Share this :



Post on twitter:

 

Starving Google

 
Changing online ads

Changing the online ad space

With Internet Explorer holding 67% of the web browser market share, what if Microsoft offered users an easy way to block online advertisements in the next version of Windows?

According to comScore in January, Google held a 63% market share in search over Microsoft at 8.5%. However, Microsoft’s Internet Explorer held 67% of the web browser market share over Google Chrome’s one per cent. With the search experience starting at the browser, Microsoft could block online advertisements in the browser and starve Google from advertising revenue. How would this change the online advertising industry?

The browser add-on Adblock Plus already blocks advertising for Firefox, which holds 22% of the web browser market share. Adblock Plus blocks nearly all advertising from AdWords, AdSense and DoubleClick. It has been downloaded more than 600,000 times per week with more than 45M total downloads.

However, with the technology to block advertising comes the question: is it ethical? Targeted advertising compensates for monthly hosting cost, but it distracts users from search.

If blocking online advertising is unethical, what about TiVo and television advertising? How is blocking advertising different from applying filters in other forms of digital media, for instance, a local print shop correcting white balances in a photo?

Do you consider Google AdWords and other banner ads as unsolicited spam? If so, should Microsoft help consumers filter online advertising like spam email filters in the next version of Internet Explorer? What do you think?

Related Blogs

Tags: , ,

  • Marcin

    The Author forgot to take into account that Microsoft blocking Google adds in their browser would be a gross violation of the anti-competitive laws, making Microsoft legally liable for all of Google’s financial losses resulting from such action on Microsoft’s side.

  • Tim

    Thank you for the note. Yes, and a recent case is Intel and AMD. The European Commission alleged Intel offered customers volume discounts that not only reduced unit cost but also increased market share for Intel. The EU competition commissioner further added that Intel “went to great lengths to cover up its anti-competitive actions.”

    Anti-competitive allegations are enacted by corporations. A corporate entity cannot go to jail. It is often settled with a financial fine. Thus, it becomes a numerical, cost-benefit analysis. Would volume production/adoption from gained market share outweigh the financial risk?

    The risks for some industries are lower, such as those in which the experience involves a learning curve. The risks for the microchip industry is higher due to the plug-and-play, interchangeable, modular system architectures.

    However, the Intel case is now 8 years in progress. In these 8 years, Intel has intertwined its sales team into the upper echelon of decision making executive offices etching out multi-year contracts based on personal relations.

    From the strategic growth standpoint, Microsoft is under shareholder pressure to grow. The online advertising industry is one of Microsoft’s exit vent. The question of whether to “starve Google” will materialise when Microsoft loses the option to make this decision as they lose more browser shares to Firefox and Google start to threaten Microsoft’s desktop renewal revenue.

    Is blocking ads truly violating anti-competition law? How would blocking ads help Microsoft sell its own ads? How would the courts decide? When is the decision? What if it is not anti-competition, then wouldn’t users miss out on a clean, ad-free web experience? Is it still illegal if Microsoft partners with a 3rd Party developer? Is it anti-competition if a start-up do this?

    For more information, I recommend The Corporation, http://www.amazon.com/Corporation-Pathological-Pursuit-Profit-Power/dp/0743247442, a read on the Microsoft Anti-Competition Law. Cheers.

Tim

Tim

 
 
Get More From MaRS   MaRS NEWSLETTERS
Facebook Twitter Vimeo Flickr

MaRS Charitable Registration Number
876682717 RR0001

Please enter your email address to subscribe to our newsletter