With Chrome’s fate hanging in the balance, Google’s antitrust trial turns into a billion-dollar browser bidding war.
DuckDuckGo, Perplexity, and even OpenAI are circling. Chrome might be the biggest browser battleground in tech history.
Chrome could be worth $50 billion—and the vultures are circling
If Google is forced to spin off Chrome, it could trigger the biggest tech land grab since the Yahoo-AOL era. DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg told a U.S. District Court this week that Chrome alone might fetch upwards of $50 billion on the open market—a bold number, but not unthinkable given the browser’s reach and data firehose. 🧠💸
We’re deep into week one of Google’s antitrust remedy trial, and Chrome is now at the center of the conversation. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta already ruled last year that Google illegally maintained a monopoly in search, and now the Department of Justice wants actual consequences—like forcing Google to sell Chrome to level the playing field.
And the list of potential buyers? It’s a rogues’ gallery of Google rivals and upstarts:
- DuckDuckGo: Wants Chrome but admits $50B is a stretch for their budget. 🦆
- Perplexity AI: Actively pitching themselves as buyers, despite testifying they’ve been “stonewalled” by OEMs due to Google’s dominance. 🤖
- OpenAI: Already tried to partner with Google for ChatGPT search support—got denied—and now sees Chrome as a pathway to creating an “AI-first browser experience.” 🚀
Why this matters: control of Chrome means control of online behavior
Chrome isn’t just a browser. It’s the gateway drug to Google Search, YouTube, Gmail, and the entire Google ad stack. Whoever controls it controls distribution, default settings, data collection, and monetization pathways for billions of users.
And it’s exactly this integration that DOJ witnesses are calling out.
- DuckDuckGo’s Weinberg emphasized that Google’s monopoly is held up by “revenue-share agreements” and “default settings” that lock out competition and smother innovation.
- Perplexity AI’s CBO Dmitry Shevelenko said Google forces OEMs into “gun-to-your-head” contracts—do what we want or lose your revenue stream.
These aren’t startups whining about unfair treatment. These are serious operators trying to break through and offer alternatives in AI search and browser experiences—blocked by a walled garden that’s been thriving for 15+ years.
The operator POV: distribution is the name of the game
Anyone in ecommerce knows this: distribution eats innovation for breakfast.
Google knows this too. It’s why they pay Apple billions to make Google Search the default on Safari. It’s why Android phones boot up with Google everything. And it’s why owning Chrome matters so damn much.
If the DOJ forces a divestiture:
- Expect an arms race for distribution. AI-first browsers from OpenAI or Perplexity could emerge as serious contenders.
- A new Chrome owner could break the search-default deadlock, giving consumers actual choice.
- And the data moat? It shrinks. Fast.
This is less about who wins a court case—and more about whether we get a shot at a real search market that isn’t stitched together by backroom deals and default settings.
The catch: can anyone besides Big Tech even afford Chrome?
Weinberg’s $50B estimate might be high—Bloomberg analysts pegged it at $20B last year. But the higher the price tag, the smaller the buyer pool.
That’s why OpenAI’s interest matters. Unlike DuckDuckGo or Perplexity, OpenAI has the hype, the funding, and now the incentive to build an ecosystem outside of Google’s control.
Whether that’s good for competition is another story. Are we just trading one monopoly for another? Even Judge Mehta raised this exact point: “Wouldn’t the world just have a different giant?”
So what?
The Google trial is more than just courtroom drama—it’s a rare moment where the infrastructure of the internet might actually shift.
If Chrome gets spun off, operators and marketers could see:
- More browser-level competition 🖥️
- Real opportunities in AI-native search 🤓
- A chance to escape Google’s search-default hegemony 🔓
But if Google wins? Strap in. The current playbook of gatekeeping, default-setting, and monetization lock-in will get even more entrenched.
Either way, the stakes are way bigger than one browser.
