To the Editor:
“Google Dominates a Concealed Marketplace With No Principles,” by Dina Srinivasan (Impression visitor essay, June 25), will make statements about our marketing engineering enterprise that we strongly disagree with.
Impartial reports present that the service fees we demand our associates are decreased than the industry typical. In actuality, the 100 largest news publishers — numerous of which have in-house sales groups that accomplish a lot of of the features supplied by Google’s ad gross sales, trade and brokerage operations — employing our tools maintain a lot more than 95 per cent of the income that their advertisement place earns, a considerably cry from the 50 percent Ms. Srinivasan cites.
When just one portion of Ms. Srinivasan’s essay refers to ad intermediaries in normal, our promotion tools do not end result in publishers “selling for up to 50 per cent significantly less than what it normally would,” as Ms. Srinivasan indicates. In simple fact, our investigation displays that publishers’ revenue boosts when they use our applications — that’s why they decide on to use them!
Ms. Srinivasan has ignored the inconvenient fact that this sector is extremely aggressive — with rivalry between home names like Adobe, Amazon, AT&T, Comcast, Facebook, Oracle, Twitter and News Corp, a enterprise for which Ms. Srinivasan has consulted. We also deal with level of competition from a legion of lesser-regarded but quickly-developing rivals like The Trade Desk and Magnite. Several of these rivals also offer advert platforms and instruments similar to ours that cater to both of those advertisers and publishers.
When it may well be an inconvenient real truth for the lawsuits she is championing, it is obvious that levels of competition in on the net promotion technological know-how has lowered advertisement tech charges and expanded possibilities for publishers and advertisers.
The author is director of financial coverage at Google.