James Avery, CEO of Kevel, recently testified in the AntiTrust trial. A 16 year conversation is finally coming to a head
The Department of Justice has finally joined the conversation that many of us in the media and tech industries have been talking about for a decade and a half, “has Google crossed the line into anti-competitive behavior?”
James Avery, CEO of Kevel, a HMTA portfolio company, was one of the industry leaders who testified. You can see some of the coverage here.
It has been clear from the earliest days that Google was very good at what it did. It became the apex predator in search in the early 2000s bolstered by its speed and comprehensive index. Layering on AdSense gave it the perfect monetization vehicle. I was an early (and very successful) AdSense partner at About.com in 2004 and even spoke at the tenth anniversary celebration in 2014 while I was at Answers.com. I briefly competed against Google while I ran the Search and Media Group at IAC in 2007/8. What I learned then, was that Google not only had the lead in search but was accelerating away from the crowd.
Many of us began raising questions about Google’s dominance even then. I was contacted by the FTC when Google announced that it wanted to acquire DoubleClick, At the time, I said that blending search and ad serving would prove to the the thermonuclear device in internet advertising and suggested that the FTC take a hard look at the deal. I was told two things which were true but problematic: first that the FTC was not concerned about internet advertising only ad serving; second that they were not concerned about competitors only consumers.
Because Microsoft had purchased Atlas and Group M had purchased 24/7, the FTC felt that there was sufficient competition in ad serving. Plausible but incorrect. But also significantly, there was no public support for a crackdown on Google. They were, at the time, one of the world’s most admired companies. Ask.com tested ads in the UK that portrayed Google as Big Brother and suggested that consumers try an alternative. The ads flopped.
That was also the time that I became an investor in Kevel and joined its board. Our premise at the time was that some publishers might want an alternative to the cost and complexity of Google Ad Manager. I used to describe it as the Volkswagen Bug of ad servers—simple, reliable, robust and affordable. That proposition was, and still is attractive, but as James explained in his testimony, our success was blocked by Google.
Kevel has since grown and flourished under James’s leadership. It is now a top provider of technology to retail media networks. But we might well have enjoyed even more success and sooner if the playing field had been level for the past decade.
When does successful, efficient competition cross the line? Many years ago, AT&T was broken up only to recombine. Microsoft received intense scrutiny for its overreaction to Netscape. But largely, the industry has been left alone. The Google trial could be the first of a number of significant tests including NVidia and OpenAI.
Perversely, breaking up Google could make it stronger not weaker. That’s the history of these things. Google’s major operating groups might well be stronger, better optimized competitors is they were only focused on individual businesses. The most damaging threat to operational efficiency is actually lingering investigations and the second-guessing and navel-gazing that flourish in environments of uncertainty.