms would be much less useful. Amazon connects lots of sellers with million of consumers. This is hugely valuable for both. Google connects lots of consumers with advertisers and information. Again, this is valuable to both sides of the market.

Because network externalities mean — all else being equal — the bigger the market share the more valuable the company’s product is to consumers, we tend to see one dominant company and a few smaller ones in such markets.

Just because tech companies have a big share of the market now, however, doesn’t mean they are destined to keep it.

Remember Netscape? In the mid-1990s it had a 80% share in the browser market, before losing it to Microsoft’s Internet Explorer.

Netscape Navigator Version 1.11 Netscape Navigator version 1.11. OiMax/flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

But Internet Explorer’s dominance, peaking at 95% share in the early 2000s, didn’t last either. It now claims barely 1% of the browser market.

This is why companies in markets with network externalities are never asleep. Uber and Facebook are constantly running experiments to innovate their products, as are other companies like Amazon and, you guessed it, Google.

Influencers and defaults

An important part of the Department of Justice’s suit against Google is that it allegedly pays Apple as much as US$11 billion a year to be the default search engine on the Safari browser on every iPhone.

This is a bit like paying for a social media influencer to plug your product — with a twist. Making something the default doesn’t mean the user has to use it, but the small effort to choose an alternative means most don’t bother.

But if it really wasn’t a good product and didn’t deliver good search results, wouldn’t consumers (a) remove it and (b) be less likely to buy iPhones?

There’s a big difference between something being a default and there being no choice. Articulating this difference may end up being an important part of how the Google litigation plays out.

Indeed, Microsoft making Internet Explorer the default browser in Windows has been an ongoing source of back and forth with US and European competition authorities.

Read more: Twitter is banning political ads – but the real battle for democracy is with Facebook and Google

Ultimately misguided

As with the suits against Standard Oil and Microsoft, the case against Google will be decided by the courts, perhaps ending with the US Supreme Court. The outcome will be instructive as to whether other tech companies like Amazon, Facebook or Uber will also wind up in the firing line.

Ironically, at a time of extreme polarisation in US politics, breaking up big tech companies is popular on the left and the right.

But we should remember that consumers are huge beneficiaries from these tech companies. Think about how much it used to cost to take and print photographs. A 2018 International Monetary Fund report cites research suggesting US consumers would need more than US$25,000 a year to compensate for the loss of free services from tech companies.

Google's huge market share doesn't automatically make it a monopoly International Monetary Fund, Measuring the Digital Economy, 2018 That’s a lot. What is crucial for competition regulators around the world to note is that the markets in which big technology companies operate are not like other markets. Because of network externalities they tend to have big “in” firms (with a large market share) and smaller “out” firms (with small market shares but providing competitive discipline). That doesn’t mean these markets aren’t competitive. It means the “in” companies have a lot to lose by being leapfrogged by a small competitor. Which is why they work so hard to innovate and keep prices low.

Authors: Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW

Read more https://theconversation.com/googles-huge-market-share-doesnt-automatically-make-it-a-monopoly-148525

NEWS

Victoria’s hotel quarantine overhaul is a step in the right direction, but issues remain

On Monday the Victorian government announced an overhaul of the state’s hotel quarantine program. The government has introduced a new oversight agency, COVID-19 Quarantine Victoria, and crafted a “reset” of...

after 1.5 billion years in flux, here's how a new, stronger crust set the stage for life on Earth

ShutterstockOur planet is unique in the Solar system. It’s the only one with active plate tectonics, ocean basins, continents and, as far as we know, life. But Earth in its...

How unis can use student housing to solve international student quarantine issues

Charles Darwin UniversityThe arrival at Darwin airport on Monday of 63 students from China, Hong Kong, Japan, Vietnam and Indonesia on a charter flight from Singapore ended an eight-month hiatus...

global authority on nature lists the Great Barrier Reef as critical

ShutterstockThe Great Barrier Reef is now in “critical” condition and the health of four other Australian World Heritage properties has worsened, according to a sobering report just released by the...

new report shows how the nation's gas expansion puts Australians in harm’s way

ShutterstockAustralia’s latest emissions data, released this week, contained one particularly startling, and unjustifiable, fact. Against all odds, in a year when emissions fell in almost every sector, Australia’s export gas...

Asia-Pacific expert Bates Gill on China's endgame

Chinese official Lijian Zhao’s tweeting an image depicting an Australian soldier holding a knife against a child’s throat and the subsequent angry exchanges is the latest incident in an exceptionally...

It isn't right to say we are out of recession, as these six graphs demonstrate

Lukas Coch/AAPIt’d be wrong to say that we are out of recession, although that’s how the graph of Wednesday’s GDP numbers makes it look.Gross domestic product (the measure of everything...

4 things about female orgasms researchers actually study

ShutterstockCardi B’s song WAP and the Netflix show Sex Education place female orgasms on centre stage in popular culture.But female orgasms are also the subject of serious academic research.Here’s a...

What's behind China's bullying of Australia? It sees a soft target — and an essential one

Mark Schiefelbein/APAs the diplomatic fallout continues over the digitally altered war crimes tweet sent by China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Zhao Lijian, earlier this week, it’s important to note this inflammatory...

Is it wrong to make a film about the Port Arthur massacre? A trauma expert's perspective

A film being made about the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, which claimed 35 lives, has been criticised by Tasmanian politicians, survivors of the mass shooting, the local community and police.The...

'What I had to say mattered' — how can we provide justice for sexual assault victims beyond criminal trials?

www.shutterstock.comLouise Milligan’s new book, Witness, reports how traumatic the criminal justice system can be for victim-survivors of sexual assault. This is not the first time we have heard how official...

newly discovered ghostly circles in the sky can't be explained by current theories, and astronomers are excited

Bärbel Koribalski / ASKAP, Author providedIn September 2019, my colleague Anna Kapinska gave a presentation showing interesting objects she’d found while browsing our new radio astronomical data. She had started...



News Co Media Group

Content & Technology Connecting Global Audiences

More Information - Less Opinion













Popular articles from Modern Australian

Be Smart Before Buying That CarWater Costs in SydneyThe Pros and Cons of Artificial Christmas TreesThe most popular types of rouletteMaintaining your asphalt driveway is made easy with these pointers5 Effective Car Mods for Absolute BeginnersYour New Home Needs A Great GardenHow To Identify Signs Of Stress In Your ChildInstalling Shade Sails On your Garden10 Tips for Clearing a Blocked DrainCarpet Cleaning: Where Is It Headed In The Future?Common Repairs to Shipping ContainersThe lifestyle Choices of the Australian Millennials5 Tips For Creating a Kid-Friendly Backyard