Reply to post:

EU under pressure to slap non-compliance notice on Google over pay-to-play 'remedy'

ArrZarr Silver badge

Having had a look at the complaint, there is a fallacy inherent within their logic.

They dismiss Google's promise to run Google Shopping with a profit as "meaningless accountancy"

Yet, since Google Shopping needs to participate within the auction it is, for practical purposes, a third party in this matter.

The Google Shopping entity (which is distinct from the Google which shows you the search page) is under all of the same restrictions as the true third parties, which was the point of the promise to run Google Shopping with a profit. True, they were massively ahead in terms of integration but that was to be expected.

The complainant's points about Google taking most of the profit from them is true, but they're deliberately ignoring the fact that most of the money that Google Shopping takes isn't usable by the wider Alphabet group.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon