[caption id="attachment_1154" align="alignleft" width="271" caption="Are all big companies bad for business and consumers?"]
[/caption]
It would appear that most people know about the indiscretions of Tiger Woods, recently. It was splashed all over the news, both online and offline. The story about his extra-marital affairs became the most searched for articles on the web for a time. Some news organisations saw large numbers of new visitors to their websites looking for the latest gossip and insights into why the most famous golfer in the world had crashed his car just outside his own house. Woods' troubles were good for business for news sites, helping them to reinforce why advertisers should continue to pay them their fees.
The image of Tiger Woods had been one of sportsmanship, achievement, dedication and integrity. But, some sponsors have started to drop him because they believe it was negatively affecting their own brands to be associated with him. Tiger Woods was, and probably still is, the biggest thing in golf, helping to boost TV ratings which no other golfers achieve.
But, like all things which become big, they often creak at the seams or they become unaware of their surroundings so much so that they damage others. You can see this with the BBC, which has announced that it is planning to pare down its organisation by dropping some stations and web pages. Google has now become so big that organisations feel that it is too dominant and they want to shackle the search organisation so that others can compete with it.
The challenge for other companies competing with them is that Google is just so good at what it does. It is competing with other massive companies, like Microsoft, by providing many free services (e.g. Google Docs) for which their competitors charge. Its competitors feel stifled in their search rankings when Google has a competitive product.
But, people do have a choice when it comes to search. Microsoft's Bing search engine will soon be joining with Yahoo!'s search engine. Bing is pretty good. But, people choose not to use Bing and Yahoo! as much because they are not yet quite as good as Google yet.
Google will soon be bringing out its own operating system to rival Microsoft Windows. I, personally, can't wait because if it is as good as their web browsing software, Google Chrome, then I am all for Google being big so that they can invest in technology which will actually give a real choice in which operating system we use in our computers.
So, it seems counter-intuitive for the European Union (EU) to being trying to legislate against Google when it is actually this organisation which is providing choice to consumers. After all, Microsoft has been the target of the EU's wrath for the last decade for not providing choice. Now that a competitor to Microsoft is providing choice in the market, the EU is attempting to stifle them.
[/caption]It would appear that most people know about the indiscretions of Tiger Woods, recently. It was splashed all over the news, both online and offline. The story about his extra-marital affairs became the most searched for articles on the web for a time. Some news organisations saw large numbers of new visitors to their websites looking for the latest gossip and insights into why the most famous golfer in the world had crashed his car just outside his own house. Woods' troubles were good for business for news sites, helping them to reinforce why advertisers should continue to pay them their fees.
The image of Tiger Woods had been one of sportsmanship, achievement, dedication and integrity. But, some sponsors have started to drop him because they believe it was negatively affecting their own brands to be associated with him. Tiger Woods was, and probably still is, the biggest thing in golf, helping to boost TV ratings which no other golfers achieve.
But, like all things which become big, they often creak at the seams or they become unaware of their surroundings so much so that they damage others. You can see this with the BBC, which has announced that it is planning to pare down its organisation by dropping some stations and web pages. Google has now become so big that organisations feel that it is too dominant and they want to shackle the search organisation so that others can compete with it.
The challenge for other companies competing with them is that Google is just so good at what it does. It is competing with other massive companies, like Microsoft, by providing many free services (e.g. Google Docs) for which their competitors charge. Its competitors feel stifled in their search rankings when Google has a competitive product.
But, people do have a choice when it comes to search. Microsoft's Bing search engine will soon be joining with Yahoo!'s search engine. Bing is pretty good. But, people choose not to use Bing and Yahoo! as much because they are not yet quite as good as Google yet.
Google will soon be bringing out its own operating system to rival Microsoft Windows. I, personally, can't wait because if it is as good as their web browsing software, Google Chrome, then I am all for Google being big so that they can invest in technology which will actually give a real choice in which operating system we use in our computers.
So, it seems counter-intuitive for the European Union (EU) to being trying to legislate against Google when it is actually this organisation which is providing choice to consumers. After all, Microsoft has been the target of the EU's wrath for the last decade for not providing choice. Now that a competitor to Microsoft is providing choice in the market, the EU is attempting to stifle them.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment!