Google Sharing Money With Android Phone Carriers

[Guest]

"cscott_it
Well, there is also app sales, which I imagine would contribute more than clickthroughs."

Google will only take a small piece of this pie as they have to encourage people to develop apps for android, so app revenue in general will go to the developers, they not going divide a small piece of pie into an even smaller piece of pie to pass onto hardware/carriers peeps. Which realistically means the best way to encourage up take of their hardware/software is to div up the click through revenue

there will be a point in time when click through are going pay off, that's where Google make their money

 

[Guest]

"apmyhr
if a carrier were to include both Bing and Google apps, do you think Google would still pay them?"

yes Google will still pay them if the click through was done with a Google app, Google is paying peeps upon click through

Google dont make any real money selling phones/apps, they make their real money on ads, as long as folks are clicking on Google click through ads i dont think they give a damn what you got on the phone, they making money on that click through no matter what

 

[falconqc]

How is this different that Intel paying resellers to use Intel processors instead of AMD?

Anyone see a problem here? Double standards much?

 

[JMcEntegart]

[citation][nom]falconqc[/nom]How is this different that Intel paying resellers to use Intel processors instead of AMD? Anyone see a problem here? Double standards much?[/citation]

I totally see where you're coming from. The EU was so pissed at Intel, it fined the company $1.45bn for cheating the european customers out of a choice. Is Google cheating customers out of a choice? I'm not sure. I don't think there's enough information on the agreements Google has with these carriers to know how it's effecting the customer's choice.

 

[Guest]

because Intel arguably owes 80% of the market share for desktop, server and laptop space CPU, they were abusing a dominate position to undermine the competition

Google does not command any kind of dominate position in the cell phone market space, you can not abuse something you do not have, that's like AMD trying to bully PC makers into buying AMD chips, not going work is it

 

[arjunp2085]

Google is only sharing profits from Service(Which is done through phone carriers).. Its not sharing Profits from actual Products..

In the case of INTEL there was no service It was outright sales and it was being sold at below listed price for those who REFUSED AMD..

Both the situations are totally different

 

[Guest]

How money does your Intel processor produce? The difference is an ad-click generates $X, and Google says that if you install their apps so they make that ad-generated revenue, they'll share that with the companies responsible for getting that app into the users' hands ... namely the carriers and manufacturers. With Intel, it was paying a defined amount of money upfront to use their products instead of the competition. Google doesn't say "you can't install another Map application", but you wouldn't be able to install an Intel AND an AMD chip in the same PC.

Google is looking to get their apps onto more handsets, not get other people's apps off.

 

[DjEaZy]

... it's like intel waz paying retailers to go intel...

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]I totally see where you're coming from. The EU was so pissed at Intel, it fined the company $1.45bn for cheating the european customers out of a choice. Is Google cheating customers out of a choice? I'm not sure. I don't think there's enough information on the agreements Google has with these carriers to know how it's effecting the customer's choice.[/citation]
Google is trying to build a market for itself in a market that is already saturated with a slew of competitors. It is a little different in the CPU market where only 2 major players exist.

 

[eddieroolz]

This doesn't seem too different from Google's search agreement with Mozilla to me. Nothing to worry or anything, really.

 

[mr_tuel]

Sounds like Google took a page or two from Microsoft's playbook for Windows...

 

[iiwmaster]

What a wonderful Google Apps? Google Latitude + Google Ocean = Real-time Fishing LBS Contents

Have you heard about Real-time Fishing LBS Contents? We have proposed this Service Model to Google over 4 years ago. Real-time Fishing LBS Contents is Location Based Service for IPTV, WiMAX, Mobile. This Service Model was created in 2002 by I&IWorld. I&IWorld's located in South Korea. As you know, there're many people enjoy fishing in the world(about 5 hundred million). I&IWorld's Real-time Fishing LBS Contents is like these.

*Main Functions*
1.The underwater topography and 3D views with fishing spots
2.Real-time fishing points tracing by GPS and angling direction guide
3.Service the real-time fishing condition about fishing place(weather, water temp, depth etc)
4.Angler Social network(such as Second Life)

Everyone knows that Google motto is, 'Don't be evil.' Is it all right? Visit http/www.koreacontent.org/weben/index.jsp, and type 'Real-time Fishing LBS Contents'. Search http/www.koreacontent.org/co/i/iiworld/index.html. If you need more information, please send your email address.

 

[Milleman]

This is great. The more companies and carriers that are producing/selling Andoid, the more applications and games will be available for this platform. Finally at last, the PC equivelent of the Mobile Phones has taken form which will lower prices since components, manufacturing, technology, software will be standard and massproduced. Instead of having every phone manufactorer running their own race with hardware and software.

Good move Google!!
This will change the future landscape for mobile phones when it comes to both better technology and lower prices!

 

[meepstone]

[citation][nom]pei-chen[/nom]Wasn't revenue sharing that got Intel into trouble? I am paying you to put my CPU / software into your product instead of a competitor’s.[/citation]

That would be true except Apple isn't leaving AT&T from their exclusive deal. So Google isnt bribing carriers to have there phones, I think Apple locked themselves into at&t. Google didnt have to do any work.

 

[falconqc]

[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]I totally see where you're coming from. The EU was so pissed at Intel, it fined the company $1.45bn for cheating the european customers out of a choice. Is Google cheating customers out of a choice? I'm not sure. I don't think there's enough information on the agreements Google has with these carriers to know how it's effecting the customer's choice.[/citation]

The problem is, why would a vendor bother to carry brand A when they get compensation for using brand B. The only reason to do so would be if the phone was a hot seller and would draw a bigger clientele.

I am not saying it is wrong of Google to be doing this, but you can see how the line is very fine and blurred.

It's as if Intel had done, instead of what they did : "You can sell anything you like, but for every Intel CPU you sell, we give you X$ back." As a VAR or Retailer, why would you bother promoting AMD if you get nothing back?