[mpcovcd]

I don't think that's a reasonable comparison. Alexa data is public, most of it can be accessed for free, and the rest at a reasonable price. Doubleclick is an advertising platform, it doesn't give insight into competitors metrics unless those competitors choose to share that information.

[j_s]

Does Google not monitor/monetize Google Fi, Google Fiber, Google Play Services, Google DNS, Google Chrome, Google Safe Browing, and on and on and on... (Google Maps, Google Location Services)

[mpcovcd]

None of those are marketed as a VPN or data security apps.

[j_s]

Sorry, which goalpost am I aiming for? This one seems to be moving...

Although not quoting until now (my mistake), my reply was specifically in response to your previous point:

I don't think that's a reasonable comparison [...] it doesn't give insight into competitors metrics unless those competitors choose to share that information

The lines begin to blur especially when discussing means of accessing the internet (especially most efficiently/safely) and/or core (semi-artificially-required) mobile phone operating system components!

If nothing else they offer the path of least resistance. Any best-of-breed solution (GMail, Google Docs, Chrome - all somehwat a matter of opinion) or de facto monopoly-ish position (search, free analytics, Google Play Services?) by Google offers the potential for them to gain info on competitors in much the same way Amazon can take over succesful verticals originally occupied by a third party.

[wonder_bread]

I would argue most of Alexa's most import features are not free, doubleclick is still a cloak around the entire digital advertising industry that gives them access to actionable metrics of how websites are doing (i.e. maybe why they've pushed into job search recently).

One commonality among all of them is being marketed as a service for smaller-scale companies while having the double-edged sword on the backend that is most likely what they are really after

EDIT: smaller scale companies and individuals