[HN Gopher] Buy on Google is now open and commission-free
___________________________________________________________________
Buy on Google is now open and commission-free
Author : hhua_
Score : 107 points
Date : 2020-07-23 20:18 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.google)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.google)
| bhamta wrote:
| This is 'The Anti-Amazon Alliance' as Ben Thompson puts it.
| Curious to see if customers will adopt it. I think it lacks two
| key value props of Amazon: uniform guarantees (Amazon guarantees
| regardless of seller) and super fast shipping.
| ISL wrote:
| It may depend on the value-proposition for the sellers. If
| Amazon takes too much of a cut, alternatives, even with fewer
| customers, may look attractive.
| nine_k wrote:
| Of you are big enough, you want to be present on all large
| trading venues, say, both Amazon and eBay.
|
| If this venue proves reasonably well functioning and promoted,
| big sellers will have to build their presence there, too,
| bringing in customers and more credibility.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Anyone remember when ATMs were free?
| techntoke wrote:
| No, I don't. How long ago was that? I hear that credit unions
| don't charge for other credit unions ATMs.
| tonymet wrote:
| This is what happens when you kill third party cookies. The
| signals have tremendous value, so networks will move them into
| first party activities . Expect further consolidation
| [deleted]
| sleepyshift wrote:
| Is Google's head of payment systems really called "Bill Ready"?
| luckydata wrote:
| A name, a destiny.
| hitekker wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism
|
| He has embraced the concept:
|
| https://www.linkedin.com/in/williamready/
| chaconnewu wrote:
| He used to be an EVP at PayPal :)
| kyrra wrote:
| (Googler, opinion is my own).
|
| Technically, no. He's head of Commerce, which is different than
| payments (I'm in payments). You can see from that page, they do
| things like shopping listings, and the experience around it.
| Payments (at least at Google) is just a service that teams like
| that can use. You'll notice that checkout screens for shopping,
| ads, Youtube, Store, etc... are all very similar. That final
| payment experience is Payments.
| cosmodisk wrote:
| Or when your name is Rich Ricci and you run a bank...
| crawsome wrote:
| Nintendo's CEO's last name is Bowser.
|
| Our AG is named "Barr" (Pun on a Bar association)
|
| Is there a cool collection of these somewhere? These are the
| only evidence I feel that we're in a simulation and the
| engineer is fucking with us.
| civil_engineer wrote:
| There's a urologist in Austin, Texas named Richard Chopp.
| pesfandiar wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptronym#Notable_examples
| Shicholas wrote:
| And Anthony Weiner, well...
| novok wrote:
| The DHS secretary spokesperson with the entire Portland
| brouhaha is named Chad Wolf. If that wasn't a meme name I
| don't know what is.
| skybrian wrote:
| I used to like buying with Google Checkout back in the day. And
| does anyone remember Froogle? They used to have free product
| listings, and then they started charging. One of the reasons I
| heard for that change was that they were getting a lot of spam.
|
| I guess by partnering with Shopify they can let someone else
| worry about that, but likely they'll have a counterfeit problem
| if this gets any traction.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Shopify isn't free right?
|
| So effectively while Google is claiming they are "free", the
| reality is the merchant still has to pay...
| muro wrote:
| A merchant doesn't have to use Spotify.
| Mave83 wrote:
| Not going to happen. The company with one of the worst customer
| support vs the most customer centric. Maybe some dont care, but I
| know a lot that prefer Amazon over any other Shop because of the
| service.
| prepend wrote:
| Could they just bring back froogle already?
|
| If it's free to list, why not just make a special shopping filter
| on google to find stuff for sale. Amazon included.
|
| I miss the day when I could google for products and find the best
| price quality. Amazon search shows more ads than search results
| and the world really needs a shopping google.
| arpinum wrote:
| Google's e-commerce had been floundering for years, I'm glad they
| brought in fresh leadership and upped investment to keep Amazon
| from having a near-monopoly. Customers will benefit.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| _timeo Danaos et dona ferentes_ [1]
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeo_Danaos_et_dona_ferentes
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Free until they dominate the entire market
| Someone1234 wrote:
| Or wipe out the low commission fee competition in the payment
| processor space.
|
| If the US had better anti-competitive enforcement I feel like
| this is akin to the Internet Explorer/Netscape/Microsoft case,
| in them using one monopoly (search) to take over another market
| (same hook too: "free").
|
| Plus you know they're going to reward sites for using this in
| their search rankings (or just outright place them at the top).
| skybrian wrote:
| Look like they aren't doing payment processing. They're
| partnering with Paypal and Shopify. So by "commission-free"
| that would mean the commission on top of payment processing?
| mav3rick wrote:
| Love how baseless allegations like "reward in search
| rankings" are heeded here. If I write something egregious
| without a source against Duck Duck Go I'd be downvoted to
| oblivion
| londons_explore wrote:
| Google is pretty strict about not artificially rewarding
| sites in the _organic_ rankings. (ie. non-ads and non-
| infoboxes).
|
| However, despite that those sites will get an implicit
| reward - if users go to these sites, and find a slick easy
| checkout and low prices, the site will satisfy their need.
| Google's goal is to put sites that satisfy the users search
| request at the top.
|
| So, assuming this new Google service is any good, then
| sites that use it will end up upranked just because those
| sites satisfy users more than other sites.
| xmprt wrote:
| Intuitively I don't like the idea of Google controlling
| everything but based on the reason you gave it sounds
| like this would be a good idea right? Customers get a
| better experience in the end.
| mabbo wrote:
| It's not entirely baseless. Look at what's happening with
| AMP. Google aren't a charity, and at some point in the last
| decade they realized it.
| mav3rick wrote:
| What is happening with AMP ? The pages load faster. They
| made it clear they will reward page load times in
| ranking. They have made no such shopping related claim
| here.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| AMP, quick search box, bread crumbs...
|
| Google track record is not great in that regards.
| reaperducer wrote:
| It would only be "baseless" if it hadn't happened before.
|
| People learn from experience and the experiences of others.
| mav3rick wrote:
| Your vendetta doesn't make something real.
| reaperducer wrote:
| I have no vendetta. You're projecting.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| I think reward, but it is pretty cunning, the rewarded sites
| get better placement so better profit so it will be easy for
| others to see how google outperforms to other solutions.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| You really think Google -- who has floundered in this space for
| years -- is going to dominate a market that is already
| dominated by a company (Amazon) with a 50% larger market cap?
|
| Walmart and Target have been trying to chip away at Amazon's
| lead, and they're only getting buried deeper in the dust.
| Google doesn't exactly have a reputation for entering new
| markets and dominating them, either...
| topspin wrote:
| > already dominated by a company (Amazon) with a 50% larger
| market cap?
|
| I wouldn't if Amazon was doing a good job. Between the
| astroturf reviews, fake products and fictional shipping times
| Amazon leaves a _lot_ to be desired.
|
| But I do agree Google won't be the solution. Google is too
| hidebound and suspect now to solve this one.
|
| I think the future is in independent online retailers. The
| good ones will thrive and the rest will vanish, and they
| aren't going to suffer the FAANGs any more than necessary.
| three_seagrass wrote:
| No, but with Shopify, Woo Commerce, and Big Commerce -
| _maybe_.
| londons_explore wrote:
| >Google doesn't exactly have a reputation for entering new
| markets and dominating them, either...
|
| Mobile OS's (Android)
|
| Online Video (Youtube)
|
| Online Maps (Google Maps)
|
| Webmail (Gmail)
|
| None recently, granted.
| frequentnapper wrote:
| Weren't they all acquisitions?
| londons_explore wrote:
| Gmail wasn't.
| splonk wrote:
| Gmail was internal. Maps was mostly built by a couple
| acquisitions, but it wasn't anything like Youtube, where
| the acquired companies were big established players in
| the space.
| patmorgan23 wrote:
| Don't for get calendar and docs
| londons_explore wrote:
| I feel like MS Word (offline) still has a majority
| marketshare for general documenting, and calendars
| outlook also has a big chunk of the market.
|
| Depends on where you draw the boundaries in markets
| certainly...
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Yeah but all those are not IRL activities, so there is a
| small chance that they mess that up. They are really not
| good with real people.
| three_seagrass wrote:
| I mean, looking at a map used to be an IRL activity.
| esrauch wrote:
| Mapquest was already successful before Google maps.
| kubanczyk wrote:
| Google Maps is very much real life. And it was very easy
| to mess up. Big usability achievement.
|
| In fact I think it's underrated. It truly changed my
| world. Earlier I was always nervous when driving and
| frequently speeding. It's so liberating to be able to
| call a friend and say "uh I'll be 8 minutes late, sorry".
| mrep wrote:
| Google photos was launched in 2015 and hit a billion users
| in 2019 [0].
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Photos
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| People don't search things on amazon, they search things on
| google, which link to amazon.
|
| So yes, they have a huge potential.
|
| They always have sucked doing things IRL, so it's not a
| certain win. But owning the road to the competition shop is
| powerful.
|
| Not to mention they can force the hand of small shops: use
| our API or go down in ranking.
| StreamBright wrote:
| Actually Google is getting shittier and crappier every day.
| Btw. I usually look for things on Amazon, they search
| engine has the same issue as Google's. Only spam (they call
| it ad) in the first N positions. I would seriously pay for
| a service which has no PII data collection (still can
| measure the effectiveness of your engine), no ads and
| relevant results.
| tinyhouse wrote:
| That's wrong. There was a study [1] on this exactly that
| found that most people (in the US I think) who search
| products start with Amazon and not Google. In one of the
| recent Amazon earning reports, they reported $10B
| advertisement revenue, which is another indication that
| direct product search on Amazon is huge.
|
| [1] Google it :)
| 8organicbits wrote:
| Is that still true? For most products Amazon search seems
| much improved to me, it used to be quite poor. Plus on
| mobile people may be biased to search via the app.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Most people don't even know what an URL is. They can't
| tell the difference between an app and a website. They
| think google is the internet. Hell, even the ones that do
| know better type the site URL into google to go to the
| site they want.
| bdcravens wrote:
| Most lists I've seen on the topic show Amazon as having the
| 3rd most trafficked search engine (after Google and
| YouTube)
| [deleted]
| antonzabirko wrote:
| I'm just glad there's someone to temper Amazon from world
| dominance... For now.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| At first, me too.
|
| But amazon doesn't have a search monopoly, millions of
| android devices, google maps, or youtube to drive the sales.
|
| Neither do they have the huge amount of data google already
| have on people.
|
| Now there is a possibility that google fails because sales
| require a lot of IRL stuff they suck at. So maybe it will be
| a balanced game.
|
| But if they win, it's going to be a nightmare.
|
| Unrelated, but I'm also quite worried about Apple deciding to
| become a bank one day.
| MisterTea wrote:
| > But amazon doesn't have a search monopoly, millions of
| android devices, google maps, or youtube to drive the
| sales.
|
| Don't forget that something like ~70% of their income comes
| from AWS. They may not be as visible as Google on the net
| but they are pretty much the largest provider of web
| services.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Sure but they make this money in B2B, not using customers
| data.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Unfortunately it's like Alien vs Predator. Whoever wins, we
| lose.
| nurettin wrote:
| It is a good move, until amazon starts taking blatant
| measures like banning traders with google shopping fronts.
| egypturnash wrote:
| Or until they get bored with updating it and EOL it.
| martinesko36 wrote:
| Sorry if this is a silly question, but is this in any way
| replacing Stripe?
| joyj2nd wrote:
| Did somebody shoot Amazon a second asshole?
| ProAm wrote:
| I would not trust a sellers business on Google with their history
| of customer support. Why risk your lively hood?
| ISL wrote:
| So many questions... the big one: How does Google make money from
| this?
| ProAm wrote:
| You're providing them with market research about inventory,
| sales, customer demographics, ad click through, etc.... Google
| isn't doing this for you.
| justaguyhere wrote:
| Just curious, what do they do with this data (other than
| maybe integrating into search)?
|
| Do they sell it? If yes, who buys these and what do the
| buyers do with it?
| grumple wrote:
| A little bit of selling it. A little bit of acquisition
| guidance. And there are certainly some very obvious ways to
| monetize once they get enough market share.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| Does this encourage or even require putting your credit card on
| file with Google? If so, that's actually very valuable for
| increasing sales of everything else Google sells to consumers.
|
| Think of a conversion funnel[1]. At each step of a process
| toward making a purchase, you lose a certain percentage of
| users. Adding a payment method (typing in your credit card
| number, address, etc.) is tedious and requires you to have the
| card handy, so you lose a lot of people at this stage.
|
| If more people are already past the hurdle of having a payment
| method on file, they can sell more apps/media on the Play
| store, more devices on the Google Store, more Drive storage
| upgrades, etc.
|
| --
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_funnel
| three_seagrass wrote:
| Allowing businesses to retarget customers easier?
| patmorgan23 wrote:
| Like everything ads
| john-shaffer wrote:
| They will still prioritize paid listings. The only thing that
| has changed is you can now get on page 51 without paying for
| the privilege. This just helps them get a slightly bigger
| marketplace to make their paid listings a little more valuable.
| elif wrote:
| you get searchers away from amazon and into google
| millstone wrote:
| It's 100% about slowing down Amazon. They want people to search
| on Google instead of Amazon.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| They can collect the data as usual, and they will, but for once
| they would not even need to. They can just wait until no shop
| can make a living without it because they dominate the market.
| They they start charging.
| summerlight wrote:
| Amazon is the only existential threat for Google Search, so
| Google doesn't exactly need to make money from Shopping as long
| as it can keep Amazon in check.
| caiobegotti wrote:
| Crossing all your shopping habits with your online profile?
| asdfk-12 wrote:
| Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 204 times, shame on me.
|
| https://killedbygoogle.com/
| dqpb wrote:
| That was my first thought. This will be gone in a year or two.
| leoh wrote:
| Dude, who cares?
| mortehu wrote:
| Slashdot.org was plagued by people posting "first post" to
| every story, so they implemented an automatic "first post"
| comment to each article, that was removed as soon as other
| comments appeared. Maybe this comment ("Google will shut this
| down like so many other products") should be similarly posted
| automatically to Hacker News on every Google story?
| heavyset_go wrote:
| It's ironic how my least favorite genre of posts are posts
| that complain about other posts.
| dmurray wrote:
| HN could also offer you the option to hide the automatic
| "Google will shut this down" post, and all its replies.
| sirlatrom wrote:
| Woooosh ;)
| organian wrote:
| It's ironic how my least favorite genre of comments are
| about people discussing the correct usage of the word
| "ironic".
| [deleted]
| bdcravens wrote:
| Could add the same logic for the inevitable "self host it"
| when Github is down, or the "but we did it first!" comment
| from Gitlab whenever Github announces a feature.
| jjcon wrote:
| Alternatively Google could just grow a spine and stop
| reinventing the same app year after year. The worst part is
| that they go all pikachu face when people react with wtf.
| asdfk-12 wrote:
| Perhaps this listing service would get more goodwill from
| users and business if they were to pay sellers a commission
| when a listed item sells. Google's extractive (no, it's
| actually _not_ 'free') business model has become quite
| tiresome, and they seem to have wasted their first-mover
| advantage over the past decade.
| yandrypozo wrote:
| when will we stop being fooled by Google? I still miss gtalk by
| the way :(
| techntoke wrote:
| When will we stop being fooled by Microsoft, Apple, Sony,
| Tesla, etc?
| mav3rick wrote:
| "companies don't try new things" - HN
|
| "Google kills products" - HN
|
| 99% of the people here would gladly work at Google. But what's
| the next best thing .. downplay the company you couldn't get
| into :) Carry on !
| jjcon wrote:
| Google isn't trying new things they are re-releasing the same
| apps with less functionality while simultaneously killing off
| user bases. This isn't some esoteric engineer criticism -
| it's mainstream at this point.
| ankashT wrote:
| Having seen the level of political indoctrination of some
| Googlers, who believe that everyone who is not colored is
| living in a permanent state of sin, yes, I would not want to
| join that Scientology knockoff.
|
| Notably none of these gives away 90% of their salary to ease
| their "guilt".
| pirocks wrote:
| I wouldn't gladly work for Google. I hope I'm not in the 1%.
| StreamBright wrote:
| I was trying to get into Google 3 times in my life. Results
| so far:
|
| - some (all? one?) interview failure (no feedback), rejection
|
| - interviews passed, no degree in CS (which was known to them
| prior of the interviews), rejection
|
| - interviews passed, this time missing CS degree is not a
| problem, no cultural fit, rejection
|
| I think I am done. You are assumption is without merit
| though.
| discobot wrote:
| I wonder how 100K of engineers made it in
| mav3rick wrote:
| There are many many people without CS degrees at Google.
| azangru wrote:
| The list is misleading. Angular.js was superseded by Angular 2.
| Google hangouts was superseded by Google Meet...
| jjcon wrote:
| I'd agree on angular but for most the others including
| hangouts the problem is that it isn't just an update - it's
| an entirely new app/service. Meet isnt superseding hangouts -
| google is killing hangouts and offering a new app in its
| place. Can you imagine if Apple killed off iMessage, didn't
| offer a way for people to transfer data and then just offered
| half the functionality to people in a new app? Google is an
| absolute shitshow these days.
| three_seagrass wrote:
| I am not sure if that's relevant given that google shopping has
| been around for almost two decades now.
| flavor8 wrote:
| They need to solve shipping. Partner with Uber (or hey, Waymo) to
| pick up and drop off packages from shops to consumers.
|
| An alternate model would be to make search good enough let
| consumers find stores within a radius of their current location
| selling X, and price compare them. E.g. I need a widget - stores
| a, b and c are selling it. Store a is $14.99 and 5 miles away,
| store b is $8.99 and 15 miles away, store c is $11.99 and 20
| miles away.
| stx wrote:
| I think for some products on shopping.google.com you can
| already search within your area. I think it it does not work
| with all products though I know I have seen it on some. Like
| electronics at Best Buy.
|
| Just search on shopping.google.com and then in the filters on
| the left side check the box for "Available nearby".
| iammru wrote:
| I doubt this will make a dent to Amazon's monopoly. Amazon is not
| winning because of they're closed and have high commission. If
| somebody can compete with Amazon will be companies like JD,
| coupang, Walmart.
| TheMagicHorsey wrote:
| Well, this is a good shot across the bows for Amazon. I feel
| Amazon was getting a bit abusive towards its sellers.
|
| To those who fear Google will become abusive in the long term:
| yes they might, but then there will be other competitors (perhaps
| a reformed Amazon) to hold them to a fair cut in the future.
|
| Market working as intended in other words.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-07-23 23:00 UTC)