Google's Payments To Apple Reached $20 Billion in 2022, Antitrust Court Documents Show

Alphabet paid Apple $20 billion in 2022 for Google to be the default search engine in the Safari browser, according to newly unsealed court documents in the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against Google. From a report: The deal between the two tech giants is at the heart of the landmark case, in which antitrust enforcers allege Google has illegally monopolized the market for online search and related advertising. The Justice Department and Google will offer closing arguments in the case Thursday and Friday, with a decision expected later this year.

Google and Apple had hoped to shield the payment amount from public disclosure. At the trial last fall, Apple executives testified that Google paid "billions," without specifying a number. A Google witness later accidentally disclosed that Google pays 36% of the revenue it earns from search ads to Apple. Court documents filed late Tuesday ahead of the closing arguments mark the first public confirmation of the figures by Apple's senior vice president of services, Eddy Cue. Such numbers aren't disclosed by either company in their securities filings. The documents also revealed the importance of the payments to Apple's bottom line. For instance, in 2020, Google's payments to Apple constituted 17.5% of the iPhone maker's operating income.

Just out of curiosity

[The-Ixian]

For science, I would like to see what happens if Google doesn't re-up the agreement for a year. What would Apple do?

Re:

[christoban]

Fire its CEO.

Re:

[Maury Markowitz]

> I am surprised to learn that if Apple gives google more info about me that advertisers will pay more for, they profit.

I read both of the linked articles and can't find anything remotely like this. Apple isn't giving any data to Google, at least nothing in the articles suggest it is and you haven't provided any evidence of such.

> Changing my search engine (s) to DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo sends info to Bing and doesn't block their trackers: "Unfortunately our Microsoft search syndication agreement prevent

Re:

[saloomy]

See the word IF? They have the incentive, and if you think incentives do not drive behavior, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. This has not come out, but it's a matter of time.

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

See the words: "You are making shit up, you moron?". Is it stupidity, malice or an incentive? Who fucking cares, you make shit up, you moron.

Re:

[NoMoreACs]

For years I was under the impression Apple made its profit selling devices and not my information. Turns out I was wrong. I am surprised to learn that if Apple gives google more info about me that advertisers will pay more for, they profit. I guess all their BS ads on privacy was money well spent on billboards etc.. Changing my search engine (s) to DuckDuckGo.

I did that years ago.

That's why this is a non-issue.

Re:

[data oyster]

I use duckduckgo on my Raspberry Pi, but am disappointed that that duckduckgo seems to be a shill for Microsoft-associated links in results. There are other search engines, you know, like Qwant. But it still doesn't beat google for many purposes. Of course, if you want, say, health related information, it's best to get out of the .com space and into pubmed.gov or equivalent. Which alternative search engines do slashdot users recommend? Just one, more than one, which ones? Thanks in advance. I will ci

Re:

[marcobat]

I don't believe Apple gave any information to Google, at least not directly, they set it as the default search engine, which means that most people have not changed it (and consequently passed some info to google). Much worse would be if apple stopped having safari as their browser and ship every mac and iPhone with chrome. I wonder what Apple price for that would be....

Re:

[cayenne8]

For years I was under the impression Apple made its profit selling devices and not my information. Turns out I was wrong. I am surprised to learn that if Apple gives google more info about me that advertisers will pay more for, they profit. I guess all their BS ads on privacy was money well spent on billboards etc.. Changing my search engine (s) to DuckDuckGo.

From what I read...Apple isn't giving Google any info...this money seems to be paid just for Apple making Google the default search engine on apps li

Re:

[ACForever]

Now you got it.

Re:

[WCLPeter]

if Google doesn't re-up the agreement for a year. What would Apple do?

If you think about it the "agreement" is basically a bribe from Google to keep Apple from competing with them and entering the search business: "You can spend billions trying to catch up to us or we can pay you billions to use our tech instead."

Re:

[saloomy]

All business arrangements are a bribe in one form or another. What is your point?

Re:

[backslashdot]

It would make its own search engine, which might be devastating for Google. Google's page rank patent is expired. Yes, they have improved since then .. but pagerank alone is sufficient to make a passable search engine.

Does money even matter for these two parties?

[Waffle Iron]

This is like sending coals from eastern Newcastle to western Newcastle.

Re:

[timeOday]

People want to see their 401k's go up, and whoever's in charge of making sure $BIGNUM goes up this quarter at google wants their bonus. There is no single individual who personally owns the $110B google has lying around.

Why does this matter?

[NoMoreACs]

Why is it anybody's business if Google thinks it's worth $20 to Google to be listed as the Default Search?

So long as the User can change it (which they can, easily), how is that a Conspiracy?

Re: Why does this matter?

[Frank Burly]

It was a secret agreement, so calling it a conspiracy seems like a reasonable, but inflammatory way of describing it

The huge dollar sum suggests that Google might be more interested in harming competitors than making a profit on each year's Apple device searches. But I don't know for much Google makes off Apple users . . . maybe you'd be fool not to be the highest bidder if you had $20b and a search engine.

Re:

[NoMoreACs]

It was a secret agreement, so calling it a conspiracy seems like a reasonable, but inflammatory way of describing it

The huge dollar sum suggests that Google might be more interested in harming competitors than making a profit on each year's Apple device searches. But I don't know for much Google makes off Apple users . . . maybe you'd be fool not to be the highest bidder if you had $20b and a search engine.

Still am having a huge bit of trouble determining a Victim or Damages.

As far as "Secret": There have been multitudinous articles, etc. about this Agreement for multitudes of years. The Amount is of no moment. Big Companies == Big Bucks.

So?

Re:

[ACForever]

whos talking about victims or damages?
What are you on about?

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

How is it "secret" when we have known about it for years - and every year we get reports about the new amount. Worst kept secret ever.

And don't get me started about the fact that Mozilla brags about their deal with Google, because that's their major source of income. And nobody bats an eye.

Wasted money

[JBMcB]

It's money wasted in my case. I immediately switched to DuckDuckGo. Took about ten seconds.

Re:

[NoMoreACs]

It's money wasted in my case. I immediately switched to DuckDuckGo. Took about ten seconds.

My point exactly.

Who's the Victim? What are the Damages?

That's concerning

[penguinoid]

in 2020, Google's payments to Apple constituted 17.5% of Apple's operating income.

Apple is one of the biggest companies in the world, selling luxury hardware -- and this much of their income is from ads? No wonder everyone and their mom is trying to shove ads wherever they can.

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

in 2020, Google's payments to Apple constituted 17.5% of Apple's operating income.

Apple is one of the biggest companies in the world, selling luxury hardware -- and this much of their income is from ads? No

FTFY.