FTC approves Google's AdMob buy, cites Apple's iAd competition
By Nilay Patel 
posted May 21st 2010 12:32PM
posted May 21st 2010 12:32PM
Google's attempt to swoop in and buy AdMob out from under Apple was looking like a Pyrrhic victory for a second there, as Federal Trade Commission approval of the deal hung in the balance based on concerns that El Goog would control far too much of the online advertising market. It's ironic, then, that Apple's acquisition of Quattro Wireless and the introduction of the iAd platform in iPhone OS 4 is what convinced the feds to let Google's acquisition go through -- the FTC says that Apple's entry into the market will provide significant competition to AdMob, regardless of whether or not it's owned by Google. That means Google's free to pursue all the ad-based initiatives in Froyo it announced yesterday at I/O, and it means we should see the already-heated rhetoric between Mountain View and Cupertino get another notch hotter. It's going to be a wild summer, folks -- get ready.Update: Here's a statement from AdMob founder and CEO Omar Hamoui on the deal -- he's got a fuller piece on his blog, linked below.
"We are extremely pleased with today's decision from the Federal Trade Commission to clear Google's acquisition of AdMob. Over the past six months we've received a great deal of support from across the mobile industry – and we deeply appreciate it. Our focus is now on working with the team at Google team to quickly close the deal."
Good for developers I guess, as a user I don't really care who delivers the ad just so it is not intrusive.
@blindguymcsqueezy When I read the word 'wild', especially in an article involving potential litigation, I knew it had to be Nilay writing.
@blindguymcsqueezy True! Dont care either, but this is Android and Google hands it out to developers for free only to make money off serving ad's. Android is about to become very intrusive!!!
@MacArtStyle simple solution. You and your buddies should start writing apps without ads. Devs have the right to show ads on their free apps or pay apps if they so chose.
I see free apps, like broadcast tv. It's free to me because advertisers are paying for the show.
@blindguymcsqueezy Well, it took 3 months for FTC to figure out that its not monopolization, rather, it's just thinking ahead with your competitors. Opinions. http://j.mp/admob-next-adsense-mobile
Ugh... Ads...
@Vdek
Yeah, ads suck, but without them there would be pay only sites on the internets.
@Vdek Well, I like ads, they make stuff free!
@daytripper I'd rather have pay only sites to be honest with you.
@Vdek
I'd rather have free sites, free Gmail, free Google Maps, free Youtube, free Hulu, and so on.
@andthemaniam
So you are pro spam? nice...
there's a difference between being pro-ads and pro-spam.
@Vdek
No you wouldn't. Do you think blogging would exist (eg. the massive wave of online weblogs, which ultimately spawned this very site) without ads? No. Would you pay to use Google? Of course not.
Ads aren't just nifty and cool, they're NEEDED to keep certain things not just profitable, but viable for consideration.
@Cy Starkman
Pro spam? Whaaat are you talking about?
@Wesscoast
Who are you to say what I would and wouldn't use, or what I would pay for and wouldn't pay for?
Of course these things would be there, there are plenty of websites that have absolutely no ads at all on the web and do fine.
Besides, there are the more subtle forms of Ads, kinda like Engadget, an ad agency for hire.
@Vdek can you name one such site?
@Dking7 and the rest ...
You people actually believe that advertising makes stuff free? Wow, that is naive. Money does not come out of thin air, you know.
Sites and services which are funded by advertising get their money from you, in the form of a higher price on nearly every product you buy. They are not free, in any way or form. You have paid for them. Whether you end up using the sites and services or not.
Just imagine if, instead of paying a bit of the price of EVERY advertising-supported service (whether you use that service or not, and there is not enough time in the day to use them all!), we individually only paid a bit of the price of the services we actually want to use.
We would each save a lot of money, and even more beneficially, only those services that were good enough to maintain consumer loyalty would continue; as it is now, so long as *advertisers* want a service to continue, then us consumers will continue to pay for it, regardless of what us consumers think of that service or indeed whether we use it at all.
Wow...the mobile ad wars are...heating up...
Yay?
@JONNNathannn
With all the news Google announced yesterday, plus this, Steve must be going batshit crazy.
@daytripper
From: Steve Jobs
No.
Sent from my iPhone.
I'm ready alright.. but my N1 isn't :-/ it's still waiting for the update to 2.2. I hope when they say they'll be releasing in the "next couple of weeks" they mean "right nao!".
We're helping Google create a monster. i'm going to buy stock in tinfoil now. Also anyone have a cold war/nuclear winter fllout shelter to spare
@Einlander I'm so with you.
@Einlander Meh. If humanity's going to be enslaved, it might as well be by Google rather than some government. And we'll all get cool phones.
@tompccs Why is a privately-owned corporation preferable to a government voted for by the people?
@Dale P
I think because they you cool and probably soon free phones?
@Dale P Technically Google is publicly owned. But it's rather privately controlled, so I take your point.
@Dale P I have more choice over who provides my search results than I have choice of where my tax money goes. Unpopular companies don't last long. Unpopular governments can last for decades.
So...they waited for apple to come forward about iad in order to have competition.
@erwin
Funny how if Apple stayed out of it, Google likely wouldn't have successful acquired AdMob.
Consumers are understandably not excited about ads (who wants more ads? I noticed on yesterday's keynote on Android, the ad portion seemed to be the portion with the least applause and enthusiasm). But I suppose it opens up more revenue opportunities for developers, which is something Android desperately needs (given a bulk of Android apps are free).
@erwin
It surpises me that people think google and apple are at war. it's strategic
@Cy Starkman
Did you listen to Google's second day keynote...
They may not be at war, but they definitely are targeting each other.
@ECH Google doesn't need to have a war with anyone - they win ultimately by people using any device to use the googlenet ooops sorry Internet
Google has arrived. I'll be happy the first time I see the term "Google killer" or "Android killer" on a tech blog.
Ads for google mean more free services. Ads for apple, means more profit for stockholders.
@revmixman Wow, you really are drinking the Kool Aid.
Ads for Google AND Apple mean developers can create ad-funded apps while making the host company money. There is zero difference between them.
@Dale P I think both of you are presuming too much with too little information given. We need to see how both get implemented in real-world scenarios, how prevalent and seemless they are, how much they can potentially add to the experience and how much more developers give cheaper and/or free versions (plus possible choice between the two) until we can make a verdict on either.
The potential is there for them to be more than "zero difference" between them as Apple currently holds a patent to shut down your OS during sponsored ad appearances.
Good week for Google!
As an Apple Supporter I say that this is a FAIR decision and let the best company win....
I hope its Apple (of course).
Google's plan of Total World Domination is now a go!
Google ought to send Apple a fruit basket at the very least.
@DTJ
or a jar of applesauce
@ECH +1 for applesauce!
I never thought I would be happy about an ad deal but, YES!
Google plans the Androids for deployment
Really I cant believe apple and now google are selling "ads on your phone" as a feature! WTF! I don't want this shit built into the phone's OS! leave it to the app developer to find a way to put ads in their app if that's truly the way they want to pay for their app. I don't want some OS level API mining though all the data on my phone to target ads at me, that's no better then spyware/malware in my book. I guess for now thats going to leave WinMO and WebOS the only with out this crap marketing "API" built in
@d0ug They're selling it as a feature to devs, which it is. They're announced and shown off at industry conferences, not consumer shows and commercials.
And we all win in the end. It makes things nicer and more interactive. Ads will be there anyway, might as well bake in Fandango functionality or a game while they're at it.
@d0ug
ProTip: Don't buy the phone/app if you don't agree with it. Thats what I plan on doing.
Typically the consumer market has this magically ability to make things go away that people don't buy.
@JONNNathannn I have no problem with specific apps being ad supported if the developer really wants to go that route, though i personally would rather just flat out pay for an app and not deal with ads. I can choose to boycott those apps if I don't want anything to do with the advertising. The problem I have is the fact that this is all built into the OS on the phone, and the phone is likely going to be constantly data mining your browsing history, txts, emails and other data even when these ad supported apps aren't running so they can have a nicely built profile on you.
@SirNoDroin and i will do just that, I have a brand new HD2 that im perfectly happy with and should keep me happy for awhile. Likely the XDA will have all kinds of mobile OSes hacked on to the HD2 in time, maybe newer versions of android with all the advertising BS stripped out. Time will tell.
However i see the HD2 hardware platform as one with a few years of life in it, depending on what people eventually can hack onto it.