Google’s “Predatory” Pricing

There is a confused piece over at ZDNet saying that Google’s new Checkout payment service has “predatory” pricing. After studiously citing a Georgetown Law Journal paper from a few years back, the author argues that consumers may be hurt by Google’s low pricing.

Huh? While that’s possible, let’s just say I’m more than happy to take that chance. Please move along and find someone else to protect. Thanks.


  1. I quite liked her take on it actually.
    Anything GOOG do has some potential for catastrophe for one group or another, be it a merchant, merchants in general, consumers or privacy.Google’s a beast, and a beast that’s thrashing around trying to find a way to make it’s one trick pony less vulnerable, and that ultimately means someone is going to get hurt.
    I don’t think there is, or necessarily should be, anything done about it, but if there’s a lock-in play afoot, someone should wave the red flag.

  2. Franklin Stubbs says:

    Isn’t the object of predatory pricing to clear the field of competitors by crippling them or putting them out of business, such that monopolistic prices can then be set unhindered?
    So by this logic, Google is going to cripple and / or destroy Paypal, Visa and Mastercard… and then wreak havoc in their absence. Yeah, right. Someone is cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
    There is a Google hatred out there that is deeply irrational. Just as some will praise them no matter what they do, it seems there is a more vocal group of folks who will damn them as hapless lumbering fools no matter what they do. Perhaps it’s a case of metastasized cynicism cutting off blood flow to the brain.

  3. The Google cynicism out there sounds similar to the Microsoft cynicism. It even came out in a gush here about a week ago, when we discussed Gate’s philanthropy.

  4. the difference being that google spends money it got from investors compared to gates spending money gotten from users through shady means (monopolistic pricing etc)