x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Report: Oracle attorney says that Google has made $22 billion in profits from Android

Report: Oracle attorney says that Google has made $22 billion in profits from Android

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags:

Report: Oracle attorney says that Google has made $22 billion in profits from Android
An Oracle attorney revealed in a courtroom last week that Android has brought in $31 billion in revenue and $22 billion in profits for Google. The figures were stated in court by the lawyer on January 14th. Oracle is suing Google, claiming that the company used Java without permission while developing the Android OS. Oracle now is seeking more than $1 billion from Google, having added to its original claim to include newer Android models.

Last month Google said that Android N will replace Java with OpenJDK. The latter is the open source version of Java which will not require Google to license it from Oracle. As for the financial information divulged by the attorney, Google said that those numbers should not have been publicly disclosed. In a court filing, the company says that the Oracle attorney used confidential financial information to calculate the figures. This information was in a file marked "Attorney’s Eyes Only." Google has asked a federal judge in San Francisco to redact and seal the publicly available transcripts from the hearing.

While Google doesn't sell the rights to Android, it profits from selling ads that appear on Android devices, and from apps and other content that is sold to Android users from the Google Play Store. 

"Google does not publicly allocate revenues or profits to Android separate and apart from Google’s general business. That non-public financial data is highly sensitive, and public disclosure could have significant negative effects on Google’s business."-Google

source: Bloomberg

43 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:27 3

1. Jimrod (Posts: 1094; Member since: 22 Sep 2014)


Such greed, fleecing their Fandroids...

Oh my mistake, that only works for other certain companies. Oops!

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:52 19

7. Finalflash (Posts: 2795; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


Well, 22 billion is cute compared to Apple's 200+ billion. So its a matter of relative fleecing when it comes to corporations. Who is getting fleeced the hardest is the real issue.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 18:31 11

8. Jimrod (Posts: 1094; Member since: 22 Sep 2014)


Actually, on the bare figures there, if we're actually being factual:

Google's revenue from Android = $31 Billion. Profit from that revenue = $22 Billion.

Apple's last quarter = $55 Billion revenue. Profit from that revenue = $11.1 Billion.

So that ACTUAL figures, based on reality rather than fanboy fantasy:

Android profit margin = 70.97%

Apple profit margin = 20.18%

Google are the ones doing the fleecing. As a manufacturer of electrical goods I'd say Apple's margin seems about right and in-line with most companies. Google don't manufacture that much so it's much more pure profit.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:06 3

12. Toneknows (Posts: 8; Member since: 09 Apr 2015)


I didn't see time frame wasn't stated for the Android profit, I highly doubt it was for a quarter.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:12 1

13. Jimrod (Posts: 1094; Member since: 22 Sep 2014)


Nope, just says the overall figures, the amount doesn't matter, the percentages are what count.

Time after time people here say Apple products are too expensive and the "stupid" customers are being ripped off - with actual figures we can see that Apple are making about the right amount, I'd expect Samsung, LG, Sony etc are doing similar but the REAL one ripping people off is Google with the Android OS profit margin.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:20 11

14. tedkord (Posts: 10675; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


These are silly arguments. Google doesn't charge people for Android. These are figures made from advertising. The consumers aren't paying one thin dime for Android.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 20:06 11

16. joey_sfb (Posts: 5428; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)


Apple fanboy logic, who is fleecing the most on consumer.

Android make $22 Billion a year selling Ads space to cooperate, investing their profit back into Android to give it away for free is more greedy than a company that makes;

1st Qty - 13.1 billons Net Profit
2nd Qty - 10.2 billons Net Profit
3rd Qty - 10.7 billons Net Profit
4th Qty - 8.5 billons Net Profit

A total 42.5 billons Net Profit from selling directly to consumer, giving nothing back for free.

I think the question is who is the biggest idiot, Jimrod.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 21:16 1

17. elitewolverine (Posts: 5117; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


They actually give updates for 'free' and also retail stores, a customer support that you can actually reach for their apple id and more.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 22:34 5

19. joey_sfb (Posts: 5428; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)


Agree. I just find it odd that this issue is even raised by Jimrod and given plenty of thumbs up.

Two me its highlight two different types of mentality. Apple fans and the rest of the world.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 23:04 2

21. VZWuser76 (Posts: 3918; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)


So you're comparing all the profits Google has made from android, which would be over a 7 year period, vs Apple's profit for one quarter of a year and you consider that even?

If you're going to compare them evenly, you need to use equal parameters. Ether you're going to do pare them both over the same period, or over their lifespan. No one would compare profitability of two companies using two different lengths of time for each unless you're talking about total lifespan. And even then it wouldn't be an equal comparison if one was around for a significantly longer period of time.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 04:06

29. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


I suggest you re think this argument. In a rush to try to paint Apple in a better light vs Google....you seemed to miss some key things....

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 23:17 4

23. RoboticEngi (Posts: 604; Member since: 03 Dec 2014)


Let's take it from a few different angles. How is googles profit hurting my wallet ? I know how apples are, Eg. a 100$ pen.

And then the other angle, didn't you sheep say that it was only apple who could make money? That apple is the best innovators because they have the highest profits etc etc? But now that it turns out others also get profits, it's suddenly a bad thing. Omfg that is a true evidence of the hypocrisy that apple and their sheep show us. It's awesome and unique when apple and their sheep think they are the only ones, and very bad when they realise that they are not.....

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 03:57

27. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Exactly.

key word: hypocrisy.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 05:38 2

31. mrochester (Posts: 528; Member since: 17 Aug 2014)


Google's profits don't hurt your wallet, they hurt your user experience of the internet and online services with incessant advertising. I'd rather pay $100 for the Apple Pencil than look at Google's advertising (which is precisely why I block it all!).

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 06:20 3

32. tedkord (Posts: 10675; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


My internet experience with and without Google is pretty much the same, other than Google services are better than the competition.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 07:25 1

34. Hexa-core (banned) (Posts: 2131; Member since: 11 Aug 2015)


Right!

And it's funny that he says he rather pay a hundred bucks for the iPencil, rather than merely looking at ads which he can ignore without paying a dime...

Wow! :O

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 09:02 1

37. VZWuser76 (Posts: 3918; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)


Sorry, but ads were around long before Google came around. And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Apple have their own iAd service?

Without advertising on the net, most any site with content would be a paysite. Is that how you'd rather do it? Any site you want to look at, enter your credit card here? Yeah, that would be a much better user experience now wouldn't it?

There's a reason that advertising is on TV and radio, because we now also have the alternatives, paid cable stations (HBO, Showtime, etc) and paid radio stations (satellite radio which still runs commercials). Is that the model you want to run with? All content costs the end user? Because now you've just ensured one thing for sure. Anyone using the internet to learn means they better have money to do so, which means poor people are SOL. Of course maybe that's your plan, I don't know.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 15:36 1

38. Hexa-core (banned) (Posts: 2131; Member since: 11 Aug 2015)


Don't mind him, man. If in future he gets employed in a web-based corporation relying on ads for profit, he'll understand what it is.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 21:30

39. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


Funny thing is thanks to Google and their ad words vs pic ads...my experience has actually been better since they started ruling advertising.

Some of us remember the wild west days of only pic ads. And using GMail is at least 10 times better than using hotmail thanks to ad words.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 03:56

26. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


So a company making a huge profit basically giving away its services, software is fleecing....vs the insane mark up for iDevices, Macs.

Alrighty then.

How about Apple didnt even sell old hardware or even have devices on pre paid carriers until Android took over...

posted on 24 Jan 2016, 06:44

41. elitewolverine (Posts: 5117; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


To each his own, this site even on a pc crashes because of ads, there becomes a point when ads are a plague.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:37 2

2. darkkjedii (Posts: 20085; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


Get ready to right that check Google.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:51 17

5. Finalflash (Posts: 2795; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


write*

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:03

9. darkkjedii (Posts: 20085; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


Damn lol, my bad.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 06:20

33. tedkord (Posts: 10675; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Two demerits.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 08:34

36. darkkjedii (Posts: 20085; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


Ted...just one please lol.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 07:28

35. Hexa-core (banned) (Posts: 2131; Member since: 11 Aug 2015)


"Damn lol, my bad"

Huh? Then you claim not to ever misspell, huh?

SMH

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 04:02

28. jroc74 (Posts: 5996; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)


I dont get why how much profit they made = them going to lose the case.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:41 6

3. f_u_006 (Posts: 50; Member since: 19 Mar 2014)


Long Live Android, the envy of all operating systems.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 23:26 3

24. yoosufmuneer (Posts: 1498; Member since: 14 Feb 2015)


Not windows lol. Maybe WP

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:46 2

4. _KIRA_ (Posts: 64; Member since: 25 Dec 2013)


BobbyBuster in 3...2...1...

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 17:51 12

6. prashant1707 (Posts: 83; Member since: 13 Nov 2015)


where is Bobby buster with his tag lines: Nobody Makes Money with Android.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:03

11. darkkjedii (Posts: 20085; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


Banned.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 04:56

30. Shocky (unregistered)


Took them long enough,

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:03 4

10. darealist (Posts: 105; Member since: 25 Feb 2015)


Only Google makes money because they harvest and sell your infos.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 19:22 7

15. tedkord (Posts: 10675; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


Tard tarding hard. Google does not sell your info. They user aggregate info for targeted ads. The companies buying ad time never see any personal, identifying data.

The Realist had no grasp on reality.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 21:20 2

18. elitewolverine (Posts: 5117; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


Actually back in 08 they were caught doing so. A german magazine caught it. People were unaware they were doing so.

"Companies such as U.S.-based Doubleclick even track the browsing behavior of a user over several websites with the help of cookies. With technical finesse, the company saves its results in a single cookie and passes it on to advertisers. Google not only uses cookies in its search engines, but also links them with real names if the user has an e-mail account with Googlemail [a.k.a. Gmail]. The company also scans the contents of e-mails in order to gather comprehensive files over its customers and load suitable advertisements"

And more:
Google’s court record includes more than just grabbing and snatching data. In early 2012, theWall Street Journal broke the story that its software was bypassing security settings for Apple devices using the Safari browser. “Google hated this [Safari’s anti-tracking features] and used a secret code to bypass this security setting,” the blog GoogleExposed wrote. “This exposed millions of Safari users to tracking for months without them even knowing about it.” In August 2012, the Federal Trade Commission fined Google $22.5 million, its largest civil fine, noting that Google also had violated previous privacy agreements.

Or:
After being sued by 38 states, Google admitted last March that its weird-looking cars outfitted with roof cameras facing four directions were not just taking pictures; they were collecting data from computers inside homes and structures, including “passwords, e-mails and other personal information from unsuspecting computer users,” the New York Times reported.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 22:37 4

20. joey_sfb (Posts: 5428; Member since: 29 Mar 2012)


Could you provide some links to support your claims?

You seem to have a lot of insider information. Google hacking my home WiFi password is quite unbelievable.

posted on 21 Jan 2016, 23:10 4

22. RoboticEngi (Posts: 604; Member since: 03 Dec 2014)


He can't. He can't use his computer/phone because of the big tinfoil hat he is wearing.

posted on 24 Jan 2016, 07:03

42. elitewolverine (Posts: 5117; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


There is no tinfoil hat, just 'google' it lol.

Heck a google search in under a second turned up this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/technology/google-sets-plan-to-sell-users-endorsements.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

All for 'free' of course.

Look to my reply joey to see the other 'links'.

posted on 24 Jan 2016, 07:13

43. elitewolverine (Posts: 5117; Member since: 28 Oct 2013)


I simply searched them.

Translated from a german magazine stern
http://translationmusings.com/2008/09/07/does-google-sell-its-users-personal-data/

For google wifi,http://www.pcworld.com/article/196397/Google_WiFi_Spying_What_Were_They_Thinking.html

As for the court record that is easy enough

I am not keen on Salon mag but hey info is info, and I am sure more digging will credit it:http://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/4_ways_google_is_destroying_privacy_and_collecting_your_data_partner/

And while not pertaining to privacy, people for their drive service (have not combed through their new one but on the surface it hasn't changed)
http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/25/2973849/google-drive-terms-privacy-data-skydrive-dropbox-icloud

Look I understand that in order for stuff to be 'free' something has to give. We have been dealing with ads for decades on tv etc. But as soon as that 'user' signs up with google you're no longer simply an aggregated search result.

posted on 22 Jan 2016, 03:17 2

25. tedkord (Posts: 10675; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)


They don't sell it, which was the point. Advertisers see only aggregate information with no identifiers. What ad networks do had nothing to do with Google.

posted on 23 Jan 2016, 03:27

40. MrElectrifyer (Posts: 2366; Member since: 21 Oct 2014)


Please could you provide your sources regarding the first and the last part? I've already seen sources regarding the second.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories