Google's Incrementality Failure: Is this the Big One?

This is a bit of a rushed brain-to-paper post, so I hope we can discuss the merits of my primary argument in the comments below.

Zack Miller got me thinking about this more with a post he wrote about brand bidding (linked here).

And I think this brings up the single greatest mistake Google has made over the past decade: Google has not aggressively chased solving for what business owners actually care about: measuring true incrementality.

In other words, "are the advertising dollars I am investing in this channel causing me to profitably acquire customers I would otherwise not have received if I had not spent that money in this channel?"

Rather, Google has obsessed about "solving" attribution... which ironically is an empty chase. I.e., they've focused on identifying which source gets what % of credit for a sale? But those are VERY different questions, and IMO, Google has missed solving for the right question. That's the question above, and it's so important I'll say it again:

"Are the advertising dollars I am investing in this channel causing me to profitably acquire customers I would otherwise not have received if I had not spent that money in this channel?"

In investing massive amounts of energy into showing their channel participated in a sale (attribution), they've arguably gotten more immediate revenue, but lost long-term trust. If from the beginning, rather than "solve for attribution" (tho I do think having insight into basic levels of attribution is directionally worthwhile), they had instead invested massive levels of engineering in solving for incredibly easy and accurate all channels incrementality measurement (especially for smaller budgets), then advertisers would know when they've ACTUALLY started contributing to true growth in their business and would aggressively spend money there... even if that means they pull back from some sources. It's less about quick wins like brand bidding.

I think the surest sign of what I'm saying here is that 2025 is when Google has released its first widely attempted MMM (Meridian). I'm not even saying that's the tool to rely on or that an MMM is what every business should do, just that Google hasn't even been attempting to solve this widely for small businesses until recently (IMO, that's because they began to realize people actually DO get excited about YouTube and the only way to prove YT success isn't through directly tracked attribution, but demonstrating incrementality... so now they're scrambling).

Where is the cross-business data and tools to assist in specific geographic holdout testing within Google Ads for small budgets who could never afford these tools, but would flock to Google if those were available to them?

Even better, where is this in GA4? If it's supposed to be such a great measurement tool, then why can it not answer the only question business owners actually care about when it comes to advertising (even though not all of them know this is what they care about):

"Are the advertising dollars I am investing in each channel causing me to profitably acquire customers I would otherwise not have received if I had not spent that money in this channel?"

I admit, There's a lot here. I'm probably wrong on some of it. All of it? But the more I live in the Google atmosphere, the more I believe they have failed me in helping me answer what is really my client's most basic question.

It is too late? I don't really know. I don't think it is based on their earnings reports, but I think we need DOGE level changes to occur at all levels of Google in this regard. It's a big swing. I certainly hope they don't make it off the musings of one PPCer, but perhaps if enough of us are saying it they'll listen? We can only hope?