Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”
This is a good response and I appreciate Malte&#x27;s effort to engage publishers, but it doesn&#x27;t calm my nerves about the biggest publisher complaint about AMP:<p><i></i>Google owns the chrome (top navigation) on all AMP pages. This makes it easy to navigate back to Google (why would you ever want to leave?) and other publishers in the AMP ecosystem, but much harder to navigate to the publisher that created the page in the first place<i></i><p>In essence, this means that what was once a publisher-owned page is now shared property: between the Google and the publisher. By controlling the top navigation, Google more easily controls the content the visitor sees, keeps visitors on Google longer, provides greater opportunity to track visitors, and perhaps most importantly has the opportunity to earn more ad revenue.<p>Now imagine if this was a requirement for ALL pages served in Google search results. You publish a page and it appears in Google, but when the user clicks on it Google has pasted a new navigation on the top of your page. This is exactly what is happening with AMP.<p>This is especially troubling in light of all the anti-trust controversies Google is finding itself in, both in the US and abroad. A recent study showed that 49% of all Google clicks go to Google properties of one kind or another (Maps, YouTube, Ads, etc) <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slideshare.net&#x2F;randfish&#x2F;intro-to-mozcon-2016&#x2F;24-Lots_of_NoClick_Searches_in" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slideshare.net&#x2F;randfish&#x2F;intro-to-mozcon-2016&#x2F;24-L...</a><p>Does AMP count as another Google property that will push more than 49% of clicks their way? Hard to say, but it&#x27;s a disturbing trend for a monopoly and a hard pill for publishers to swallow.