The market often rewards bloat (more features) not technical excellence. I think a big marketing push or pre-install partnership would help them a lot. Their marketshare is now so low that web developers unironically state “Best viewed in Google Chrome” like it’s 2003 when IE6 had 95% marketshare.

The "market" doesn't care about Firefox at all. It has already chosen Chrome and making a second Chrome won't change that.

"The market has already chosen Internet Explorer and making a second Internet Explorer won't change that."

- This was probably said by someone in a meeting at Google in 2006

Chrome is an obvious win for Google.

Rather than paying browser makers for every search, they can make one time payments to convert users to Chrome, and then get the searches for free.

And now with their dominant position they can choke off competing ad networks by removing 3rd party cookies.

Sure, but Google didn't make a second Internet Explorer, they made a new thing.

Maybe the one where they decided not to make a second Internet Explorer and create a different browser? But I doubt they even considered it.

Maybe because as from another comment: "Firefox is an antitrust litigation sponge". They also absorb some useful users feedback. But do they have a real intention to increase market share (which could be done easily)? They are well paid - see in other comments how much its CEO is earning. So, "antitrust litigation sponge" sounds plausible?

I think exactly the same. It's always the same play.

I guess they don't want to listen to things they need to pour money into.