Google, Yahoo, and the Elephant In the Room 123
CWmike writes "Linda Rosencrance reports that despite assurances from Google and Yahoo that their online advertising deal doesn't need regulatory approval, the two companies should not be too quick to dismiss Microsoft's influence on Capitol Hill. Andrew Frank, an analyst at Gartner, said both Yahoo and Google will benefit from the deal, but he also said Microsoft will do everything in its power to bring the arrangement to a screeching halt. 'Expect Microsoft to challenge it and come back aggressively with some search plans of its own,' he said. Rob Enderle, of the Enderle Group, said Microsoft is a formidable opponent and knows how to play politics. 'Without Microsoft, this probably would stand up to regulatory scrutiny,' Enderle said. 'But Microsoft has increased its presence on Capitol Hill significantly ... and there are restraint of trade issues, so by the nature of Google's size and because Microsoft is going to be pounding on a lot of doors, I think this is going to be a problem.'"
Bragging about Corruption. (Score:4, Interesting)
No matter how many times it's done, it's always amazing to see people endorse corruption. The anti-trust trial, destruction of competitors, ISO have all left a bad taste in people's mouth. Yet it seems there's always someone that says these "sharp" business practices are good and another that demands people respect them.
A new front (Score:4, Interesting)
The elephant may smash all the chairs in the room (Score:5, Interesting)
... but the Google-Yahoo deal is non-exclusive, so I guess that'll get them off the hook.
I do find it quite ominous that Microsoft has been put on the defensive, and they can only try to defend by making the government stop their competitors.
They are influential, but it is growing ever more obvious they cannot compete with their own tech, no matter how much money they may have.
It's sad, really.
Hmmm. what about Google's payout? (Score:3, Interesting)
M$ might like him to shut up. (Score:2, Interesting)
It's true that M$ is throwing its weight and money around Washington [slashdot.org].
The question is if Enderele's mouth helps or hurts the soft. These kinds of statements are designed to manipulate people on Wall Street, but they are smarter [google.com] than M$ thinks they are [google.com].
Re:Enderle is mostly full of shit (Score:2, Interesting)
This would be true, if not... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The elephant may smash all the chairs in the ro (Score:3, Interesting)
Or is that 'they want to use it as an excuse to stop google from beating them into a messy pulp on search'.
Re:Yahoo needs a new board... (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, letting themselves be purchased is DEFINITELY not the "best fit from a competition standpoint." Since when is GIVING UP competition? How is consolidating the effective market to two corporations from three pro-competitive?
Oh, and Yahoo wasn't lazy. They're problem was they tried to do too much at once. They got diluted and distracted, not lathargic.
That could happen to Google, but so far the people running Google seem to have their heads on straight and are doing quite well.
Re:First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All the Lobbyists (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry, that only happens in a democracy.
Yes I know this will be modded into oblivion. But please realise that The Rest Of The World does not acknowledge the USA as a shining example of Democracy and Freedom. I think it's because you've lost that "of the people, by the people, for the people" bit, and now have "of the moneyed, by the moneyed, for the moneyed".
Re:First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All the Lobbyists (Score:4, Interesting)
All Americans do have that access.
But officials are a limited resource. Obviously the Americans that work harder to get some of that resource will be the ones who benefit the most from those resources.
What you're really asking is "wouldn't it be nice if nobody was allowed to put any more effort into influencing officials than the effort I put into it today?"
And no, that wouldn't be nice at all. It's a free country: Everybody is free to specialize in accessing and influencing officials if they want to, and free to sell the benefits of their specialization to the highest bidder. And free to specialize in something else, and thereby generate enough personal wealth to retain the services of a lobbying specialist. And free to form an association with any number of other like-minded citizens, and pool their wealth for the purpose of accessing and influencing officials either directly, or through the services of a specialist. And free to do none of the above, and whine about it on the Internet instead.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)