Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 620

Google is facing 'the innovator's dilemma'

A question that we have often been asked over the years is: can the disruptors be disrupted?

There is a ready answer. The largest, most valuable and closest disruptor on the horizon is artificial intelligence (AI) and one of the targets is the ten blue links in Google’s search. Further, the threat is so serious that Google has been forced to disrupt itself with its own AI engine, Gemini. At stake is Google’s US$200 billion annual search revenue stream – which explains why the funding of new AI disruptors continues to rise and ‘big tech’ companies (including Google) invest to position themselves in the AI era (big tech capex is expected to be US$300 billion + in 2025). Here is a non-exhaustive summary of capital raisings to date:

OpenAI

  • Amount: US$40 billion (closed March 2025)
  • Valuation: US$300 billion post-money
  • Lead Investor: SoftBank (US$30 billion), with Microsoft, Thrive Capital, Coatue, and others
  • Purpose: Funding next-gen AI models and the massive Stargate infrastructure project
  • Additional Plans: Targeting another US$17 billion by 2027.

Anthropic

  • Amount: US$7 billion in 2025 alone (mix of US$4.5 billion equity + US$2.5 billion debt)
  • Valuation: US$62 billion post-money (as at March 2025 equity raising)
  • Lead Investor(s): Amazon, Google, Lightspeed Venture Partners and others
  • Purpose: Funding next-gen AI models, expand compute capacity, deepen research and accelerate international expansion.
  • Additional Plans: Targeting another US$17 billion by 2027.

Grok / xAI (Elon Musk)

  • Capital Raising in Progress: US$9.3 billion (mix of US$4.3 billion equity + US$5 billion debt)
  • Valuation: US$80 billion (Q1 2025)
  • Investors: Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia, VY Capital
  • Use of Funds: Infrastructure (e.g., ‘Colossus’ supercomputer), Grok model development, enterprise AI expansion

These capital raisings are coming for Google’s search. Because for larger questions requiring finished documents (where the document may also be a programming routine) Microsoft’s Copilot, ChatGPT – and Google’s Gemini itself – do a much better job than Google search on its own.

For example:

  • Show the options for travel to Bali, including hotels and places of interest (shown below)
  • Or “provide a timetable and the links to help me get conversational in Spanish in 1 year.” Et cetera.


Source: Microsoft Copilot

Satya Nadella, the head of Microsoft, when announcing the company’s entry into AI in November 2022, famously laid out the investment case, saying that just a 1% shift in search revenue from Google would be worth US$2bn to the company. His aim was to make Google come out from behind its search wall and be forced to compete on a battlefield where Microsoft was setting the terms. Nadella even taunted Google and its CEO Sundar Pichai by saying “I hope with our innovation they will definitely want to come out and show that they can dance. I want people to know that we made them dance”.

Gemini: Google disrupting itself

Unfortunately for Microsoft, they did not make Google dance – but ChatGPT, the AI product from Microsoft-affiliated Open AI, certainly did.

Ever since the chatbot’s launch in late 2022, it seems Google has been playing a game of catch-up. The threat was so great that reports suggested a ‘Code Red’ had been issued within the company. Would the company be able to pivot from being a search engine to an answer engine?

At least anecdotally, it seems more and more of those answers are being provided by ChatGPT (and not Google). Even if this is simply users performing non-commercial searches (often informational searches that can’t be monetised), those users might end up shifting more of their commercial searches over time. That would be bad news for Google.

While yet to show up in the headline Google Search revenue (which is still growing at a healthy 10% Y/Y), under the surface there appear to be warning signs. In the company’s latest quarterly SEC filing, the company disclosed the lowest paid click growth ever (2% Y/Y, lowest by ~2 percentage points). Meanwhile, Apple is reportedly looking at AI search as an alternative to Google in Safari and has had discussions with Perplexity (another ChatGPT-like offering). To make matters worse an Apple senior executive in testimony suggested that in April 2025 Google searches in Safari declined for the first time ever.

But is it all doom and gloom for Google?

Over the past 12 months Google has aggressively rolled out various AI-powered solutions to its existing products, including Search. Readers will have noted that AI overviews are now appearing in more and more searches – reaching approximately 1.5bn users per month according to management. The company also plans to roll out “AI mode” to users in the US which incorporates even more features.

Google also disclosed that AI overviews monetise at the same rate and are driving higher usage as well as satisfaction. Queries were also 2x longer vs traditional search – it’s because of these factors that monetisation might actually increase as a result of AI.

AI usage across Google’s surfaces is still accelerating

Source: Google (Alphabet)

Just look at the travel example referenced previously – the searcher is disclosing significant, specific intent around flights, hotels and restaurants. The provision of this data may be extremely valuable to those who may benefit, owing to the higher likelihood of patronage relative to a traditional search.

And on the technology side, Google is unrivalled. The company has its own AI research lab (Google DeepMind), which helps produce its own Large Language Models (Gemini) on specialised hardware (Tensor Processing Units) that it has designed over the course of a decade for its cloud. It also has numerous applications that provide it immediate and significant distribution for these capabilities (billions of people interact with Google’s suite of services every day).

But even with all these advantages, the company has to tread carefully so as to not upend the largest and most profitable part of its business (Google Search). This is the innovator’s dilemma and why technological change and disruption are such potent forces. Microsoft successfully navigated its own disruption – the shift from a Windows-centric business to a Cloud-centric business – but wasn’t unscathed during the process (it famously missed the shift to mobile) with a long period of underperformance from a share price perspective.

So for now, Google no longer appears in the portfolios we manage. We believe there are better exposures on a risk-adjusted basis to the big changes impacting advertising. And while we won’t know for many years the final shape of the AI search market from an investment perspective, we do know (and are observing) that there is exploding growth in revenue for those supplying the tools for this AI. Nvidia’s revenue has catapulted from US$35 billion in 2022 to an expected US$200 billion this year. And that is the reason we continue to hold it, and others in the area (including Broadcom and Arista).

Which other companies and industries are disrupting themselves?

Slightly further along is the disruption impacting the automotive industry. It was initially held that the electric car, which is a significant disruption to the car and transport industry, would be incorporated into the range of existing car companies like Volkswagen and Ford. But the speed, quality and number of the models coming from China are decimating the car industry, even the German car brands like Mercedes, as well as Toyota and US marques. It is even disrupting Tesla, which has not been able to respond adequately given the emerging scale of the Chinese car industry.

A handful of these automotive companies were disruptive in their own right – but that was over a century ago.

Disruption is dynamic – the winners of today are not necessarily the winners of tomorrow. Business models are constantly changing and new opportunities emerging, often fuelled by new technologies, and this change seems to be accelerating. An active investment strategy that recognises and takes advantage of these realities is essential.

 

Harry Morrow is a Senior Investment Analyst, and Alex Pollak is Chief Investment Officer and Co-Founder of Loftus Peak. This article is for general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual. Loftus Peak Global Disruption Fund (ASX:LPGD) is available to investors on the ASX as an active Exchange Traded Managed Fund.

 

  •   16 July 2025
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

High quality businesses are on sale

There’s more to software than just code

The Ozempic moment for SaaS

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

Latest Updates

Fixed interest

Higher yields are creating opportunities in global bonds

Bond markets are adjusting to a new reality, but not in the ways investors expect. With markets repricing and capital competing for attention, investors may need to rethink where resilience and opportunity lie. 

Economy

Are we in a recession?

What if the warning signs are already everywhere? From supermarket aisles to company failures, investors are being bombarded with recession signals. But most face a different risk that can be just as dangerous for portfolios. 

SMSF strategies

Meg on SMSFs - Division 296 actuarial certificates

The tax bill might be yours, but the event that caused it may not be. A key Division 296 calculation can sometimes attribute earnings in ways that many SMSF trustees won't instinctively expect or fully appreciate.

Property

The first impact of negative gearing reform is not the tax bill

Negative gearing changes formally begin in 2027, but the first consequences may already be here. A subtle shift is quietly influencing who can borrow, how much they can access and which property strategies still stack up.

Economy

The oil market is running out of easy answers

The biggest threat to markets may not be what investors are watching. The numbers have stopped adding up and supply is harder to measure, with forecasts becoming simple guesses. A more fragile reality is being masked.

Investment strategies

The state of investor knowledge in Australia

Australians are investing more than ever, yet a surprising divide is emerging between those building wealth effectively and those making costly mistakes. Surprisingly, the gap has little to do with income, age or starting capital.

Taxation

Complexity and capital gains

A case study shows that the ‘30% minimum CGT’ is a poorly conceived tax that adds significant complexity to an already over-complex system. A less complicated model would create a much fairer progressive tax scale.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.