Archive for the 'Industry News' Category

admin

Boo to Yahoo-Google Deal

I think that there is huge anti-trust issues with the proposed Yahoo-Google advertising partnership. Google says they will backfill their advertisers into areas where Yahoo doesn’t have any advertisers.

Yahoo President Sue Decker recently wrote on a Yahoo company blog that the nonexclusive Google deal is simply a way of “backfilling” search queries with relevant ads that Yahoo doesn’t have in its network. The idea is that with millions Yahoo users making so many search queries, it is simply not possible for any one company to maintain a large enough repository of ads to make a relevant match with every query. “Not even Google,” she wrote.

As an advertiser and agency that represents several paid search clients we are concerned that Google will apply its muscle to popular terms that they have decided should cost more to advertisers which will raise our costs across the board if we are now buying them from Google via Yahoo.

How could the Department of Justice not see this as anti-trust where Google already commands somewhere around 70 percent of the search market and pairing up with Yahoo will mean that we will be forced to play by their rules and algorithm changes that will favor squeezing more and more out of their already upset advertising community. Google is already exhibiting unfair advertising practices by conveniently protecting large branded searches and letting large brands buy the “trademarked” search terms of their smaller competitors. It is a one-way street where big business is protecting big business and the giant just gets bigger and bigger.

Google has even launched their own “Advocacy” website:
http://www.google.com/yahoogooglefacts/

Doesn’t this look like what you usually see when politicians are sending out slander campaigns against each other. The simple fact is that Yahoo should get their game up and not sell out to Google but maybe team up with Facebook or MSN and try to get some marketshare from Google. Getting in bed with Google at this stage in the game only makes them more powerful on all fronts and reduces Yahoo’s value proposition as a brand. Yahoo is expected to make an additional $800 Million a year from this partnership. Short sighted gain for longer term losses in my eyes. Yahoo, you are bigger than this. Step away from the 800lb. gorilla, roll up your sleeves and make your damn search results better and don’t do it by listing “Wikipedia” at the top of the page like Google and MSN. Try to find a small but popular brand on large search queries in Google and you’ll only see site the large brands, newspaper, .gov links and wiki-sites. (example: travel). Why does Tripadvisor.com have to buy that keyword? Answer that and you might have the answer to what is wrong with Google’s so-called “Algorithm”.

admin

Google’s AdWords Downfall

Google has been making some very poor business decisions lately mostly in the way they handle their advertisers in Google AdWords. When I first bought an ad on Google (I believe I was the 3rd person to do so) it was presented to me in a 3-ring binder with a list of keywords that I had to purchase. There was no cherry picking or keyword negatives. I met with my sales executive in their old Mountain View offices and I believe there was about 120 people back then mostly PHD engineers and only a handful of sales people.

I believe the CPM was around $55 initially and we purchased our block of keywords for a one-year contract in order to block out any other competitors in the dating space from appearing on those keywords. Remember that this is pre-AdWords and there was only two ad spots on the page that were both highlighted in pale green and blue. The sponsored ads appeared above the natural results and never to the right side of the page.

We enjoyed this position for quite sometime and the traffic was great and converted well for us. Eventually we were able to refine our keyword lists and the internal estimation system got more accurate in projecting our spend for the next year.

Then came Google AdWords, this meant that we could no longer protect our positions and that the entire marketplace was going to open up in a bid environment. I fought this hard with David Scocco, who I believe was the head of vertical markets at the time. I didn’t understand how they could or would cancel our contract and allow all of our competitors to now come in and fish in our waters when we had build out the opportunity with Google and now our keyword lists were getting shared by other Google sales groups to our competitors.

The sharks then filled in the tank and all of the ad spots were occupied instantly in our category. I then began to understand why Google had introduced this model to let the best advertiser and ads trickle to the top and that we wouldn’t be bullied out of our positions as long as we had a strong CTR and bid. It started out as a bull fight with some of the companies fighting for top position on several keywords but then everyone settled into where the CPA’s were working for them.

Now let’s fast forward to Google’s operations today and how tons of media companies are laying off employees and losing face with their clients because Google has decided to put strict guidelines on trying to increase their dying CTR’s by arbitrarily raising bids to $5, $10 and in some cases $100 levels making them impossible to buy anymore. Most of these keywords are directional searches like “Dell”, “Kayak” or “Match”. There is no longer a landscape of advertisers on those keywords.

Look at the keyword “Dell” a little closer. Don’t you remember searching for this keyword at one point in time and seeing advertisers for Dell accessories, re-furbished Dell’s, Dell coupon codes, Dell printer ink cartridges or even a competing Sony Laptop ad. Do the search today to only yield an official “Dell.com” ad and also Dell.com in the first natural result spot.

How does this benefit the consumer at all? Google is now deciding for us what we were looking for when we did this search instead of letting the marketplace compete with each other to offer us other options. Obviously if I was just looking for Dell.com’s website then I could have easily navigated to it directly or clicked on the top natural result. Google is bleeding money that they used to make on these searches because not-so relevant advertisers had to pay a premium to be on these keywords before. Now they are only making money from the brand itself and the CTR on branded terms is usually in the 0.10 - 0.25 CPC range as they are relevant and click well.

You can do this search across a bunch of different brands and verticals including online education. Do a search for “University of Phoenix” and you’ll see the same thing. The Official UoP ad and UoP listed in the #1 position in natural search. What happened to the competitors of University of Phoenix ads? If I was investigating going to an online university and only knew of UoP then I would like to see other competitors ads in the “Marketplace” area but instead Google has made the decision to protect this brand.

University of Phoenix Google Search

Do a search for “Plenty of Fish” in Google and you’ll see that no one is advertising on that keyword. That is because it will cost you $10 / click to buy a free dating service keyword where your acquisition costs for a user are around $6 which means that if every single click converted you would still be under water.

Plenty of Fish Google Search

This keyword gets searched well over a million times a month and Google isn’t making ANY money off of the term but there are plenty of dating companies that would love to “fish” in these waters and buy the term from them.

Plenty of Fish Keyword

Now here is where I really think there is a larger issue that needs to be brought to the federal level. Google is protecting a lot of the large brands terms but not vice versa. Do a search for Match.com and then do a search for Perfectmatch.com. Why is there no advertisers on Match.com but there is a full marketplace of advertisers on the Perfectmatch.com trade keyword. How can their “Algorithm” determine that advertisers shouldn’t be able to buy Match.com because it hasn’t historically performed well for advertisers which is what they told me.

Google is intentionally hurting the value of their advertising business to any shareholder by placing these new rules on their paid advertisers and leaving tons of money just sitting on the table. They are bullying small brands and protecting the large brands that don’t need the protection by protecting their trade names and not that of the smaller brands. I have told many of my banker friends to short their stock until they change their evil ways.

-Brian

Alexa recently released news that they have “better rankings,” and “improved methodology” and have moved past using their Alexa Toolbar as one of the main sources for its rankings. I have always called Alexa the CEO’s site meter tool as the toolbar itself wasn’t even available for MACs. I think every CEO or marketing manager has installed the toolbar at one point in time to check their ranking and it has been used widely by marketing professionals as a research tool for competitive intelligence.

Alexa Ratingsкомпютри втора употреба

I haven’t used the site or toolbar in over a year and for comparative site reporting I usually frequent sites like Compete.com and Quantcast.com which the industry and website owners have implemented and are using in great numbers to report on their own demographics and to share information to their vertical or category for ranking. These two services have free features and provide pretty detailed information for general comparison reporting or trending. If you have the cash to pay for yearly access to Hitwise, comScore or Nielsen’s net ratings then let me know so you can run a few reports for me too. Those subscriptions are costly and I haven’t seen much value in them unless you are in an interesting vertical and are looking for websites to advertise on that you might not have realized were in your demographic.

I wish sites like 100Hot.com still existed and MediaMetrix still published their top 100 website report online for free. I think I’ll give Alexa another try and see if they are delivering something worthwhile now.

Why would Google be wasting their time trying to block the Microsoft / Yahoo deal? We as consumers need another search solution and another good PPC search option other then Google. Google has been buying up companies left and right and there hasn’t be any issues with that. I was really excited about this news since I have been a little dissappointed with both providers lately. Microsoft needs more search volume and Yahoo needs more eyeballs for their portal.

It has been interesting seeing both portals grow over the past 5 or so years with two different strategies. Yahoo has opted to buy companies like Flickr, Blue Lithium, del.icio.us, Overture, Musicmatch and other websites that offer complimentary services that Yahoo decided not to build. MSN instead decided to partner with sites to offer products and services like CitySearch for City Guides, Match.com for Dating & Personals and Career Builder for their Jobs channel. MSN recently purchased aQuantive, Inc. for $6 billion to extend their ad network with Atlas, DrivePM and the Avenue A / Razorfish ad agency. They were already pretty aligned with aQuantive using them to serve up ads on their performance network. I hope that the Microsoft / Yahoo deal goes through as it will streamline a ton of inefficiencies that both Yahoo and Microsoft have had in Advertising. Yahoo has been a weak publisher to deal with on the display media side of things and MSN has been weak in the search side of the biz.

By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN AND MIGUEL HELFT THE NEW YORK TIMES

Standing between a marriage of Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo may be the technology giant that has continually outsmarted them: Google.

· What would stay, what would go if Yahoo takes Microsoft’s offer?
In an unusually aggressive effort to prevent Microsoft from moving forward with its $44.6 billion hostile bid for Yahoo, Google emerged over the weekend with plans to play the role of spoiler.

Publicly, Google came out against the deal, contending in a statement that the pairing, proposed by Microsoft on Friday in the form of a hostile offer, would pose potential threats to competition that need to be examined by policymakers around the world.

Privately, Google went much further. Its chief executive, Eric Schmidt, placed a call to Yahoo’s chief, Jerry Yang, offering the company’s help in fending off Microsoft, possibly in the form of a partnership between the companies, people briefed on the call said.

Yahoo declined to comment Sunday. Microsoft said, as it did Friday when it made the bid, that the merger would lead to more, not less, competition.

“The combination of Microsoft and Yahoo will create a more competitive marketplace by establishing a compelling No. 2 competitor for Internet search and online advertising,” Brad Smith, Microsoft’s general counsel, said in a statement. “The alternative scenarios only lead to less competition on the Internet.”

BrianR

Right Media gets acquired by Yahoo!

Right Media has agreed to be acquired by Yahoo! Inc.. Following the closing, the Right Media Exchange will operate as a distinct business unit of Yahoo! Inc., and all products related to the Exchange (PMX, NMX, AMX and Direct Media Exchange) will continue on as before. As part of Yahoo!, Remix Media will continue to offer high value solutions to you– our advertiser, agency and publisher customers. Like other exchange networks utilizing the NMX platform, Remix Media will benefit from the increased scale and liquidity of the exchange as a part of Yahoo!.

Here is the press release: Yahoo acquires Right Media

Here are some comments from Bill Wise, President of Remix Media:

The benefits of the acquisition are clear. Yahoo! will add considerably more supply and demand to the Right Media Exchange, increasing liquidity in the market and broadening the opportunity for advertisers, publishers, networks and technology providers alike to grow their businesses. The acquisition will also provide Right Media with access to more resources to continue to accelerate the pace of innovation on the Exchange.

Please note that, as with their investment last October, the acquisition will in no way afford Yahoo! any unfair advantage in the Exchange. A level playing field is one of the foundations of the Exchange and its success-it remains level. The fact that the Right Media Exchange will operate as a distinct business unit of Yahoo! ensures its independence and lack of bias.

All Exchange participants-ad networks, publishers, advertisers, technology providers-will continue to play their crucial roles in the marketplace. Bring your value to the community as you always have, and the community will continually become more valuable to everyone.

==

I think that this is a nice move from Yahoo with Google’s news of the Doubleclick acquistion for them to own an ad network similar to DrivePM. Yahoo’s Class 2 network is nice but will be enhanced now by adding thousands of additional publishers outside of the Yahoo network.

comScore Releases March U.S. Search Engine Rankings

RESTON, Va., April 17, 2007 – comScore released its monthly qSearch analysis of activity across competitive search engines. In March 2007, Google Sites captured 48.3 percent of the U.S. search market, gaining 0.2 share points from the previous month. Yahoo! Sites maintained its second place ranking with 27.5 percent of U.S. searches, followed by Microsoft Sites (10.9 percent), Ask Network (5.2 percent) and Time Warner Network (5.0 percent).

Mar-07 Share of Online Searches by Engine - Total U.S. Home, Work and University Internet Users
Source: comScore qSearch, Total Internet Population

Google Sites
48.3% Share of Online Searches
0.2% Percent Change vs. Previous Month

Yahoo! Sites
27.5%
-0.6%

Microsoft Sites
10.9%
0.4%

Ask Network
5.2%
0.2%

Time Warner Network (AOL)
5.0%
0.1%

• Americans conducted 7.3 billion searches online in March, up 6 percent versus February and 14 percent versus March 2006.

• Google Sites led the pack with 3.5 billion search queries performed, followed by Yahoo Sites (2.0 billion), Microsoft Sites (798 million), Ask Network (379 million), and Time Warner Network (368 million).

darnit

MSN disables back link queries

Blaming abuse of the system by data miners MSN announced on March 28th that they will no longer allow the following queries in their search engine - link:, linkdomain: and inurl:

From their blog:

“We are doing our best to get this back online as soon as possible in a manner that allows folks that use this functionality for real queries. We have a few good ideas up our sleeve on how to enable this, but want to make sure we are making the right changes that will give you the functionality you want and all of our customers the experience they deserve.”

You can read more as well as the comments from webmaster who are obviously upset on their blog below.

http://blogs.msdn.com/livesearch/archive/2007/03/28/we-are-flattered-but.aspx

darnit

Google To Buy Double Click?

It appears that Google is in talks with Double Click to purchase the privately held company. With only Microsoft still in discussions of a purchase rumoured to be $2 billion dollars it seems Google has more spare cash on hand to make this a reality.

Full article here:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070402/media_nm/doubleclick_google_dc

It appears the early rumors were true.

Today Friday the 13th 2007 - 11 days after we first reported the rumors, it has indeed been confirmed that DoubleClick was sold to Google for 3.1 billion dollars in cash.


http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,130722-c,industrynews/article.html