Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the informations-sans-frontières dept.

Wired had a story Sunday where they make the case that, between it's own wireless service and current negotiations with phone companies that would let customers move its service and international cellular networks at no extra cost, Google is doing its best to keep users locked into its network:

...you'd be able to travel across the US, the UK, Italy, Hong Hong, and Sri Lanka while paying the same fees for calls, text, and data—an attractive option for anyone who's ever carried a phone overseas. Carriers tend to charge inflated rates for this kind of "roaming," forcing you to think twice about using your phone at all while traveling. "Roaming fees in Europe and Asia can kill you," says Richard Doherty, an analyst with New York-based research firm Envisioneering.

...Google said it doesn’t comment on "rumor or speculation." But the report fits nicely with what we already know about Google's plans for its unconventional wireless service. Google appears to be envisioning a wireless world where we can move effortlessly from one wireless network to another, making it easier for us to stay online.

Of course that just means more ad revenue for Google:

The more you're online, the more you'll use Google's search engine and other apps—and the more the company can serve you ads. "Google needs reach," Doherty says. And what better way to extend that reach than by offering what so many of us want: ready access to the internet at all times?

Having just opened my wireless bill that included a recent week spent in Cancun, Mexico I can personally attest that roaming charges hurt not just in Europe and Asia.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by frojack on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:47AM

    by frojack (1554) on Wednesday April 08 2015, @01:47AM (#167676) Journal

    Of course that just means more ad revenue for Google

    But Google doesn't charge by the impression. They only charge by the click.
    Sending Having lots of ads does not translate to more revenue for google, unless the user clicks on them. Having more ads on a page does not make me more likely to click on them, other than by accident.

    Now If I'm traveling in unfamiliar territory, I might WANT ads (especially on Google maps) to find hotels restaurants, etc, and I might be just the kind of customer the advertiser is looking for. But having just gotten back from such a trip, I really don't remember clicking on many ads.

    I think people overestimate the revenue generating capacity of one more ad.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday April 08 2015, @02:26AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 08 2015, @02:26AM (#167693) Journal

    Now If I'm traveling in unfamiliar territory, I might WANT ads (especially on Google maps) to find hotels restaurants, etc, and I might be just the kind of customer the advertiser is looking for.

    You mean... pretty much like when travelling in holidays? With extra money to spend just for leisure?
    Like those 1.087 billion international tourists [wikipedia.org] worldwide in 2013 (meh, I know; an approximation, since a tourist can arrive multiple times)?
    Which spent US$1.07 trillion [wikipedia.org] in 2012?

    Why would Google bother to target them; after all most of the people stay at home most of the time, there's where ads should be targeted :). Except:

    But having just gotten back from such a trip, I really don't remember clicking on many ads.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 1) by anubi on Wednesday April 08 2015, @06:40AM

    by anubi (2828) on Wednesday April 08 2015, @06:40AM (#167758) Journal

    Bingo! I, too, welcome *targeted* ads. There are very specific things I will seek out, and if anyone is marketing their version of it, I would certainly like to see it.

    Trade magazines come to mind... like Electronic Design, EDN, Circuit Cellar, and the like.

    My favorite ad spots in the magazine were in the back when they had them all organized into type of product, and each merchant had something like a 2"x4" tile. Several pages of these tiled ads. I could look them over in a few minutes to see if any were of interest.

    I note online AliExpress has been tuning their system up pretty well to sense what I am dialing into and making pretty good suggestions of similar things.

    So has Google and YouTube.

    I have two main gripes with ads:

    * Not targeted - trying to sell me something I have no use for...

    * Obtrusive use of javascripts and annoying presentation such as flashing, overlaying something else I came to see, or oversized.

    A small ad is all it takes. If I am interested, I will click on it.

    Google is doing a great job of this - I would have a hard time telling Google how to improve how they place their ads on their search results page. Although I use NoScript, the way Google does it, the ads that do come through are perfectly acceptable. I have no intention of trying to block them.

    I only wish other webmasters would do ads like Google does them.

    If my statistic means anything, I do like ads... but I absolutely hate and will take steps to avoid ALL ads if they are presented in an obnoxious manner. I like lemon pie too, but I will completely avoid the pie place if they throw the pie at me.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by rigrig on Wednesday April 08 2015, @05:27PM

    by rigrig (5129) Subscriber Badge <soylentnews@tubul.net> on Wednesday April 08 2015, @05:27PM (#167910) Homepage

    But Google doesn't charge by the impression. They only charge by the click.

    And how many ads are clicked if people turn off their data connection to prevent roaming charges? Google won't even be able to properly track you in real-time.

    Google cares about improving (internet) technology in general:
    Before Chrome, most people would not have a good enough browser to properly load all the tracking/advertising scripts Google would like you to put on your site, let alone run all the fancy web-applications Google offers.
    By having to compete with Chrome, other browser-makers were forced to improve their product, and people can now 'happily' be tracked across all those ad-laden pages out there, and look at Gmail ads instead of using a dedicated e-mail client.

    Now Google would like everybody to be online all the time, so you can look at fresh ads.
    Because Google offers a service that allows people to be online all the time, existing carriers will be forced to make similar offers for a decent price, or all their customers will switch to Google.
    If your carrier starts offering online-all-the-time for a decent price, so you decide not to switch, that's fine with Google. It just wants you to have access to fresh ads all the time.

    The happy thought is that Google want these things to happen, so it will offer them at (slightly above) cost:
    that way existing companies will be forced (but able) to match their offer, and everybody gets better internet (and autonomous cars*) for a decent price.

    * Once everybody gets theirs to work, Google doesn't care if you drive a Google-car or an iCar, as long as you're watching ads instead of the road.

    --
    No one remembers the singer.