Google Paying Phone Carriers to Go Android

I suppose thats the difference between google and apple.. They are totally willing to share the cash if they can take the market by storm..

'Revenue... Sharing!?!!?'


I can hear Jobs rolling over in the grave he hasn't taken refuge in yet... all the way from here.

But they only share revenue if their own apps are installed. Sounds more like paying to have their apps included.

Google is paying big money to take the market by storm and they need to do it, because when they entered a field that was already being dominated by Apple. Congratulations for Google, it turns out their engineers are good and their pockets deep.

However, how long will these deals last. Let's just assume that in two years time Android reached its goals (just a random timeframe). What will happen at that point?
a) Google continues paying, sharply reducing their profits, especially compared to those of Apple.
b) Google ends these deals, increasing its profit. However, they risk losing the sharp market share growth, potentially even seeing a decline as carriers and manufacturers will get their profit elsewhere, raising prices for the consumer.

So I can't really imagine this to be a way of gaining market share that's built to last...

Right, this is the difference.
Carriers fight for the right to offer iPhone, without Apple paying them a penny.
Google pays to carriers to accept Android phones.
Makes you think, which phone is better?...

Good for Google! :-D

Yeah, I should think that paying people to offer your product would lead to rapid adoption. I wonder how long it is before google starts paying the phone users too. Kinda makes you wonder why they have to pay these carriers to offer android products.

What? This is bullshit. They are essentially paying cash for manufacturers and carriers to use Android and to use Android with google services. How is that not anti-competitive?

google is becoming greedy

Most of the comments fail to understand that what Google is doing is being a savvy business. By sharing profits with manufacturers and carriers they increase sales. The extra profits gained may even cause the prices to drop! Which is good to us, because that raises competition and that means better, cheaper products to choose from.

It's not about being greedy, it's about being smart. What is good to the customer is good to the business, something Apple fails to understand (treating customers like criminals, having a lousy app store that rejects useful apps for stupid reasons, etc...)

come on folks read the article, as well as the standard incentive Google is sharing some of the click through revenue, if the user didn't click a paid link no one gets squat

I didn't expect google to make their move this soon. Good or them!

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.

I don't know. I feel like Intel and Microsoft have been fined for billions of dollars for doing similar things. Is this really that much different from Intel paying off computer makers to use Intel processors over AMD? I guess you could say Intel was paying people off to NOT use AMD products, but think for a minute, if a carrier were to include both Bing and Google apps, do you think Google would still pay them?

Thing is, I'm not saying I think its anti-competitive or bad. I just think the EU or US governments might consider it anti-competitive.

"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

"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

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

Anyone see a problem here? Double standards much?

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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.