Hacker News Reader

Comment by guelo | Hacker News Reader

I agree with your larger point but you exaggerate too much calling it a single-product company. Here's a revenue pie chart https://i0.wp.com/fourweekmba.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10...

Search is 58% of revenue but I'd still call it at least a 4 product company with the "other" products contributing a decent 11%.

View on HN

Ads is 80% of all revenue on your chart (search ads + network ads + youtube ads).

If you want, you can stretch their products to ads, cloud, and play store. But ads are still 80% of the whole pie. More if one accepts that some percentage of youtube subscribers are only paying to get rid of ads.

I would consider Youtube and Search and AdSense as completely separate giant businesses.

They all were at one point.

Imagine if they can't sell ads. How are they making money? I don't think subscriptions, pay per use, or referral fees would work.

They're different because the funnels are different. If Bing were to eviscerate Google Search overnight, YouTube and AdSense (other companies showing Google ads on their pages) will still continue to draw in the clicks and the eyeballs.

No. If Bing eviscerated Google Search, then MSFT could profitably serve and sell ads on video content, so MSFT/Bing would immediately want to set up a video site, and lure content creators off YouTube.

And I would add that the non-ads businesses listed there are money-losers. Their cloud stuff is still in the red, and things like Android and Chrome and Maps are basically about ensuring that there are places they can put ads.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com