It's a bit surreal to juxtapose today's release from the IAB -- Internet Advertising Revenues for Q3 at $5.9 billion -- with Google's earnings release of last month, related to their Q3 earnings. Labels: iab, online advertising
Since Google's revenues were $5.54 billion, you're apt to say: what the heck is going on here?
The IAB figures cover the U.S. only, of course.
But if you subtract Google's international revenues, their U.S.-only revenues for the quarter were all of $2.69 billion. So in the United States, this one company appears to be clocking about 46% of the revenues for the whole digital advertising sector. Twiddle a few knobs, and wait a quarter, and Google will be at around 50%. Among other things, you would imagine that this makes further acquisitions dicey for Google. One company moving from, say, 50% to 58% of share for an entire sector of such importance might make certain regulators nervous. (Not saying it's right, but that's sort of how the world works.)
Whether that's proof that Google is incredibly big, or the rest of the sector remains embarrassingly small given the gallons of ink devoted to it, I'll leave to your discretion. A third possibility is that display and other forms of online advertising have yet to reach the peak of efficiency achieved by Google's click auction.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
 |
 |
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
You gotta keep it in perspective.
Google was kind enough to share with me this evening a new take on their now multi-faceted keyword research tool lineup. I tinkered a bit, but between knocking off work at a reasonable 7:00 p.m., going to the gym, shopping for tasteful late-fall v-necks, and eating dinner, it seems I finished the evening without a single thing to say about Google's new product rollout, other than: I look forward to playing around with it. But seriously: that's work, and I didn't play with it very much after the news embargo lifted at 8:30 p.m. my time.
The real story is over at Mike Grehan's place (blog, I mean). On Sunday, as you can see beautifully laid out in his extensive post, he posted the full account of his day accompanying Incisive Media's Matt McGowan on a Veteran's Day adventure of a lifetime -- ("is this unreal or what?"). Read on a bit, to the previous day's post, and you get an inkling of another development in the search marketing events w
orld: Matt's recent promotion. Well known to many as VP of Global Marketing, Matt's new VP position encompasses publishing and content, so he'll oversee of a variety of digital properties for Incisive. I wasn't even aware that Matt has only been with Incisive since 2006. A lot accomplished in a short time. (That's Mike pictured at left, on fifth avenue... not Matt. :) )
So what's happening with me here in Toronto this week? Well, I'm not as good with the camera or the anecdotes as Mike, but I can say I'll be guest-speaking at a class for the Canadian Marketing Association tomorrow night, and on Thursday Google will be throwing some events here in Toronto for -- finally -- the grand opening of their new, non-temporary, fully-Googly Toronto office in Canada Square on Yonge St.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Monday, November 17, 2008
To lead with what should hopefully be obvious to all, in spite of the frustrations many of us have shown with Yahoo's recent progress, Kara's certainly right: Jerry Yang is a nice man. Labels: jerry yang, yahoo
We'll be back with a few more thoughts on this one, on top of the many we've shared about the company over the past few years.
But for starters I'll begin with what I think are a couple of serious indicators as to what was so misguided about Yang's and his predecessors' approach to running Yahoo.
First, the comment in Yang's departure memo, that "the company is in many ways stronger than it was 18 months ago," or some such claptrap. Sure, you can make a list. Point to many accomplishments and initiatives. But what if those things are being spun out in a rapidly deteriorating context, where they are unlikely to thoroughly succeed?
This persistent soft focus on harsh realities is the hallmark of a "comparison company" that "doesn't go from good to great." I've recently pored over Jim Collins' Good to Great for the umpteenth time. Although all of Collins' insights aren't bulletproof, the part about the most successful leaders who have ultimate faith in prevailing but also build a culture of confronting harsh reality rings so true. At Yahoo, everything always seemed to be just fine, until the broken parts began to be fixed, two years behind schedule.
At least Peanut Butter Exec Garlinghouse was willing to stand up and say this. He had to say he bled purple when he tore a strip off the company for its failings, but at least he did it.
The corollary to the first point, then; secondly, is the conflation of loyalty with performance. It seems that "bleeding purple" is a prerequisite for working in the management ranks at Yahoo.
Dammit, it's us consumers that need to bleed purple, not you guys. We need to love the company; you need to make it work.
Fortunately, that leads me to my next, hopeful point. A lot of us still do bleed purple. Yeah I said it! I don't hide my Yahoo schwag when guests come over. I still have my own pet ideas for how Yahoo could improve its best products and extend its beloved brand. I think Yahoo could partner offline with all kinds of business and consumer routines in a way that Google couldn't.
So there you have it. We're great customers, and many missteps by Yahoo's management have left the company a shell of what it might have been, lying next to a pool of purple blood, waiting for Microsoft to swoop in with a mop and a transfusion. Let's hope for better days ahead.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Is it even worth a comment?
Not about the case. Definitely not.
But I do remember thinking it curious that Cuban was messing around making high profile investments in a couple of tiny little search companies with zero fundamentals and in Mamma's case, not even "potential" given that it was on the downslope of its "story" (as in "story stock") when Cuban happened on it.
If he'd been really interested in this genre of technology companies, why not go for a portfolio approach to small-company search technology, or take a different tack than taking a stake in a publicly traded penny stock? Taking a stab at Mamma (and what was the other one, IceRocket?) seemed a bit like throwing darts... or a fun night playing Texas Hold 'Em or entering a pie-eating contest for charity.
In which case... if he loses... that will have been an awfully costly "night out." But I seriously doubt that a conviction would convince anyone that Mark Cuban was thoroughly guilty of anything other than being a goof with his money.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Jessica Bowman, an in-house SEO expert who has built in-house SEO programs at Yahoo and Enterprise Rent-a-Car, will be back to join attendees and fellow speaking alumni for this year's Search Engine Strategies Chicago conference. Traffick: Jessica, you've been overheard stating that SES Chicago is your favorite SES conference of all! I don't hear that so much. People may mention San Jose because of the great weather and the Google Dance, or New York or London because, well, they're New York and London. Me, I have a bunch of reasons to prefer SES Toronto above any other. But Chicago?!? My Page Zero posse and I have a lot of fond memories of that conference to be sure, but maybe you can share your reasons for liking this one the best? J.B.: It's my favorite event because it's more intimate than all of the other shows. The show is at the same location as the conference hotel, so you don't have to go out in the cold, and you can sneak a few winks during lunch if you need them. Because of this, everyone is condensed within the Hilton, which makes constant opportunities for interaction. And, there are two great bars where everyone congregates in the evenings where you can talk more candidly and interact with the speakers you saw during the day. Traffick: Other than eating a piece of the giant candy Christmas decoration in the Hilton lobby and getting ill, I have one SES Chicago memory (non content related) that really stands out: Buddy Guy himself getting up to do a number at his blues club (Buddy Guy's). Sample lyrics: "Hey all you Yahoo people, why don't you call me on the phone..." Anyway. Do you have any spectacular memories? J.B.: The Buddy Guy party is my fondest memory of all and one of the reasons Chicago is my favorite. Outside of that, it's the many nights of great conversation that happens at the hotel bar. The venue seems to be very conducive to conversations with attendees - I have had many eye opening conversations an met new people that have become friends. Traffick: Fond indeed. I remember having a conversation with some of the guys in Buddy's band, and by the end of it, they were all fired up to come play at Jeff Healy's in Toronto... Your speaking and consulting generally focus on the challenges of in house SEO. Have these kinds of sessions become more popular over the years? Do you feel that the number of independent SEO shops will dwindle over time as companies bring the work in-house? J.B.: In-house SEO sessions have definitely become more popular. When I started as an in-house SEO 6 years ago at Enterprise Rent-A-Car, I didn't meet one person who was in-house. Two years later we had the first in-house SEO session and only 20 people attended. Today it's a full house and once or twice we've even had standing room only at an in-house session. Traffick: That all makes sense. Some companies should never build in-house capacities in areas where they cannot afford the full-time expertise, or can't find a top person. And as far as all those in-house and agency positions being properly staffed, we're years away from the point where we overcome the current labor shortage of qualified SEO's, and years away from the point where this knowledge set is built into what people in a variety of professions bring to the table. You hear a lot of talk about folks 'knowing just enough to be dangerous,' and they are just that! My next question is about Yahoo, where you did in-house SEO advising. Can you share any learnings about being in the interesting position of teaching a big company that is actually a search engine, how to get better rankings in search engines? J.B.: [Chuckle] Surprisingly, it's the same as it was for any enterprise-level organization. When I joined Yahoo!, I thought it would be different because they were a search engine and I was going to be doing things differently. It turns out that they are no different than any large company with many different divisions - politics, red tape, proving the ROI, getting SEO into the development life cycle, etc. The biggest tips I have for enterprise-level in-house SEO programs are: Traffick: Awesome tips! Hehe. You trailed off a bit at the end there but I think you're coming through crystal clear. Managers don't like to be told they're doing a crappy job. Tact is key. Did I just say crappy? One last question. Do you have any strategy for learning and developing your talents that you apply when attending the search marketing conferences? Even conference veterans need to keep pushing the envelope and using the opportunity for continued learning, networking, and personal growth, right? How about tips for newbies? J.B.: Tips for the newbies: Traffick: Thanks for your time and insights, Jessica! See you on December 8. Labels: ses chicago
Recently Jessica was overheard telling friends that SES Chicago is her favorite SES. We caught up with Jessica to get to the bottom of this. We also asked Jessica for a few other thoughts and pointers about conference life and large-organization SEO.
I believe there will still be a place for independent shops, and I expect the number to decrease over time, but not in the next 3 years. I anticipate the demand for agency work among the bigger brands to dwindle, because they are starting to catch on and have the need and budget to build an in-house SEO program. I predict the needs for agencies will be more project based and bigger long-term contracts will come more from the mid-sized company who isn't ready to build out a team, but is ready to invest in SEO.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Under the guise of the weekly personal financial profile called "Me and My Money" in the Globe and Mail, reporter Tony Martin teases out an interesting local tech story from investor Will Ashworth that refers directly to Geosign's click-arbitrage-oriented business model. Holy moly! Labels: click arbitrage
For those just beginning to score at home, Geosign's properties included a site called TrueLocal, along with several thousand other websites that showed sponsored links, largely in partnership with Yahoo. Traffic was driven to those sites by SEO and low-priced clicks obtained by "lowball bidding" on Google AdWords. Google's Quality Scoring system, including the period where low Quality Scores were associated with high minimum bids per click (as high as $5.00 or $10.00), was largely motivated by top management's desire to squelch most of the arbitrage-based ads in the system.
The key excerpt from the article, "Writer pens an ode to small-cap stocks":
"Forget Nortel. Freelance writer Will Ashworth calls the 2007 collapse of Guelph-based Geosign -- where he worked for six months up to its demise, just weeks after it received $160 million in venture capital -- the biggest tech wreck. It was trying to make money from online arbitrage, but crashed when Google changed its policies. 'It certainly teaches you that in investing, things aren't always what they appear.'"
And, one supposes, in business generally.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Google currently holds $46 in cash per share, and its book value per share is $87.
Going with the most optimistic figure, if you bought Google stock today at $287, it would be like getting it for $200.
An amazing bargain? Personally, I think so -- recession and all. Another point to consider is that Google's EPS is dampened by massive expansion. Any belt-tightening at all, or a hiring freeze, could goose profits and add to that cash pile.
Note: I hold no shares in any tech stocks, including GOOG. And do not have any ax to grind. :)
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Today, Google releases a new update to its increasingly popular Site Search product. I had the chance to speak with Nitin Mangtani, Lead Product Manager for Enterprise Search at the company, about Google Site Search's growing momentum. Labels: google site search
Along with its popular search appliances, Google's "cloud-based" site search solution is gaining momentum. New pricing and features seem to eliminate some previous objections to using what was already a powerful service.
Clearly a search focused company will have a leg up in providing comprehensive indexing of your pages, and fast, relevant results for queries. But what else does Google bring to the table?
Customization is key. Today, companies using the increasingly inexpensive product (it starts at $100) can choose their own "look and feel" if they so choose, and yes, you can remove the Powered by Google logo treatment with no penalty -- it's up to you.
Ranking customization and layout options are more extensive than you might realize. Site owners can feature certain types of content; they can add specific weightings for valued attributes such as freshness; and much more. I'm uncertain how far you could really take this for a site requiring full customization, though: a movie review site that wanted its own look and feel across the board would probably still feel constrained by the Googliness of this particular search solution. But the product shines for many information-rich corporate sites, and ecommerce sites seeking to connect customers with products no matter what the query.
Because Google is ahead of many competitors on things like misspellings and synonyms, it's also a bonus to have these features included in Google Site Search. Site owners can customize synonym lists as well; it seems like that is standard fare for site search today.
I asked Nitin specifically if "smart" algorithm ranking factors like clickstream and behavioral data would be used to bubble relevant results to the top. By all means, the advantages of Google's proprietary technology are brought to bear on every query, was his answer. But here is where some customers might get uneasy. There is an uncertain mix between rank weightings you can customize yourself, and black box ranking factors that will run in Googly fashion and never be revealed to you. Those who wish to control or understand their site search algorithm won't enjoy this black box product, and this is where Google's status as a public search engine that must guard its ranking secrets against spammers becomes as much of a liability as a strength, given that now, you're guarding the algorithm against potential developers of custom ranking solutions for localized use, as opposed to would-be rank mavens trying to game the system in the case of the adversarial indexing environment of the public Web.
Google has chosen a new pricing model, and the new "index on demand" feature of the cloud-based site search product, as hooks for this latest round of publicity. But on the whole, it's simply useful to be reminded that Google's inexpensive, lightning-fast, uber-scalable site search product now has the chops to handle not only many mission-critical large company needs, but the flexibility and low price to impress niche site owners looking for a better, cheaper, site search solution. Worth a look.
Today there are simply a lot more reasons to take a second look at Google Site Search.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Quality Score = SEO. That's the oversimplified version of things being shared around by some marketing advice-givers of late. Labels: google adwords, quality score
Ask any key Googler on the paid or unpaid search side, and they'll readily admit something like "for both the organic search algorithm and the paid search ranking system, we look at very similar signals."
That's not the same as saying the AdWords program responds well to "SEO," however. Landing pages serve a very different function in paid search campaigns. You don't have to perfect them with SEO principles, and you'll very rarely get a major ranking boost from using SEO principles. You'll still predominantly rank well if you (1) have a high CTR; (2) bid sufficiently high; (3) create a strong relevancy pattern by associating the most relevant high-intent keywords with relevant ads and relevant landing pages.
Strictly dealing with the landing pages themselves, though, don't go overboard worrying about their impact on Quality Score. The wrong landing page can give you a poor Quality Score, for a variety of don't-be-evil reasons. Google does attempt to look at the page content, and will measure user responses such as bounce rates and back-button-hitting. But you don't have to twiddle around with keywords in headings and stuffing keywords in body text as if this were SEO circa 1997.
Powerful campaigns with real patterns of satisfied user behavior are "relevant enough," even with the basic elements of relevancy present on the page. Additional relevancy is likely not gained with keyword stuffing efforts. Outdated efforts to game QS with SEO principles only take away from real user response testing - pleasing navigation, persuasion, and testing that can improve conversion rates (without gimmicks and superstition).
The folks to say "AdWords = SEO"... they may be in the ballpark, and they haven't totally struck out, but the analogy is a foul tip into the bleachers, at best.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Google has been unusually active with product releases and good-news announcements all of a sudden. Historically, this has often coincided with a PR strategy to blunt the impact of bad news in the immediate news media and blogosphere reaction. Labels: goog
In the last few days, we've heard of upgrades to Google Ad Planner, major new developments with Google Analytics, the release of Google video chat, and this flu-tracking thing has gotten so much play I heard Marissa Meyer on the lunchtime radio news.
And there is more to come, with more significant announcements slated through the next week (just watch).
This has me thinking something must be up. The stock has taken a major hit this afternoon, to close to $290 (down 6.75%). Maybe that's just a reaction to further analyst downgrades, which usually signal a bottom for stocks in solid companies. Maybe the vagaries of federal bailout plans and stimulus or lack of it, election results, and general market conditions are making this safe stock look riskier than the rest of the stocks in the index. But something makes me suspect another shoe is set to drop.
Maybe that's market psychology at its most acute, though. It's spooky, whatever it is.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Google rolls out voice and video chat. Labels: google talk, google video chat
[I'm already using the voice; I am sure I expected this development. As for the timing, it does seem timely to me. The Google blog post about this points out how it helps this particular project team communicate between the US and Sweden (Sweden? Isn't that where Skype's from?); lately, you may have seen those GoToMeeting TV spots touting the benefits and cost savings of remote meetings as against costly air travel in a recession.]
Techcrunch predicts a whiteboard feature next. Ouch again for any company trying to charge for any of this stuff...
So... the purpose of Skype now is...???
Well, I guess you could use competing products so Google won't be archiving digital images of little old you yakking about confidential company matters. If you're the paranoid type.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
According to day-by-day traffic numbers being circulated by Hitwise, Yahoo News is the #1 source for news these days, especially in the days leading up to, and during, the election. In fact, Yahoo News's market share for news visits is triple Google News', the #4 player in a near dead heat with Fox News at #5. MSNBC is #3; CNN.com is #2. Labels: google news, yahoo news
The Drudge Report, ABC News, NYTimes.com, USA Today, The Huffington Post, AOL News, The Washington Post, and Real Clear Politics are among the other leaders this past week.
The picture is a little more embarrassing for Google News than the Hitwise figures seem to suggest, because they have FOXNews.com Elections in 8th place. Combined, the FOX properties as a whole vault into 4th place, pushing Google News down to #5.
Of course these are estimates based on Hitwise's proprietary sampling methods. But Yahoo News has a solid lead, it appears.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
My sources just informed me that Google has pulled out of the advertising agreement with Yahoo, citing regulatory interference. Labels: google, google adwords, yahoo, yahoo search marketing
Although it is a short term loss to Yahoo's bottom line, I believe ultimately it's healthier for competition to keep the two companies more at arm's length and for Yahoo to continue to develop their own, proprietary platforms.
Posted by Andrew Goodman
| | Permalink
|
|
 |
The Traffick Search Engine Directory :: |
| » Internet Marketing » Internet Tools » Search Engines |
» Web Browsers » Web Portals » Webmaster Tools |
» About the Directory » Add URL » Traffick Report: Flock |
