Alphabet faces 'watershed moment' if AI erodes search dominance, analysts say
Wall Street's more bearish investors believe that Alphabet could be facing an uphill battle of disruption. Shares of Alphabet sank 7% on Wednesday after Eddy Cue, senior vice president of services at Apple, said Apple was "actively looking at" reshaping its Safari web browser to focus on search functions powered by artificial intelligence, according to a report by Bloomberg . GOOGL YTD mountain GOOGL YTD chart Cue's remarks came in testimony in the Justice Department's lawsuit against Apple. The executive added that he believes AI search engines such as OpenAI will eventually replace their historic counterparts, such as Google. In response, many analysts across Wall Street took a "wait-and-see" approach, with some saying the stock decline was overblown. On Thursday, Alphabet shares rebounded as much as 2.5%. More optimistic analysts pointed to Alphabet's own AI innovations, led by Gemini, a strong suite of products, the difference between search queries asked in AI versus traditional search questions and the Apple executive's own self-interest in his Wednesday remarks. But other researchers — albeit a minority — warned that cracks are showing in Alphabet's armor. Wells Fargo's Ken Gawrelski called this a "watershed moment," while Melius Research's Ben Reitzes begged Alphabet to "make a bet already and disrupt yourself before it's too late." Here's how some of Wall Street's more bearish analysts answered the Apple executive's remarks. Wells Fargo "View Apple's remarks indicating search volume declined for the first time in April as a watershed moment. Believe consumer behavior is changing and GOOGL must act to accelerate adoption of AI-powered search to maintain market leadership." Melius Research "The comments from Apple not only back our below consensus long-term estimates for Google Search — but also back downside in 2025. It may be time for Alphabet to make a real bet — instead of just experimenting all the time (Deep Research, Notebook LLM, AI mode, etc.), really confusing the heck out of people … Self-inflicted business model disruptions in the tech elite aren't unheard of … Alphabet — make a bet already and disrupt yourself before it's too late." Citizens "While we acknowledge the value of Google's distribution as it has seven services with 2B+ MAU, the superior search product offered by ChatGPT is taking share of queries. Additionally, while the valuation is increasingly compelling and Google has substantial cost levers to maintain profitability growth if search faces headwinds, we continue to view search estimates as having downside risk, and maintain our Market Perform rating given our view that the risk/reward in shares is currently balanced." MoffettNathanson Research "While the market may have been waiting for a day like today where people's worst fears on search are confirmed, we hate to say that Google investors are out of the woods. Yes, the stock is cheap … and yes, other divisions are growing nicely … and yes, search may be more resilient than people think due to commercial search share and pricing power. Our experience covering other sectors that have been disrupted tell us that this is a long bumpy journey that ultimately becomes smoother when today's worries are long in a mirror of rear view. Unfortunately, we are just starting the ride." — CNBC's Michael Bloom contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Global streamers fight CRTC's rule requiring them to fund Canadian content
OTTAWA - Some of the world's biggest streaming companies will argue in court on Monday that they shouldn't have to make CRTC-ordered financial contributions to Canadian content and news. The companies are fighting an order from the federal broadcast regulator that says they must pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to funds devoted to producing Canadian content, including local TV news. The case, which consolidates several appeals by streamers, will be heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Apple, Amazon and Spotify are fighting the CRTC's 2024 order. Motion Picture Association-Canada, which represents such companies as Netflix and Paramount, is challenging a section of the CRTC's order requiring them to contribute to local news. In December, the court put a pause on the payments — estimated to be at least $1.25 million annually per company. Amazon, Apple and Spotify had argued that if they made the payments and then won the appeal and overturned the CRTC order, they wouldn't be able to recover the money. In court documents, the streamers put forward a long list of arguments on why they shouldn't have to pay, including technical points regarding the CRTC's powers under the Broadcasting Act. Spotify argued that the contribution requirement amounts to a tax, which the CRTC doesn't have the authority to impose. The music streamer also took issue with the CRTC requiring the payments without first deciding how it will define Canadian content. Amazon argued the federal cabinet specified the CRTC's requirements have to be 'equitable.' It said the contribution requirement is 'inequitable because it applies only to foreign online undertakings and only to such undertakings with more than $25 million in annual Canadian broadcasting revenues.' Apple also said the regulator 'acted prematurely' and argued the CRTC didn't consider whether the order was 'equitable.' It pointed out Apple is required to contribute five per cent, while radio stations must only pay 0.5 per cent — and streamers don't have the same access to the funds into which they pay. The CRTC imposes different rules on Canadian content contributions from traditional media players. It requires large English-language broadcasters to contribute 30 per cent of revenues to Canadian programming. Motion Picture Association—Canada is only challenging one aspect of the CRTC's order — the part requiring companies to contribute 1.5 per cent of revenues to a fund for local news on independent TV stations. It said in court documents that none of the streamers 'has any connection to news production' and argued the CRTC doesn't have the authority to require them to fund news. 'What the CRTC did, erroneously, is purport to justify the … contribution simply on the basis that local news is important and local news operations provided by independent television stations are short of money,' it said. 'That is a reason why news should be funded by someone, but is devoid of any analysis, legal or factual, as to why it is equitable for foreign online undertakings to fund Canadian news production.' In its response, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said the CRTC has wide authority under the Broadcasting Act. It argued streamers have contributed to the funding crisis facing local news. 'While the industry was once dominated by traditional television and radio services, those services are now in decline, as Canadians increasingly turn to online streaming services,' the broadcasters said. 'For decades, traditional broadcasting undertakings have supported the production of Canadian content through a complex array of CRTC-directed measures … By contrast, online undertakings have not been required to provide any financial support to the Canadian broadcasting system, despite operating here for well over a decade.' A submission from the federal government in defence of the CRTC argued the regulator was within its rights to order the payments. 'The orders challenged in these proceedings … are a valid exercise of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's regulatory powers. These orders seek to remedy the inequity that has resulted from the ascendance of online streaming giants like the Appellants,' the office of the attorney general said. 'Online undertakings have greatly profited from their access to Canadian audiences, without any corresponding obligation to make meaningful contributions supporting Canadian programming and creators — an obligation that has long been imposed on traditional domestic broadcasters.' The government said that if the streamers get their way, that would preserve 'an inequitable circumstance in which domestic broadcasters — operating in an industry under economic strain — shoulder a disproportionate regulatory burden.' 'This result would be plainly out of step with the policy aims of Parliament' and cabinet, it added. The court hearing comes as trade tensions between the U.S. and Canada have cast a shadow over the CRTC's attempts to regulate online streamers. The regulator launched a suite of proceedings and hearings as part of its implementation of the Online Streaming Act, legislation that in 2023 updated the Broadcasting Act to set up the CRTC to regulate streaming companies. In January, as U.S. President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term, groups representing U.S. businesses and big tech companies warned the CRTC that its efforts to modernize Canadian content rules could worsen trade relations and lead to retaliation. Then, as the CRTC launched its hearing on modernizing the definition of Canadian content in May, Netflix, Paramount and Apple cancelled their individual appearances. While the companies didn't provide a reason, the move came shortly after Trump threatened to impose a tariff of up to 100 per cent on movies made outside the United States. Foreign streamers have long pointed to their existing spending in Canada in response to calls to bring them into the regulated system. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025.
Tom's Guide
33 minutes ago
- Tom's Guide
AI on phones feels too much like homework — and Apple should use iOS 26's redesign to fix that
Tech companies, especially the ones that make and sell phones, have been telling us how important AI is for several years, and offering a range of new AI-powered features that promise to make our lives easier. But despite promising that, it seems a bunch of those companies forgot the most important thing about new features — making sure people can actually find and use them. As someone who's spent a great deal of time reviewing new phones, nothing irritates me more than being told about new AI features and then having to do a bunch of research to figure out how to access them. Even Apple, a company that has made its own AI suite a lot more transparent, is guilty of this in some regard. And since iOS 19 (or iOS 26) is set to redesign the entire Apple ecosystem, WWDC 2025 is a chance for the company to make AI feel less like homework and transform it into something a lot simpler and more intuitive. I'll preface this with an admission that not all AI features are difficult to find. If it involves going through some kind of voice assistant, like Google Gemini or Siri, then AI capabilities are literally only a voice prompt away. Similarly AI photo editing features, like Google's Magic Editor, have long been available in photo gallery apps, like Google Photos or Apple's equivalent. But at the same time, considering all these features have been around for quite some time, their location and functionality have already been ingrained into our collective memories. Plus, once you know about one of those features, you can often find similar ones in the same spot. Or in the case of voice assistants, physically ask it about the kind of things it can do. There's also a bunch of AI working in the background that the user doesn't actually need to initiate. All that processing that happens to your photos? AI has a hand there, just as it does in helping translate foreign languages for you. We've also seen AI applied to software that helps manage the battery and displays, to help phones run more smoothly and efficiently. None of this is the flashy AI that gets promoted in keynote speeches or TV commercials. It's the boring stuff that makes your phone run and perform better, without you even realizing what's going on. But if a company is trying to add some fuel to the AI hype train, the focus ends up on the new and showy AI features that look and sound good. The problem is phone makers haven't put much consideration into helping users find the darn things. One good example I've found in this area are specialist translation apps — ones that do more than Google Translate. Samsung's Interpreter Mode is the one I've noticed this with most recently, offering the ability to translate two-way conversations happening in two different languages. I know that it exists, Samsung has talked about it at great length, but looking at a Galaxy S25, it's nowhere to be seen. It's not in the app drawer, nor the home screen, nor is it one of the default apps in the Quick Settings menu. Instead you either have to use the search bar to find Interpreter Mode, or change the Quick Settings features to include it — which isn't ideal when you only have 6-8 slots to choose from. The more I think about Galaxy AI features Samsung has talked about, the more I realize that I also have no idea where they are. The same is true for Apple Intelligence, Google Gemini and the countless other AI features that have been added to smartphones in recent years. I made a point of criticizing this in my review of the Xiaomi 15 Ultra, but the problem is a lot more widespread than that — and it's like phone makers don't realize this is a complete hindrance. In the days when new AI features weren't all that common, this probably wouldn't be so bad. Users get the time to get to grips with new features as they arrive, and by the time the next big software update comes around it'll be second nature. But the sheer number of new AI features being added to phones, and with little communication on how they work, makes this much more difficult. The distinct lack of official guidance on how to use new AI features is definitely getting in the way of me wanting to use them — and I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way. If phone makers really care about us using AI features more regularly, then this needs to change. I've often spoken about my severe lack of interest when it comes to using AI on phones, and a big part of that is due to the fact it's usually so difficult to find any of the new features. Back in the day, Apple would proudly declare that "it just works," with die-hard fans parroting that line for several years. But when your new smartphone comes with homework, it certainly isn't passing the intuitiveness test with a particularly good grade. Apple's not the only party guilty of this, but with WWDC set to majorly shake up how Apple software works, be it on iPhone, Mac or another Apple product, it's in a position to try and help users use Apple Intelligence without doing a thesis-load of research first. Who knows, maybe making AI actually intuitive can help make up for all its AI missteps over the past year.
Forbes
43 minutes ago
- Forbes
Has Apple Just Accidentally Leaked A Major Upgrade For iPhone 17?
A regulatory filing has just happened which, it's claimed, is for two iPhone MagSafe chargers, suggesting that a faster-than-ever wireless charging capability could be coming to the iPhone 17 series when it's announced this fall. Will MagSafe charging be super-fast on the iPhone 17 series? Taiwan's National Communications Commission website shows two MagSafe chargers which Apple has never announced, sighted by 91mobiles. That seems to be the case because, 'Current MagSafe chargers are compatible with Qi 2 and the original Qi standard. While WPC (Wireless Power Consortium), the body behind Qi, incorporated MagSafe's magnetic accessory support into the Qi standard and introduced Qi 2.1, Apple didn't announce a product with that standard. Apple appears to have leapfrogged to Qi 2.2,' the report said. The site shows images of the chargers and says the model numbers are A3502 and A3503, looking the same but for one having a 1-meter cable, and the other a 2-meter one. The cables are braided, by the way, as the photos clearly show. Why does any of this matter? Qi 2.2 supports maximum output to 50W and, ccording to the report, it looks like the chargers will support up to 45W charging, when connected to the right wall adaptor. Right now, the most powerful MagSafe wireless charging for the latest iPhone 16 is 25W. More than that, another benefit for Qi 2.2 it's more efficient, with less power loss or heat generation. Plus, the magnetic alignment 'should ensure the device snaps into the charger quickly and properly,' the report said. Since the iPhone 17 Air looks like having a smaller battery than other iPhones, to accommodate its super-thin design, fast, efficient charging without unnecessary heat, could be important, especially if it meant that a super-quick top-up could juice your phone for hours. It looks like the chargers have been tested both with the iPhone 16 and iPhone 11. This wouldn't mean faster charging rates on older phones, but the efficiency element would still be key.
