I think the CMA does think it's a conflict of interest which is why they are stepping in. It seems like they think it's in Google's favor to remove third party cookies without a replacement.
Thanks that is interesting. To be clear though I meant a conflict-of-interest inside of Google. E.g. the ad division influencing the browser division to slow the roll to avoid damaging revenues/sales.
But I hadn't even considered that this might benefit Google, but that certainly makes sense! I'm grateful for good old British skepticism :-) Looking forward to their findings.
