Source: Zhitong Finance "Since 1950, the S&P 500 index has risen more than 10% 21 times as of the end of May. In about 90% of these cases, the S&P 500 index rose for the rest of the year. There were only two instances of declines for the rest of the year, in 1987 (-13%) and 1986 (-0.1%)." With the rebound of the stock market, the old adage "Sell in May and Go Away" seems to have been a bad advice once again. Last month, the S&P 500 index rose 4.8%, the best May performance since 2009. The NASDAQ 100 index rose nearly 6.2%, and the NASDAQ Composite Index rose 6.9%. Goldman Sachs FICC & Equities Trading Division said: "History doesn't really support this saying. Don't sell, leave the market (go on vacation), and enjoy the good times." The rising trend is still to be continued? If history is any guide, it may indicate that the rise of the stock market is not over yet. Looking ahead to the rest of 2024, Scott Rubner, Managing Director of the Goldman Sachs Global Markets Division and tactical expert, pointed out the following historical background for investors. Rubner stated that the S&P 500 index has risen 10.7% year-to-date, and since 1950, the S&P 500 index has risen more than 10% 21 times as of the end of May. In about 90% of these cases, the S&P 500 index rose for the rest of the year. There were only two instances of declines for the rest of the year, in 1987 (-13%) and 1986 (-0.1%). "Since 1950, the median return of the last 7 months of each year (June 1 to December 31) is 5.4%. In the aforementioned 21 cases, the average performance of the last 7 months increased to 8.1%." Rubner added. Rubner also pointed out that the NASDAQ index has risen for 16 consecutive Julys, with an average return of about 4.64%.

In the antitrust lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice against Google (GOOGL.US) in the USA, testimony from a former Facebook advertising executive revealed a secret agreement between Meta Platforms Inc. (the parent company of Facebook) and Google. The executive, Brian Boland, who served as Facebook's ad technology chief from 2009 to 2019, disclosed to a federal court in Virginia that Facebook initially tried to challenge Google's dominant position in the ad display market but eventually found it difficult to compete due to Google's monopolistic position in the market.

Facebook's Audience Network project aims to allow advertisers to place ads not only on Facebook and Instagram, but also on other websites and apps. However, by 2017, Facebook realized that it was difficult to effectively compete with Google due to the advantages Google gave itself in its ad tools. A strategic memo from 2017 pointed out that Google's strategy was like setting a barrier between advertisers and Facebook, allowing Google to prioritize the best ad resources.

Boland explained to Judge Leonie Brinkema that Facebook was concerned that this barrier would affect its advertising business. Judge Brinkema will make a ruling on the Department of Justice's accusation that Google illegally monopolized the ad tech market. Google's ad exchange platform allows it to conduct a "final look" after the ad auction ends to decide whether to purchase ad space.

Boland likened Google's technological advantage to being able to pick the best 30 apples from a box of apples before anyone else buys them, leaving other participants to choose from the remaining apples.

Under Boland's supervision, Facebook negotiated with Google for six months and ultimately reached an agreement in 2018 called "Project Sky." This agreement gave Facebook preferential treatment when bidding for ads within its Audience Network through Google's ad exchange platform. The agreement was approved by the top executives of both companies, including Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Google CEO Sundar Pichai.

Although Google and Facebook are the first and second largest participants in the online advertising market respectively, the details of this transaction, known as the "network bidding agreement", were not disclosed in the court testimony. However, court documents show that Google wanted Facebook to pay 15% of media costs in exchange for giving up the advantage of the "final look."

In 2020, a group of state attorneys general sued Google, accusing it of monopolizing the advertising technology market and pointing out that the agreement between the two companies violated antitrust laws. They claimed that Google proposed the deal in exchange for Facebook's abandonment of a new technology called 'header bidding,' which could weaken Google's market position. However, a judge in New York dismissed these allegations, finding no impropriety in the agreement reached by the two companies.

The antitrust enforcement agencies in Europe also investigated the deal and concluded the investigation in March 2022 without taking any action. Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice, when suing Google for monopolizing the advertising technology market, did not accuse the agreement of being anti-competitive, but emphasized that even technology giants like Meta were unable to compete with it.

In 2020, Boz ​​left Facebook, expressing internal concerns about the lack of growth in Facebook's display advertising field. Ultimately, the project stopped buying display ads online and instead focused entirely on mobile advertising.

It is worth mentioning that, in addition to Boz, multiple executives testified in Google's antitrust investigation. Among them, Stephanie Layser, a former executive at News Corp, pointed out that in 2017, News Corp estimated that if they stopped working with Google's ad agency and were no longer constrained by Google's restrictions, News Corp would lose at least $9 million in advertising revenue that year.

She believes that Google's advertising business benefits them more but harms the interests of publishers. Almost no one in the industry uses other products because Google's publisher ad server is tied to Google's ad exchange platform.

Layser emphasized that at the time of her departure, approximately 70-80% of News Corp's advertising transactions were carried out through Google's ad platform. But Google argued that this data was outdated, and large publishers now have around six different platforms to sell ads, with over 80 different services.

Tim Wolfe, the advertising executive of Gannett, the largest newspaper group in the USA, also testified, stating that Gannett had been using Google ad servers for about 13 years and had consistently been unable to find any other viable alternative.

In addition to executives from Gannett and News Corp, employees of companies such as Trade Desk, comcast, and pubmatic are also on the list of possible witnesses, with more than twenty current or former Google employees waiting to be 'summoned.'

The US Department of Justice is proving that Google has used its dominant position in the advertising technology field to engage in illegal monopolistic practices, preventing publishers and advertisers from using other tools and unfairly harming the competitiveness of their bidding.