Yahoo! Loses Mobile Giant Opera to Google; Did Google Just Buy a Mobile Browser?
Starting on the first of next month, the widely popular mobile browser Opera will switch from offering Yahoo! to using Google as its default search engine. While Yahoo! has its own relatively sophisticated mobile offerings, the company can't be happy to lose Opera to Google. Update: Yahoo! emailed to tell us that "Yahoo! has elected not to continue its mobile search partnership with Opera at this time." Interesting!
Presumably there's some money changing hands and we can't help but wonder how much. It's Google's payment to Mozilla for being the default search engine in Firefox that makes that browser financially viable.
What mobile money means
Some people say (only partly in jest) that Google does in fact own a browser - Firefox. Have deals gone on behind the scenes than mean Google now effectively owns a mobile browser too? These up-front payments for default placement are later more than made up for through search ad click throughs - and mobile is a key emerging market in search advertising.
In this case there is probably not a major shift in power going on over Opera, since the company has what should be a major revenue stream in the sale of browser installs themselves. For some reason, people are willing to pay for a better mobile browser despite widespread insistence that web and desktop software should be free. A large portion of Opera customers are Europeans, though, so perhaps that explains it.
None the less, it was probably seen at Google as a major coup to score this deal and they may have been willing to spend a lot of money on it. If Safari on the iPhone is the elite upper class mobile browser, Opera is the browser of the growing middle class in that space.
Opera users in general tend to be vehement advocates of the browser. While Firefox users will sometimes go to the trouble of telling you how much they like their browser, the smaller number of Opera fans are much more outspoken. I could comfortably hold my breath between putting up this post and the time that it will take for an Opera lover to post a comment about how wonderful this fast, standards compliant browser is on the desktop and the phone. (Please don't prove me wrong.)
For more informed coverage of this news see the blog of mobile search specialists MSearchGroove, where presumably it will be covered soon. Readers interested in mobile news should check out the RWW toolkit for 2008, a package of resources for tracking key issues like mobile in the coming year.
FOLLOW RWW ON TWITTER
RECENT JOBS
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
And this doesn't strike anyone as monopolist behavior?
Posted by: Pierre Far | February 27, 2008 9:21 AM
Pierre, that's an interesting argument to make. I imagine not literally buying Opera might make a difference there :) - or maybe not!
Posted by: Marshall Kirkpatrick
|
February 27, 2008 9:29 AM
How is this monopolist behavior? They paid a third party for marketing... that's like saying advertising on TV is monopolist behavior.
Posted by: Mike Malone | February 27, 2008 9:31 AM
Mike, I think the lines get a bit blurry when talking about something as fundamental to the browser experience as search. You're probably right though.
Posted by: Marshall Kirkpatrick
|
February 27, 2008 9:38 AM
Hi Marshall,
could you elaborate on this part:
> For some reason, people are willing to pay for a better > mobile browser despite widespread insistence that web
> and desktop software should be free. A large portion of > Opera customers are Europeans, though, so perhaps
> that explains it.
Because my first thought, after reading this, was: "What the fuck does this mean?"
Sorry, but it was indeed my first thought, so I'm being frank here.
Posted by: Igor | February 27, 2008 10:03 AM
Any agreement made which results in a lessening of competition is potentially illegal under antitrust laws in many countries. Especially in an industry that has few major players or is consolidating, the US courts have seen even tiny increments in market share as something to stop. Eventually it'll catch up to Google and every deal they do that increases their share of search advertising will be scrutinized and perhaps stopped.
Posted by: Dan Grossman | February 27, 2008 10:07 AM
Igor, humor never comes across in text as well as by voice. I apologize for the lack of clarity. I have the utmost respect for people willing to pay for software and am skeptical of the insistence that everything be free. Perhaps I was referencing the stereotype here in the US of Europeans being smarter and more sophisticated. Thank you for helping demonstrate that no stereotype is as nuanced as reality.
Posted by: Marshall Kirkpatrick
|
February 27, 2008 10:09 AM
I doubt Google will be buying Opera browser and alienate Firefox. As long every browser uses Google search they will be content. Browser application is not the most important focus for them right now, just to have a better mobile experience. Maybe it is just a licensing agreement, and Opera will be making more money via searches like Firefox.
Posted by: Chris | February 27, 2008 10:47 AM
I honestly don't get this whole "monopolist" approach to search.. Just because your the default search engine on an application doesn't mean your going to get used MSN LIVE is the default search engine on 90% of sold computers yet has less than 5% marketshare, the yahoo toolbar is embedded into almost everything as a co-download and STILL has less than 10% marketshare, when you load up the browser you have a choice, google, yahoo, msn, ask heck even dogpile or hotbot or even one of the countless thousands of search engines that are available..
With regards to ad space, google run adwords + adsense, everyone had a choice when they put the adsense code on there website there ARE many many viable alternatives (YPN, Affiliates, Text Links, other contextual networks), with adwords you also have alternatives (like mentioned above).
Don't get me wrong I'm not pro Google and screw Microsoft, I have issues with the way that Google likes to buy things, lock them to new users and then do nothing with them (jaiku) or just leave them stales (feedburner has had no features apart from making pro free) and I'm a windows user who likes XP but hasn't ventured out to Vista yet :)
Dom
Posted by: Dominic Hodgson | February 27, 2008 11:20 AM
I just saw this post, so sorry it's taken me so long to remind everyone how wonderful Opera is. :)
But I was a little taken aback by your headline... Google did not just buy a mobile browser. A few points to consider:
- Google has been the default search engine on Opera Desktop for seven years.
- As you mentioned, Opera has plenty of revenue streams besides what they get from Google out of this.
- Google's placement is essentially advertising - it doesn't affect the browser's code or interface beyond making it easy to access Google.
- Opera's mobile browser is one implementation of their core technologies, which are use on a wide range of platforms - if Google wanted Opera Mini, they'd have to take the whole package.
- Google's Android platform incorporates a WebKit-based browser.
- Mozilla's been working on a mobile version of Firefox; one has already shipped on some Nokia devices.
- In 2006, Google promoted non-Google software on the home page for the first time. The software advertised was... Firefox. Google certainly has a cozy relationship with Mozilla, one they're not likely to abandon soon.
- Google has never seemed to show much interest in making sure their services (e.g. Gmail) work correctly in Opera Desktop.
- Opera has repeatedly stressed their intention to remain independent, despite repeated rumors of them being purchased by Microsoft, Google, [insert company here]...
- Adobe has used Opera technology in some of their development products... is Adobe trying to buy a browser? (Hint: No.)
- Opera's no fan of Microsoft, and the proposed Microsoft takeover of Yahoo could have contributed to Opera's switch.
- Besides, until about a year ago, Google was the default search engine on Opera Mini, then Opera switched to Yahoo.
Basically, I see this as purely an advertising deal. I don't see any indication that Google has much interest in Opera's code or products, but Google is very interested in the more than 100 million people who have downloaded Opera's products onto their mobile handsets. Google's simply trying to expand their user base, not trying to get a mobile browser. It's certainly a big win for them, but my answer to your headline is a solid "no."
Posted by: theharmonyguy | February 27, 2008 11:23 AM
Harmonyguy, thank you for the detailed refutation of the idea. I did mean more that Google, which *in effect* owns Firefox, could be developing a similar relationship with Opera Mobile.
Posted by: Marshall Kirkpatrick
|
February 27, 2008 11:31 AM
theharmonyguy, what took you so long? I've been waiting for some one to post about how wonderful Opera is. :)
Daniel
Opera Software
Posted by: Daniel Goldman | February 27, 2008 12:04 PM
Yay! Opera Rocks!
http://blog.mastermaq.ca/2007/03/19/10-reasons-to-love-opera-the-browser/
Posted by: Mack D. Male | February 27, 2008 12:35 PM
The first thing I thought of when I read the headline was, "wow... Google is going to do everything in their power to make sure Android launches with support from MANY angles."
Then, I read theharmonyguy's reply which seemed to make this seem more like a simple financial transaction.
I'm sure this falls somewhere in between those two extremes, but as the guy running this Google Android Review Site, I'm really interested in how this may have implications on their Android platform.
I'm about to start an article on this... GREAT info and would love to hear more about your thoughts as it relates to android. Link back to RWW forthcoming!
(PS to Marshall: If you have a second, shoot me an e-mail - I'd love to do a little mini-interview via email to feature in the article)
Posted by: Android Phone Fan | February 27, 2008 12:43 PM
Search is an internet experience, not a browser experience. I don't see this as monopolistic at all. If Google had an OS and it came prebundled with a browser, I would consider it monopolistic. Apple is monopolistic with Safari, for example. A browser is, however, a good feature for an operating system to have.
Oh, and Opera 9.5 Beta rocks. I didnt like anything prior to Opera 9, but 9.5 takes the cake if you use multiple computers. That, and it now supports the native OS skin... which is another something that held me back from using Opera.
I do, however, develop in Firefox.
Posted by: James Thomas | February 27, 2008 12:46 PM
sorry for Yahoo!. it's quite a loss of a customer. I like how Safari works on iPhone but Opera rocks on Nokia phones.
Posted by: Yakov | February 27, 2008 2:57 PM
thanks for your subject. it is very important for internet users.i will write your site .. please write
me back. thank you
Posted by: Plaket | February 27, 2008 3:41 PM
"If Safari on the iPhone is the elite upper class mobile browser, Opera is the browser of the growing middle class in that space."
Opera Mobile 9.5 is already better than Safari Mobile: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-499736717430810460&hl=en
So, call it 'less popular' please.
@theharmonyguy
"Mozilla's been working on a mobile version of Firefox; one has already shipped on some Nokia devices."
The damned thing is only a bunch of bad mockups, how could they have already shipped an early early alpha on production nokia devices instead of their nice(?) webkit-based browser? I'd like to read more on that please.
Posted by: lmjabreu | February 27, 2008 5:54 PM
@Daniel Goldman
Hehe, yeah, sorry for the delay... btw, I have Opera Watch on my speed dial... commented a few times with a different name. :) Keep up the good work over there. (Now I'm imagining the confused looks as IE and Firefox users see me mention "speed dial" for a web page... :)
@lmjabreu
I'm just repeating what Mozilla says: http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/FAQ I've heard for a while that a mobile Firefox was in the works; a quick search led me to this page, which says they're shipping on the Nokia N800 and N810... now that I look them up, I suppose they don't really count as phones, but it's something.
Posted by: theharmonyguy | February 27, 2008 8:50 PM
Opera is lightning fast and super-usable in just about every aspect there is (except that Opera doesn't have built in spell-checker). But Opera's engine it's just not a Gecko... and because of this not everything works right and there is no Google Gears, no Firebug (to name a few).
Because recently I'm starting to use Google Applications heavily (they work really good only in Fx) and I don't need Opera's built-in mail client anymore... If Fx3 will be really so much faster and more usable then I'll switch.. I hope that Opera Software would think something out to keep me with them.
Or maybe.. this recent google's buy would make them more aware of this browser and google aps will just click :) I hope so.
Posted by: frrrr | February 28, 2008 7:21 AM
This one is baaaad news for Y! and the impending domination by Gobble err... Google. I am concerned about the privacy policy of google and they do not reveal the usage statistics of their websites. And now its time for the little gadgets that we love so much to be googlized.
Being a dominant player in the online search and advertising industry, I do wonder why the anti trust folks have not taken note of this fact. I believe having all that usage data does give it a huge advantage to spot trends in the online market and even gobble popular companies that are on a growing trend as kind of real estate for their boring text ads. I am surprised to see that in the age of Web 2.0, the colors of the banners are missing. The creatives have taken a beating (where have all the flash ads from GE - water, etc. gone) and I truly thought that Y! was more creative than Google with their media departments and creative talent. Google just buys virtual real estate or introduces products to that effect. Period! Being number 1 or number 2 matters in this sense. Anyways, when will Gmail get out of the BETA phase? I wonder 2010!
Concern: We would like to know how Goog uses usage data. It simply means that "Knowledge is Power" and I believe we are giving it all away to one company. Don't you all think so?
Posted by: Shyaam Deshmukh | February 28, 2008 11:54 PM
monopoly or not, opera rocks, got it on my phone, at home and on a usb stick (so i can use it at work as well) been a satisfied user for over a year and although i still use ie (on very rare occasions) opera is my default browser (firefox used to crash on me too much and well, let's face it, email, rss feeds and browser and so much more all in one, plus a wonderful community behind it, all wrapped in a very attractive looking package? how can you resist?) and honestly, i prefer google as a search engine anyway... :)
that's my 5 cents
p.s.
love your articles :)
Posted by: kora | February 29, 2008 6:46 AM
To prove the Opera is superior to Firefox, I need but to point to a singular task that Opera can handle without a sweat, while at the same task, Firefox can huff, puff and blow without shaking the tiniest leaf....
Page Zoom.
The firefox on my notebook display at 1680x1050 pixels resolution is unreadable. Opera can maginify the page to a comfortable 180% without messing up the appearance.
In firefox, at the best, with all the plugins available i can only increase the font size and screw up the layout ridiculously. Imagine a large font size text in a tiny winy frame!
And to have a gal to claim firefox's superiority is just like that: Huge Frame, Tiny Dik.
Posted by: Jagan | March 2, 2008 12:06 AM