What would be the parts though?
There is one profitable part (ads). The other parts are supported by that part or at least require deep integration with that part.
Maybe you could split of Google Cloud, but I bet it would just become a digital REIT.
There is one profitable part (ads). The other parts are supported by that part or at least require deep integration with that part.
Maybe you could split of Google Cloud, but I bet it would just become a digital REIT.
Google (Search), YouTube, Doubleclick (Ads), Android (Android, gmail, docs, google drive, Meet, google cloud, Stadia), maps and business listings (a Yelp competitor).
I don't think Google Cloud should be its own thing. I see the business software, Android, Stadia and Google Cloud all part of the same company. It's basically a Microsoft clone. I could even see Microsoft buying that part of the business from Google.
Yes you can.
> most of the other facets would likely tank within 18 months without (specifically, the ones dependent on ad revenue to remain solvent).
Business models don't have a right to exist just because they "work" for the moment.
> You'd have breakup the ads business and give a piece to various resulting companies, otherwise most offshoots wouldn't have a viable positive revenue model to save themselves from immediate financial collapse.
I think there's an argument to be made that anything that "must" exist could be paid for by taxes (and likewise open sourced and publicly owned). However, I honestly don't see much of Google's business model that "must" exist. Not Gmail, not Meet, and certainly not Ads. Possibly Chrome.
No. I want the government to step in and break up Google into distinct business units. That doesn't mean outlawing Google at all.
Who knows, this might even make Google more competitive at the end of the day. If anything, it could make the "ROI" and financial metrics of their individual products more explicit instead of nebulous "cross-subsidizing" centers.