Connect with us

Published

on

Google CEO Sundar Pichai testifies before the House Judiciary Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building on December 11, 2018 in Washington, DC.

Alex Wong | Getty Images

Google’s antitrust woes are continuing to mount, just as the company tries to brace for a future dominated by artificial intelligence.

On Thursday, a federal judge ruled that Google held illegal monopolies in online advertising markets due to its position between ad buyers and sellers.

The ruling, which followed a September trial in Alexandria, Virginia, represents a second major antitrust blow for Google in under a year. In August, a judge determined the company has held a monopoly in its core market of internet search, the most-significant antitrust ruling in the tech industry since the case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago. 

Google is in a particularly precarious spot as it tries to simultaneously defend its primary business in court while fending off an onslaught of new competition due to the emergence of generative AI, most notably OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which offers users alternative ways to search for information. Revenue growth has cooled in recent years, and Google also now faces the added potential of a slowdown in ad spending due to economic concerns from President Donald Trump’s sweeping new tariffs.

Parent company Alphabet reports first-quarter results next week. Alphabet’s stock price dipped more than 1% on Thursday and is now down 20% this year.

Why Google's antitrust woes endangers its AI momentum

In Thursday’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said Google’s anticompetitive practices “substantially harmed” publishers and users on the web. The trial featured 39 live witnesses, depositions from an additional 20 witnesses and hundreds of exhibits.

Judge Brinkema ruled that Google unlawfully controls two of the three parts of the advertising technology market: the publisher ad server market and ad exchange market. Brinkema dismissed the third part of the case, determining that tools used for general display advertising can’t clearly be defined as Google’s own market. In particular, the judge cited the purchases of DoubleClick and Admeld and said the government failed to show those “acquisitions were anticompetitive.”

“We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half,” Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president or regulatory affairs, said in an emailed statement. “We disagree with the Court’s decision regarding our publisher tools. Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable and effective.”

Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a press release from the DOJ that the ruling represents a “landmark victory in the ongoing fight to stop Google from monopolizing the digital public square.”

Potential ad disruption

If regulators force the company to divest parts of the ad-tech business, as the Justice Department has requested, it could open up opportunities for smaller players and other competitors to fill the void and snap up valuable market share. Amazon has been growing its ad business in recent years.

Meanwhile, Google is still defending itself against claims that its search has acted as a monopoly by creating strong barriers to entry and a feedback loop that sustained its dominance. Google said in August, immediately after the search case ruling, that it would appeal, meaning the matter can play out in court for years even after the remedies are determined.

The remedies trial, which will lay out the consequences, begins next week. The Justice Department is aiming for a break up of Google’s Chrome browser and eliminating exclusive agreements, like its deal with Apple for search on iPhones. The judge is expected to make the ruling by August.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai (L) and Apple CEO Tim Cook (R) listen as U.S. President Joe Biden speaks during a roundtable with American and Indian business leaders in the East Room of the White House on June 23, 2023 in Washington, DC.

Anna Moneymaker | Getty Images

After the ad market ruling on Thursday, Gartner’s Andrew Frank said Google’s “conflicts of interest” are apparent by how the market runs.

“The structure has been decades in the making,” Frank said, adding that “untangling that would be a significant challenge, particularly since lawyers don’t tend to be system architects.”

However, the uncertainty that comes with a potentially years-long appeals process means many publishers and advertisers will be waiting to see how things shake out before making any big decisions given how much they rely on Google’s technology.

“Google will have incentives to encourage more competition possibly by loosening certain restrictions on certain media it controls, YouTube being one of them,” Frank said. “Those kind of incentives may create opportunities for other publishers or ad tech players.”

A date for the remedies trial hasn’t been set.

Damian Rollison, senior director of market insights for marketing platform Soci, said the revenue hit from the ad market case could be more dramatic than the impact from the search case.

“The company stands to lose a lot more in material terms if its ad business, long its main source of revenue, is broken up,” Rollison said in an email. “Whereas divisions like Chrome are more strategically important.”

WATCH: U.S. judge finds Google holds illegal online ad-tech monopolies

U.S. judge finds Google holds illegal online ad tech monopolies

Continue Reading

Technology

CoreWeave stock slumps 14% on wider-than-expected loss ahead of lockup expiration

Published

on

By

CoreWeave stock slumps 14% on wider-than-expected loss ahead of lockup expiration

CoreWeave sinks more than 8% on quarterly results

CoreWeave‘s stock dropped 14% after the renter of artificial intelligence data centers reported a bigger-than-expected loss.

In its second quarterly financial results as a public company, CoreWeave reported an adjusted loss of 27 cents per share, compared to a 21-cent loss per share expected by analysts polled by LSEG.

CoreWeave’s results came as the lock-up period following its initial public offering is set to expire Thursday evening and potentially add volatility to shares. The term refers to a set period of time following a market debut when insiders are restricted from selling shares.

“We remain constructive long term and are encouraged by today’s data points, but see near-term upside capped by the potential CORZ related dilution and uncertainty, and the pending lock-up expiration on Thursday,” wrote analysts at Stifel, referencing the recent acquisition of Core Scientific.

Shares of Core Scientific fell 7% Wednesday.

In the current quarter, the company projects $1.26 billion to $1.30 billion in revenue. Analysts polled by LSEG forecasted $1.25 billion. CoreWeave also lifted 2025 revenue guidance to between $5.15 billion and $5.35, up from a $4.9 billion to $5.1 billion forecast provided in May and above a $5.05 billion estimate.

Read more CNBC tech news

Some analysts were hoping for stronger guidance given the stock’s massive surge since going public in March. Others highlighted light capital expenditures guidance and a delay in some spending until the fourth quarter as a potential point of weakness.

“This delay in capex highlights the uncertainty around deployment time; as go-live timing is pushed, in-period revenue recognition will be smaller,” wrote analysts at Morgan Stanley.

The AI infrastructure provider said revenue more than tripled from a year ago to $1.21 billion as it continues to benefit from surging AI demand. That also surpassed a $1.08 billion forecast from Wall Street. Finance chief Nitin Agrawal also said during a call with analysts that demand outweighs supply.

The New Jersey-based company, whose customers include OpenAI, Microsoft and Nvidia, also said it has recently signed expansion deals with hyperscale customers.

CoreWeave acquired AI model monitoring startup Weights and Biases for $1.4 billion during the period and said it finished the quarter with a $30.1 billion revenue backlog.

Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

hide content

Coreweave stock 6-month chart.

Continue Reading

Technology

How Big Tech is paying its way out of Trump’s tariffs

Published

on

By

How Big Tech is paying its way out of Trump's tariffs

Apple CEO Tim Cook (R) shakes hands with U.S. President Donald Trump during an event in the Oval Office of the White House on August 6, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Win Mcnamee | Getty Images

Top tech executives are at the forefront of a recent swathe of unprecedented deals with U.S. President Donald Trump.

In just the last few days, the White House confirmed that two U.S. chipmakers, Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices, would be allowed to sell advanced chips to China in exchange for the U.S. government receiving a 15% cut of their revenues in the Asian country.

Apple CEO Tim Cook, meanwhile, recently announced plans to increase the firm’s U.S. investment commitment to $600 billion over the next four years. The move was widely seen as a bid to get the tech giant out of Trump’s crosshairs on tariffs — and appears to have worked for now.

Altogether, analysts say the deals show just how important it is for the world’s largest companies to find some tariff relief.

“The flurry of deal-making is an effort to secure lighter treatment from tariffs,” Paolo Pescatore, technology analyst at PP Foresight, told CNBC by email.

“In some shape or form, all of the big tech companies have been negatively impacted by tariffs. They can ill afford to fork out on millions of dollars in additional fees that will further dent profits as underlined by recent quarterly earnings,” Pescatore said.

While the devil will be in the detail of these agreements, Pescatore said that Apple leading the way with its accelerated U.S. investment will likely trigger “a domino effect” within the industry.

Apple, for its part, has long been regarded as one of the Big Tech firms most vulnerable to simmering trade tensions between the U.S. and China.

Earlier this month, Trump announced plans to impose a 100% tariff on imports of semiconductors and chips, albeit with an exemption for firms that are “building in the United States.”

Apple, which relies on hundreds of different chips for its devices and incurred $800 million in tariff costs in the June quarter, is among the firms exempt from the proposed tariffs.

A ‘hands-on’ approach

The Nvidia and AMD deal with the Trump administration has meanwhile sparked intense debate over the potential impact on the chip giants’ businesses and whether the U.S. government may seek out similar agreements with other firms.

Some strategists described the arrangement as a “shakedown,” while others suggested it may even be unconstitutional and comparing it to a tax on exports.

White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that the legality and mechanics of the 15% export tax on Nvidia and AMD were “still being ironed out.” She also hinted deals of this kind could expand to other companies in future.

Ray Wang: Having Nvidia and AMD pay 15% of China chip sales revenues to U.S. govt. is 'bizarre'

Ray Wang, founder and chairman of Constellation Research, described the Nvidia and AMD deal to pay 15% of China chip sales revenues to the U.S. government as “bizarre.”

Speaking on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Monday, Wang said what is “really weird” is there is still some uncertainty over whether these chips represent a national security issue.

“If the answer is no, fine OK. The government is taking a cut out of it,” Wang said. “Both Nvidia’s Jensen Huang and Lisa Su at AMD both decided that OK, we’ve got a way to get our chips into China and maybe there is something good coming out of it.”

Investor concerns

While investors initially welcomed the deal as broadly positive for both Nvidia and AMD, which once more secure access to the Chinese market, Wang said some in the industry will nevertheless be concerned.

“As an investor, you’re worried because then, is this an arbitrary decision by the government? Does every president get to play kingmaker in terms of these deals?” Wang said.

“So, I think that’s really what the concern is, and we still have additional tariffs and trade deals to come from the China negotiations,” he added.

Tech investor Dan Niles says Nvidia having access to the Chinese market is 'crucial'

Continue Reading

Technology

Amazon launches same-day delivery of meat, eggs, produce in more than 1,000 cities

Published

on

By

Amazon launches same-day delivery of meat, eggs, produce in more than 1,000 cities

An independent contractor wearing a protective mask and gloves loads Amazon Prime grocery bags into a car outside a Whole Foods Market in Berkeley, California, on Oct. 7, 2020.

David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Amazon is rolling out same-day delivery of fresh foods to more pockets of the U.S. as it looks to encourage shoppers to add meat and eggs to their order while they’re browsing its sprawling online store.

The company announced Wednesday it’s bringing the service to more than 1,000 U.S. cities and towns, including Raleigh, North Carolina, Tampa, Florida, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with plans to reach at least 2,300 locations by the end of this year.

Amazon began testing the service in Phoenix last year and in additional cities this year, where it found shoppers frequently added strawberries, bananas, avocados and other perishables to their order.

“Many of these shoppers were first-time Amazon grocery customers who now return to shop twice as often with same-day delivery service compared to those who didn’t purchase fresh food,” the company said in a release.

Read more CNBC tech news

The service is free for Prime members on orders over $25 in most cities, or for a $2.99 fee if an order doesn’t meet that minimum. Shoppers without a Prime membership pay a $12.99 fee to use the service, regardless of order size.

Grocery delivery company Instacart‘s stock tumbled more than 11% following the announcement. Supermarket chains Kroger and Albertsons fell about 4% and 3%, respectively.

Shares of Walmart, which has been racing to compete with Amazon on speedy deliveries and offers same-day shipping for groceries, slipped 1%.

Amazon has been retooling its grocery business over the past few years.

The company has tweaked its chain of Fresh grocery stores in a bid to attract more shoppers, and it opened up fresh food delivery to shoppers who aren’t Prime members.

It’s also looked to highlight its growing business selling household staples like paper towels, cleaning supplies, bottled drinks and canned food.

In January, Amazon tapped Jason Buechel, the CEO of Whole Foods Market, the upscale grocer it acquired in 2017 for $13.7 billion, to lead its worldwide grocery stores business. Buechel announced in June that the company was bringing Whole Foods closer to the Amazon grocery umbrella as part of a reorganization.

Previously, Whole Foods had remained largely independent from Amazon’s own grocery offerings.

Continue Reading

Trending