It's a case where the company took control of the process and dictated to the investment bankers, and they're not used to that situation," said Jay Ritter, professor of finance at the University of Florida and an initial adviser to Google on the Dutch auction system. "A lot of the underwriters did not go out of their way to tout the stock." Furthermore, the company made a number of mistakes, magnified under an intense media spotlight. _ Google failed to account for 23 million stock options granted to employees and was forced to offer to buy them back; _ Company founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page gave an interview published in Playboy magazine a week before the IPO was to have hit the market, a violation of U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rules. _ The company went ahead with the IPO in a very oversold market, with technology shares particularly battered in recent months. _ The Dutch auction system was designed to garner as much money for Google as possible while limiting the usual jump in price on the first day of open trading. While the auction priced Google at $85 per share, the stock quickly soared to $100 in the first hour of trading, and closed Friday up $7.98 at $108.31. With better pricing, Google itself could have gotten that extra $23 a share - or more than $30 million. However, with Google so popular with both investors and the public, most Wall Street firms felt they could not afford to sit out. Only Merrill Lynch publicly dropped out of the auction, reportedly unhappy with the cost-benefit equation. Google may not have met Wall Street's definition of success, since the Dutch auction system poses a threat to major underwriters' business models. But it nonetheless raised $1.6 billion, and its investors saw strong gains in the first two days of trading. "It's certainly a success in that Google went public, and they did it the way they wanted to," said Matt Rhodes-Kropf, associate professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School. "But it was a failure in the sense that they didn't get the price they could've gotten if they had gone through the traditional method. And they did not eliminate the first-day jump."
No matter where they stood on the success or failure of Google's IPO, most experts and insiders agreed that other companies would attempt IPO auctions in the future, and would try to involve the public to one degree or another. And Wall Street would continue to be, at best, ambivalent about the concept. "Certainly, the lead underwriters did not want to use an auction. In that regard, a lot of them have not been anxious to paint this as a success, since it's a threat to their business model," Ritter said. "But outside of the top 10 or 15 underwriters out there, there are plenty of smaller underwriters who would be happy to pick up the crumbs and try to make inroads using the auction system. There aren't that many IPOs around, after all."
Sunday, August 22, 2004
Google's spats with venture capitalists
Very interesting history of Googles relationships with named venture capitalists... Tensions between entrepreneurs who start a company and venture capitalists who finance them are as common as spats between husband and wife...the rows between Google's two strong-willed founders and their venture capitalists are legendary up and down Sand Hill Road.
Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Are you sick of Google yet...some astute comments
cbs.marketwatch.com
"The founders of Google are waltzed from one blunder to another by experts who appear to be setting them up for failure. The experts are doing a great job but not for Google"
"The founders of Google are waltzed from one blunder to another by experts who appear to be setting them up for failure. The experts are doing a great job but not for Google"
Wednesday, August 11, 2004
Google history February 17, 1999 The IPO Report
Google.com: Next Brainchild To Go Big?
by
Tom Taulli
February 17, 1999 : "By being at Stanford, Google.com has a tremendous advantage. The two other search engines -- Yahoo and Excite -- came from this fertile university. Late last year, the company talked to various angels for investment capital. 'They all said yes,' according to Page. One notable investor is Andy Bechtolsheim, the co-founder of Palo Alto, Calif.-based Sun.
The company is expected to get a venture-capital round in a few months. Who knows -- perhaps Google.com will be the next Stanford start-up to get its Nasdaq ticker symbol and multibillion-dollar market cap"
by
Tom Taulli
February 17, 1999 : "By being at Stanford, Google.com has a tremendous advantage. The two other search engines -- Yahoo and Excite -- came from this fertile university. Late last year, the company talked to various angels for investment capital. 'They all said yes,' according to Page. One notable investor is Andy Bechtolsheim, the co-founder of Palo Alto, Calif.-based Sun.
The company is expected to get a venture-capital round in a few months. Who knows -- perhaps Google.com will be the next Stanford start-up to get its Nasdaq ticker symbol and multibillion-dollar market cap"
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
WebProWorld :: Tips For Link Buying Part 3: Matt Cutts From Google..Don't even go there..
WebProWorld :: Tips For Link Buying Part 3: Matt Cutts From GoogleTips For Link Buying Part 3: "
Matt's approach to link building was more of a philosophical one than straight tips and tricks. However, when taken with the advice that appeared in the previous link building articles, you have a fairly comprehensive list of ideas to keep in mind when designing a website, not just attempting to build links.
Making your content valuable enough to be linked to seems to be the emphasis of all speakers well, that and link relevancy. Of course, the first part is a little easier to control than the second. The thinking seems to be: if you build it (quality content), they will come (links pointing to your site).
Though he was philosophical about how to build links, Matt was specific on things to AVOID when link building. One of the first things he said while speaking on what to avoid was controlling whom YOU link to. Make sure that that any site you are linking to is relevant, quality site. Again, no shady SEO users should appear. He also stated another obvious point: avoid hidden links. Be sure and place your links where site visitors can find them.
Matt also suggests avoiding links coming from or pointing to guest books. These are notorious havens for spammers. He did not say whether or not Google discounted these links, but because he warned about them, you can guess that they don't give much relevance to these types of links.
He also mentioned to avoid buying anything that will artificially boost PageRank. Reading Google's Information for Webmasters Page discusses why this is something that should be avoided: 'Linking schemes do not increase a given site's PageRank, and will often do a site more harm than good. Many sites that advertise link-sharing programs not only offer little value, but will distribute your email address without your permission, resulting in an increased volume of unwanted mail to you."
Another area that should be avoided is interlinking of sites within your own domain. Google can perceive interlinking between domains, because they are on the same IP, as link spam, and this is an action that they can and will penalize." (Update:he meant to say don't interlink multiple domains on the same IP. Internal linking should be fine.)
Matt's approach to link building was more of a philosophical one than straight tips and tricks. However, when taken with the advice that appeared in the previous link building articles, you have a fairly comprehensive list of ideas to keep in mind when designing a website, not just attempting to build links.
Making your content valuable enough to be linked to seems to be the emphasis of all speakers well, that and link relevancy. Of course, the first part is a little easier to control than the second. The thinking seems to be: if you build it (quality content), they will come (links pointing to your site).
Though he was philosophical about how to build links, Matt was specific on things to AVOID when link building. One of the first things he said while speaking on what to avoid was controlling whom YOU link to. Make sure that that any site you are linking to is relevant, quality site. Again, no shady SEO users should appear. He also stated another obvious point: avoid hidden links. Be sure and place your links where site visitors can find them.
Matt also suggests avoiding links coming from or pointing to guest books. These are notorious havens for spammers. He did not say whether or not Google discounted these links, but because he warned about them, you can guess that they don't give much relevance to these types of links.
He also mentioned to avoid buying anything that will artificially boost PageRank. Reading Google's Information for Webmasters Page discusses why this is something that should be avoided: 'Linking schemes do not increase a given site's PageRank, and will often do a site more harm than good. Many sites that advertise link-sharing programs not only offer little value, but will distribute your email address without your permission, resulting in an increased volume of unwanted mail to you."
Another area that should be avoided is interlinking of sites within your own domain. Google can perceive interlinking between domains, because they are on the same IP, as link spam, and this is an action that they can and will penalize." (Update:he meant to say don't interlink multiple domains on the same IP. Internal linking should be fine.)
Thursday, August 05, 2004
Google primer presentation
This was the keynote address at Search and Collaboration Seminar 2004 | Introduction 2004 in Haifa. PDF Paper
Wednesday, August 04, 2004
Different search strings for Totaltravel.co.uk Google Search: allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk
Google Search: allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk: "
Web Results 1 - 2 of about 31,500 for allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk"
repeat the search with the omitted results included: about 47,400 for allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk
Google Search: site:www.totaltravel.co.uk
Web Results 1 - 2 of about 31,500 for allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk"
repeat the search with the omitted results included: about 47,400 for allinurl:www.totaltravel.co.uk -www.directory.co.uk
Google Search: site:www.totaltravel.co.uk
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Monday, August 02, 2004
August 2009: How Google beat Amazon and Ebay to the Semantic Web (Ftrain.com)
August 2009: How Google beat Amazon and Ebay to the Semantic Web (Ftrain.com): "Google allowed you to search for buyers and sellers, and then, using a service shamelessly copied from the then-ubiquitous PayPal, handled the transaction for a 1.75% charge. Sure, people could send checks or contact one another and avoid the 1.75%, but for most items that was your best bet - fast and cheap. 1.75% plus advertising and a global reach, and you can count on millions flowing smoothly through your accounts. "
Tuesday, July 27, 2004
show all 28,500 Google Search: allinurl:www totaltravel co.uk
Google Search: allinurl:www totaltravel co.uk: " 1 - 100 of about 28,500 "
19,400 Google Search: allinurl:www totaltravel co.uk
Google Search: allinurl:www totaltravel co.uk: "Results 1 - 9 of about 19,400 "
Google's 15 minutes of fame inc history of search related share prices...
Google's 15 minutes of fame: "Google's 15 minutes of fame Commentary: Atypical price for an atypical company "
By Bambi Francisco, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 9:35 PM ET Jul 26, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- So, you want to buy Google at a valuation of some $32 billion and a price-to-earnings multiple of 100-plus?
That was the question with which investors were left after Google's latest filing Monday, in which it said it would offer 24.6 million shares for between $108 and $135 each.
For a company that wants to be accessible to small investors, the price is a psychological deterrent. But investors will have at least a couple of weeks to determine whether they want to bid at that price.
If you're one of the lucky 800 or so big-time investors invited to Google's road-show luncheon at the Waldorf-Astoria in Manhattan on Tuesday, you'll even get to rub elbows with the Google executives. The official IPO launch is slated for the week of August 9, according to investors looking at the deal.
I'd imagine that anyone interested in investments might find it a bit hard to decline any of these shares if they were offered.
Why is Google apparently worth it to some?
For one thing, Google's more profitable than Yahoo. In Google's latest S-1, the company said it had an operating profit of $326 million in the first six months of this year. That was earned on sales of $1.3 billion. By comparison, Yahoo posted a smaller operating profit of $281 million on a larger revenue base, $1.59 billion.
Google's also been the top-rated search engine, ahead of Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT).
Additionally, Google's search revenue grew 7.5 percent in the second quarter from the first quarter. For its part, Yahoo said that its search sales were essentially flat in the same period.
Another positive note for Google is the pent-up demand that may be present by the time Google goes public, especially after the recent correction in Net shares.
Reasons not to buy
But Google is expensive.
Its float alone is larger than the market caps of Ask Jeeves (ASKJ), InfoSpace (INSP) and FindWhat (FWHT) combined.
At Google's latest price, it's estimated to earn $1.26 per share on sales of $1.8 billion, according to Mark Mahaney, an analyst at American Technology Research. That means, at Google's midpoint proposed IPO price, it will trade around 96 times 2004 earnings. Yahoo is expected to earn 33 cents per share. At its current price of $28, it's trading at around 85 times this year's earnings.
I question whether Google deserves such a premium multiple.
First of all, there is a huge overhang of shares. Google is making 10 percent of its company available to shareholders. That means for every 1 share owned, there are nine waiting to be sold down the road.
Secondly, at such a multiple, it's unclear whether the bankers have priced in future erosion of margins due to competitors, like Microsoft and Yahoo. We'll hear some words from Mr. Softy about its push into search this Thursday at its analyst day.
It's unclear how formidable Microsoft will be in search. But clearly, Microsoft has the money to make a difference and the know-how to be a monopoly. Google has yet to be the de facto Web search tool for anyone.
As for Google's ability to compete with Yahoo, it's unclear whether Google has the wherewithal to move into what will be the sweet spot in online advertising: Branded advertising.
This appears to be the next phase of growth, most observers agree. Sure, when Yahoo went public at a market valuation of $334 million in 1996, it generated sales of $19 million in that year. But sales also rocketed 252 percent to $67 million by the following. Those aren't the type of growth rates a mature company like Google is experiencing.
Search explosion was in 2003. What will be the driver in 2005? If it's brand advertising, search engines don't have what brand marketers want: stickiness.
According to comScore, the average time spent on Yahoo is 4.4 hours in a month compared to 22 minutes for Google. Time Warner's (TWX) AOL seems to keep users on its properties for 6 hours in a month, on average.
15 minutes
Yahoo has both search and branded advertising. What will it cost Google to maintain its attractiveness to consumers and investors? It's already taking the steps to emulate Yahoo by offering Gmail.
But does it know the media business like Yahoo does?
It seems that every three years, a new search engine takes the lead and has its 15 minutes of fame.
Alta Vista, the pioneer of Web searches, learned the hard way. Its technology started in 1995 inside Digital Equipment and was the leading search product in the early commercial days of the Internet in 1996. That was before DEC was sold to Compaq Computer and Compaq was sold to Hewlett-Packard, Now, Alta Vista's part of Overture. See related story.
Inktomi was a 1999 darling that inflated to a market value of roughly $30 billion during the bubble heyday. Now, it's part of Yahoo (YHOO).
Google, which had 10 employees in 1999, grew to be the most widely recognized search brand in the world by 2002. See Web searchers doing the Google.
But now Microsoft (MSFT) is brewing up its own "secret sauce" of algorithms to search Web pages.
What will happen by 2005 is anyone's guess, but here's a look at what has happened so far:
1996: Search goes public
(all IPOs are split-adjusted prices. Source: Dealogic)
Jan. 1996: Google founders collaborate on search engine called BackRub
April 1, 1996: Lycos goes public at $4 a share
April 4, 1996: Excite goes public at $8.50 a share
April 11, 1996: Yahoo prices at $1.83.
1998 and 1999: New batch of search engines go public and Google is born
1998: Google opens its doors (answers 10,000 search queries Oct. 7, 1998)
June 1998: Inktomi goes public at $4.15 (market cap at IPO was $370 million)
December 1998: InfoSpace (INSP) goes public at $15
May 1999: Excite merges with At Home for $6.5 billion
June 1999: GoTo.com goes public at $15. Company changes name eventually to Overture Services.
June 1999: Ask Jeeves (ASKJ) goes public at $14
August 1999: LookSmart (LOOK) goes public at $12
August 1999: CMGI buys 83 percent of Alta Vista for $2.3 billion in stock, plus bonds
2000 and 2001: More consolidation and bankruptcy
Oct. 30, 2000: Terra Networks (TRLY) buys Lycos for $46.40 per share, or $5.1 billion.
Sept. 28, 2001: ExciteAtHome goes bankrupt. See story.
2002: Back to search roots
Nov. 13, 2002: Alta Vista relaunches its search site. See Alta Vista's constant search.
December 2002: Yahoo says it'll buy Inktomi for $233 million in cash.
2003: Google accelerates position and portal expansion; Microsoft launches Web crawler; Search gets deeper
March 2003: Google surpasses Yahoo in searches with 1.1 million searches. (source: comScore)
March 4, 2003: Ask Jeeves says it's buying Interactive Search Holdings for $343 million. See full story.
March 11, 2003: Yahoo's maps meet Yellow Pages See Yahoo local
March 29, 2003: Google's Froogle launched See Google's Froogle.
April 7, 2003: Yahoo revamps its search functionalities. See Yahoo returns to search roots.
April 21, 2003: Ask Jeeves unveils its new look. See Ask Jeeves' search gets smarter.
April 28, 2003: Overture completes purchase of Alta Vista for $106 million stock and cash
June 19, 2003: Microsoft tests its own Web crawler. See full story.
July 1, 2003: MSN to recast search to make algorithmic searches more prominent. See MSN to recast search.
Oct. 7, 2003: Yahoo completes purchase of Overture for $2.2 bln in stock and cash.
2004: Google's long awaited IPO
April 29, 2004: Google announces it'll try to raise $2.7 billion through an IPO, offering shares in a Dutch auction. See full story.
So would you buy Google shares at this price? E-mail: Bfrancisco@marketwatch.com Or, you can e-mail me at: Bambi.blogs.com
By Bambi Francisco, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 9:35 PM ET Jul 26, 2004
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- So, you want to buy Google at a valuation of some $32 billion and a price-to-earnings multiple of 100-plus?
That was the question with which investors were left after Google's latest filing Monday, in which it said it would offer 24.6 million shares for between $108 and $135 each.
For a company that wants to be accessible to small investors, the price is a psychological deterrent. But investors will have at least a couple of weeks to determine whether they want to bid at that price.
If you're one of the lucky 800 or so big-time investors invited to Google's road-show luncheon at the Waldorf-Astoria in Manhattan on Tuesday, you'll even get to rub elbows with the Google executives. The official IPO launch is slated for the week of August 9, according to investors looking at the deal.
I'd imagine that anyone interested in investments might find it a bit hard to decline any of these shares if they were offered.
Why is Google apparently worth it to some?
For one thing, Google's more profitable than Yahoo. In Google's latest S-1, the company said it had an operating profit of $326 million in the first six months of this year. That was earned on sales of $1.3 billion. By comparison, Yahoo posted a smaller operating profit of $281 million on a larger revenue base, $1.59 billion.
Google's also been the top-rated search engine, ahead of Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT).
Additionally, Google's search revenue grew 7.5 percent in the second quarter from the first quarter. For its part, Yahoo said that its search sales were essentially flat in the same period.
Another positive note for Google is the pent-up demand that may be present by the time Google goes public, especially after the recent correction in Net shares.
Reasons not to buy
But Google is expensive.
Its float alone is larger than the market caps of Ask Jeeves (ASKJ), InfoSpace (INSP) and FindWhat (FWHT) combined.
At Google's latest price, it's estimated to earn $1.26 per share on sales of $1.8 billion, according to Mark Mahaney, an analyst at American Technology Research. That means, at Google's midpoint proposed IPO price, it will trade around 96 times 2004 earnings. Yahoo is expected to earn 33 cents per share. At its current price of $28, it's trading at around 85 times this year's earnings.
I question whether Google deserves such a premium multiple.
First of all, there is a huge overhang of shares. Google is making 10 percent of its company available to shareholders. That means for every 1 share owned, there are nine waiting to be sold down the road.
Secondly, at such a multiple, it's unclear whether the bankers have priced in future erosion of margins due to competitors, like Microsoft and Yahoo. We'll hear some words from Mr. Softy about its push into search this Thursday at its analyst day.
It's unclear how formidable Microsoft will be in search. But clearly, Microsoft has the money to make a difference and the know-how to be a monopoly. Google has yet to be the de facto Web search tool for anyone.
As for Google's ability to compete with Yahoo, it's unclear whether Google has the wherewithal to move into what will be the sweet spot in online advertising: Branded advertising.
This appears to be the next phase of growth, most observers agree. Sure, when Yahoo went public at a market valuation of $334 million in 1996, it generated sales of $19 million in that year. But sales also rocketed 252 percent to $67 million by the following. Those aren't the type of growth rates a mature company like Google is experiencing.
Search explosion was in 2003. What will be the driver in 2005? If it's brand advertising, search engines don't have what brand marketers want: stickiness.
According to comScore, the average time spent on Yahoo is 4.4 hours in a month compared to 22 minutes for Google. Time Warner's (TWX) AOL seems to keep users on its properties for 6 hours in a month, on average.
15 minutes
Yahoo has both search and branded advertising. What will it cost Google to maintain its attractiveness to consumers and investors? It's already taking the steps to emulate Yahoo by offering Gmail.
But does it know the media business like Yahoo does?
It seems that every three years, a new search engine takes the lead and has its 15 minutes of fame.
Alta Vista, the pioneer of Web searches, learned the hard way. Its technology started in 1995 inside Digital Equipment and was the leading search product in the early commercial days of the Internet in 1996. That was before DEC was sold to Compaq Computer and Compaq was sold to Hewlett-Packard, Now, Alta Vista's part of Overture. See related story.
Inktomi was a 1999 darling that inflated to a market value of roughly $30 billion during the bubble heyday. Now, it's part of Yahoo (YHOO).
Google, which had 10 employees in 1999, grew to be the most widely recognized search brand in the world by 2002. See Web searchers doing the Google.
But now Microsoft (MSFT) is brewing up its own "secret sauce" of algorithms to search Web pages.
What will happen by 2005 is anyone's guess, but here's a look at what has happened so far:
1996: Search goes public
(all IPOs are split-adjusted prices. Source: Dealogic)
Jan. 1996: Google founders collaborate on search engine called BackRub
April 1, 1996: Lycos goes public at $4 a share
April 4, 1996: Excite goes public at $8.50 a share
April 11, 1996: Yahoo prices at $1.83.
1998 and 1999: New batch of search engines go public and Google is born
1998: Google opens its doors (answers 10,000 search queries Oct. 7, 1998)
June 1998: Inktomi goes public at $4.15 (market cap at IPO was $370 million)
December 1998: InfoSpace (INSP) goes public at $15
May 1999: Excite merges with At Home for $6.5 billion
June 1999: GoTo.com goes public at $15. Company changes name eventually to Overture Services.
June 1999: Ask Jeeves (ASKJ) goes public at $14
August 1999: LookSmart (LOOK) goes public at $12
August 1999: CMGI buys 83 percent of Alta Vista for $2.3 billion in stock, plus bonds
2000 and 2001: More consolidation and bankruptcy
Oct. 30, 2000: Terra Networks (TRLY) buys Lycos for $46.40 per share, or $5.1 billion.
Sept. 28, 2001: ExciteAtHome goes bankrupt. See story.
2002: Back to search roots
Nov. 13, 2002: Alta Vista relaunches its search site. See Alta Vista's constant search.
December 2002: Yahoo says it'll buy Inktomi for $233 million in cash.
2003: Google accelerates position and portal expansion; Microsoft launches Web crawler; Search gets deeper
March 2003: Google surpasses Yahoo in searches with 1.1 million searches. (source: comScore)
March 4, 2003: Ask Jeeves says it's buying Interactive Search Holdings for $343 million. See full story.
March 11, 2003: Yahoo's maps meet Yellow Pages See Yahoo local
March 29, 2003: Google's Froogle launched See Google's Froogle.
April 7, 2003: Yahoo revamps its search functionalities. See Yahoo returns to search roots.
April 21, 2003: Ask Jeeves unveils its new look. See Ask Jeeves' search gets smarter.
April 28, 2003: Overture completes purchase of Alta Vista for $106 million stock and cash
June 19, 2003: Microsoft tests its own Web crawler. See full story.
July 1, 2003: MSN to recast search to make algorithmic searches more prominent. See MSN to recast search.
Oct. 7, 2003: Yahoo completes purchase of Overture for $2.2 bln in stock and cash.
2004: Google's long awaited IPO
April 29, 2004: Google announces it'll try to raise $2.7 billion through an IPO, offering shares in a Dutch auction. See full story.
So would you buy Google shares at this price? E-mail: Bfrancisco@marketwatch.com Or, you can e-mail me at: Bambi.blogs.com
Monday, July 26, 2004
Google Closes Doors on One Nation
Search Engine News :: Search Engine Lowdown: Google Closes Doors on One Nation: "Google Closes Doors on One Nation
Those poor citizens of Azerbaijan can no longer claim to have a Google all to themselves. According to media powerhouse 'BakuToday' (yes, my tongue is in my cheek), Google has decided not to continue with their www.google.az domain.
Google was the most popular international search engine in Azerbaijan. It is translated in Azerbaijani, and fully supports Azerbaijani language standards (Unicode and UTF-8). "
Those poor citizens of Azerbaijan can no longer claim to have a Google all to themselves. According to media powerhouse 'BakuToday' (yes, my tongue is in my cheek), Google has decided not to continue with their www.google.az domain.
Google was the most popular international search engine in Azerbaijan. It is translated in Azerbaijani, and fully supports Azerbaijani language standards (Unicode and UTF-8). "
Tuesday, July 20, 2004
Google to post quarterly results | CNET News.com
Google to post quarterly results | CNET News.com: "Google is expected to give an indication of how much it expects bidders to pay for its shares in an updated initial public offering filing as soon as this week,"
Google Crawls Into Academia
Google Crawls Into Academia: "Google and DSpace have embarked on a pilot program designed to allow universities to better manage their intellectual output. "
Saturday, July 17, 2004
Guardian Unlimited | Online | All eyes on Blinkx the woman taking on Google
Guardian Unlimited | Online | All eyes on Blinkx: "All eyes on Blinkx
Victor Keegan spoke to the woman taking on Google
Thursday July 15, 2004
The Guardian
Less than a month ago, Kathy Rittweger went to the office of the technology magazine Business 2.0 in San Francisco to demonstrate Blinkx, a late entrant to the search engine market. The editor she was meeting brought two other people as he didn't know much about the subject himself.
She left the office at noon, saddened that it had not gone very well. "I thought I did a lousy job. I've never really done this whole PR thing." She retired round the corner to Starbucks with her public relations adviser for a debriefing. He told her to be more provocative in future, not so humble and more proud of what she had accomplished. "He was also convinced we didn't stand a good chance".
But by the time she had got back to her hotel, there was an email from one of the people at the meeting, Om Malik, whom she had never heard of. He said he had "blogged" the item on his website at 12.40pm while she was still commiserating over coffee.
Malik wrote that he had the same tingling sensation watching Blinkx being demonstrated as he had had almost five years ago when two fresh-faced boys called Larry and Sergey had stopped by the offices of Forbes.com to demonstrate something called Google.
Malik's comments were soon picked up by other bloggers and Rittweger started getting a wave of emails and calls, including some from venture capitalists, a breed thought to be in hibernation after the dotcom excesses.
The blog was posted on a Friday, and by the Monday there were 5,000 links to it and people were discussing it all over the world. Since then, there have been 130,000 direct downloads, and many more through users swapping files. This week, the site - which is only launched today - has been recording 6m links or hits a day solely from word-of-mouth publicity.
You would be forgiven for thinking that Rittweger and her British business partner, Suranga Chanratillake, who used to work for the UK search engine company Autonomy, ought to be locked up for even thinking of trying to take on the almighty Google, especially at a time when it and the likes of Microsoft and Yahoo - not to mention dozens of smaller companies - are teeing up for the next battle in the search engine wars.
Blinkx has two selling points. First, it doesn't only search the web but simultaneously scours news sites, emails, attachments and your own hard disk. It does all this unobtrusively in the background until you pass your cursor over icons at the top or bottom of the page, when it reveals a digest of related sites as well as material from Word, Excel or PDF files. If you are working in a word processing document, it provides the same service.
It also searches blogs. This function has just been added because Malik suggested it would be a good thing to do. "I didn't appreciate the significance until he wrote the article and then I thought, 'Right, I get it'," she said disarmingly. Blinkx can also search digital TV on the internet, which, in practice, means video output from the BBC. Why? "Because the BBC posts its digital TV free on the internet."
Both Google and Microsoft are working on unified engines that search your desktop as well as the web, and some others already do it. But Rittweger believes Blinkx is the only one that offers all these facilities including video search now. So the company has a window of opportunity in a market where consumers can switch allegiance with two blinkx of an eyelid.
The second selling point is that, unlike Google, it uses artificial intelligence to rate stories, not page rankings. "What it is trying to say," she explains, "is that all words are not equal in a sentence... Quite critically, if you are looking at a document and trying to figure out what it means, Blinkx reads everything you are reading and sorts out what are the key ideas."
Blinkx's planned business model involves getting advertising revenue from contextual adverts, product channels and white labelling, but she emphasises that the search is independent: it is mathematically based and just looks at words and their context. She adds: "It is clean, but users don't know that so we show our advertisements in a different colour".
Her moment of truth came when doing a project on Japanese tourism a few years ago and found that when she put a page into a search engine, nothing happened because search was limited to 10 words. Later, she met Suranga Chanratillake, who shared her ideas and had the technological expertise to develop them.
Whether they succeed is an open question. It is a tough market to crack because for many users, Google is as good as it gets - and, like Yahoo and Microsoft, it has immense resources. But people are also starting to realise that search engines are mining only a tiny proportion of available knowledge. And loyalty is only as deep as the click of a mouse. files. This week"
Victor Keegan spoke to the woman taking on Google
Thursday July 15, 2004
The Guardian
Less than a month ago, Kathy Rittweger went to the office of the technology magazine Business 2.0 in San Francisco to demonstrate Blinkx, a late entrant to the search engine market. The editor she was meeting brought two other people as he didn't know much about the subject himself.
She left the office at noon, saddened that it had not gone very well. "I thought I did a lousy job. I've never really done this whole PR thing." She retired round the corner to Starbucks with her public relations adviser for a debriefing. He told her to be more provocative in future, not so humble and more proud of what she had accomplished. "He was also convinced we didn't stand a good chance".
But by the time she had got back to her hotel, there was an email from one of the people at the meeting, Om Malik, whom she had never heard of. He said he had "blogged" the item on his website at 12.40pm while she was still commiserating over coffee.
Malik wrote that he had the same tingling sensation watching Blinkx being demonstrated as he had had almost five years ago when two fresh-faced boys called Larry and Sergey had stopped by the offices of Forbes.com to demonstrate something called Google.
Malik's comments were soon picked up by other bloggers and Rittweger started getting a wave of emails and calls, including some from venture capitalists, a breed thought to be in hibernation after the dotcom excesses.
The blog was posted on a Friday, and by the Monday there were 5,000 links to it and people were discussing it all over the world. Since then, there have been 130,000 direct downloads, and many more through users swapping files. This week, the site - which is only launched today - has been recording 6m links or hits a day solely from word-of-mouth publicity.
You would be forgiven for thinking that Rittweger and her British business partner, Suranga Chanratillake, who used to work for the UK search engine company Autonomy, ought to be locked up for even thinking of trying to take on the almighty Google, especially at a time when it and the likes of Microsoft and Yahoo - not to mention dozens of smaller companies - are teeing up for the next battle in the search engine wars.
Blinkx has two selling points. First, it doesn't only search the web but simultaneously scours news sites, emails, attachments and your own hard disk. It does all this unobtrusively in the background until you pass your cursor over icons at the top or bottom of the page, when it reveals a digest of related sites as well as material from Word, Excel or PDF files. If you are working in a word processing document, it provides the same service.
It also searches blogs. This function has just been added because Malik suggested it would be a good thing to do. "I didn't appreciate the significance until he wrote the article and then I thought, 'Right, I get it'," she said disarmingly. Blinkx can also search digital TV on the internet, which, in practice, means video output from the BBC. Why? "Because the BBC posts its digital TV free on the internet."
Both Google and Microsoft are working on unified engines that search your desktop as well as the web, and some others already do it. But Rittweger believes Blinkx is the only one that offers all these facilities including video search now. So the company has a window of opportunity in a market where consumers can switch allegiance with two blinkx of an eyelid.
The second selling point is that, unlike Google, it uses artificial intelligence to rate stories, not page rankings. "What it is trying to say," she explains, "is that all words are not equal in a sentence... Quite critically, if you are looking at a document and trying to figure out what it means, Blinkx reads everything you are reading and sorts out what are the key ideas."
Blinkx's planned business model involves getting advertising revenue from contextual adverts, product channels and white labelling, but she emphasises that the search is independent: it is mathematically based and just looks at words and their context. She adds: "It is clean, but users don't know that so we show our advertisements in a different colour".
Her moment of truth came when doing a project on Japanese tourism a few years ago and found that when she put a page into a search engine, nothing happened because search was limited to 10 words. Later, she met Suranga Chanratillake, who shared her ideas and had the technological expertise to develop them.
Whether they succeed is an open question. It is a tough market to crack because for many users, Google is as good as it gets - and, like Yahoo and Microsoft, it has immense resources. But people are also starting to realise that search engines are mining only a tiny proportion of available knowledge. And loyalty is only as deep as the click of a mouse. files. This week"
Search Engine News :: Search Engine Lowdown: Google's Patrick Keane Afraid of Search Engine Optimizers
Search Engine News :: Search Engine Lowdown: Google's Patrick Keane Afraid of Search Engine Optimizers: "However, don't you think the process should be a two-way thing? Let me get to my point...
Google's head of sales advertising, Patrick Keane, just finished a presentation here at AD:TECH. The usual stuff, with Google keeping to it's 'quite period' by having some of its AdWords customers do the talking. However, Patrick Keane was asked about whether SEO companies can really help a company to get better positioning on Google and the search engines [tick...tick]. Waiting for Patrick's response, I felt confident that, despite my reservations about SEMPO, they had at least been able to educate the key figures at Google. A positive response about SEO was surely about to leave Patrick's 'SEC regulated' lips. [tick...tick...tick...]
Oh, how I wish it had. [tick....] Patrick basically replied that there is no way to improve your rankings on Google and that any claims by a SEO company were false. [tick...tick] He suggested that a few simple 'design changes' were all that could be done and that a SEO firm wasn't needed. [tick....BOOM!!!!]
Uh, hello? Isn't Google sponsoring SES in San Jose next month...the same SES that has dozens and dozens of sessions on SEO and how to improve your ranking. Are the 1300+ clients that WebSourced assists, and the many thousands more using other SEO companies, simply imagining the great results they are getting on Google, Yahoo and other search engines? If it were not for us SEO's there would be no hype about Google's IPO right now. Granted, paid search is the revenue generating aspect of search, but who do you think created the whole search engine buzz in the first place? Us SEO's that's who! And many of "
Google's head of sales advertising, Patrick Keane, just finished a presentation here at AD:TECH. The usual stuff, with Google keeping to it's 'quite period' by having some of its AdWords customers do the talking. However, Patrick Keane was asked about whether SEO companies can really help a company to get better positioning on Google and the search engines [tick...tick]. Waiting for Patrick's response, I felt confident that, despite my reservations about SEMPO, they had at least been able to educate the key figures at Google. A positive response about SEO was surely about to leave Patrick's 'SEC regulated' lips. [tick...tick...tick...]
Oh, how I wish it had. [tick....] Patrick basically replied that there is no way to improve your rankings on Google and that any claims by a SEO company were false. [tick...tick] He suggested that a few simple 'design changes' were all that could be done and that a SEO firm wasn't needed. [tick....BOOM!!!!]
Uh, hello? Isn't Google sponsoring SES in San Jose next month...the same SES that has dozens and dozens of sessions on SEO and how to improve your ranking. Are the 1300+ clients that WebSourced assists, and the many thousands more using other SEO companies, simply imagining the great results they are getting on Google, Yahoo and other search engines? If it were not for us SEO's there would be no hype about Google's IPO right now. Granted, paid search is the revenue generating aspect of search, but who do you think created the whole search engine buzz in the first place? Us SEO's that's who! And many of "
Search Engine News :: Search Engine Lowdown: Google's Patrick Keane Afraid of Search Engine Optimizers
Search Engine News :: Search Engine Lowdown: Google's Patrick Keane Afraid of Search Engine Optimizers: "post something controversial on here. If it's about Google, you can bet that they are are on the phone to me to discuss their position and make sure that I am 'educated'"
However, don't you think the process should be a two-way thing? Let me get to my point...
Google's head of sales advertising, Patrick Keane, just finished a presentation here at AD:TECH. The usual stuff, with Google keeping to it's "quite period" by having some of its AdWords customers do the talking. However, Patrick Keane was asked about whether SEO companies can really help a company to get better positioning on Google and the search engines [tick...tick]. Waiting for Patrick's response, I felt confident that, despite my reservations about SEMPO, they had at least been able to educate the key figures at Google. A positive response about SEO was surely about to leave Patrick's "SEC regulated" lips. [tick...tick...tick...]
Oh, how I wish it had. [tick....] Patrick basically replied that there is no way to improve your rankings on Google and that any claims by a SEO company were false. [tick...tick] He suggested that a few simple "design changes" were all that could be done and that a SEO firm wasn't needed. [tick....BOOM!!!!]
Uh, hello? Isn't Google sponsoring SES in San Jose next month...the same SES that has dozens and dozens of sessions on SEO and how to improve your ranking. Are the 1300+ clients that WebSourced assists, and the many thousands more using other SEO companies, simply imagining the great results they are getting on Google, Yahoo and other search engines? If it were not for us SEO's there would be no hype about Google's IPO right now. Granted, paid search is the revenue generating aspect of search, but who do you think created the whole search engine buzz in the first place? Us SEO's that's who! And many of us are also commanding the paid search budgets of some of the world's largest companies.
Search engine optimization is real...it works...it can help you get to the top of Google. There may be some bad apples, who make totally ridiculous promises, but you get that with any industry. Please, please, someone, anyone at Google, take Mr. Keane aside and quietly remind him that search is not just about paid search and agencies. SEO may be the "red-headed step-child" as far as Google is concerned, but we are still family and deserve the respect!
- Search Engine News by Andy Beal | News Link | Others' Thoughts (18)
However, don't you think the process should be a two-way thing? Let me get to my point...
Google's head of sales advertising, Patrick Keane, just finished a presentation here at AD:TECH. The usual stuff, with Google keeping to it's "quite period" by having some of its AdWords customers do the talking. However, Patrick Keane was asked about whether SEO companies can really help a company to get better positioning on Google and the search engines [tick...tick]. Waiting for Patrick's response, I felt confident that, despite my reservations about SEMPO, they had at least been able to educate the key figures at Google. A positive response about SEO was surely about to leave Patrick's "SEC regulated" lips. [tick...tick...tick...]
Oh, how I wish it had. [tick....] Patrick basically replied that there is no way to improve your rankings on Google and that any claims by a SEO company were false. [tick...tick] He suggested that a few simple "design changes" were all that could be done and that a SEO firm wasn't needed. [tick....BOOM!!!!]
Uh, hello? Isn't Google sponsoring SES in San Jose next month...the same SES that has dozens and dozens of sessions on SEO and how to improve your ranking. Are the 1300+ clients that WebSourced assists, and the many thousands more using other SEO companies, simply imagining the great results they are getting on Google, Yahoo and other search engines? If it were not for us SEO's there would be no hype about Google's IPO right now. Granted, paid search is the revenue generating aspect of search, but who do you think created the whole search engine buzz in the first place? Us SEO's that's who! And many of us are also commanding the paid search budgets of some of the world's largest companies.
Search engine optimization is real...it works...it can help you get to the top of Google. There may be some bad apples, who make totally ridiculous promises, but you get that with any industry. Please, please, someone, anyone at Google, take Mr. Keane aside and quietly remind him that search is not just about paid search and agencies. SEO may be the "red-headed step-child" as far as Google is concerned, but we are still family and deserve the respect!
- Search Engine News by Andy Beal | News Link | Others' Thoughts (18)
Thursday, July 15, 2004
Google tools WebmasterBrain | Online Keyword Suggestion Tool
WebmasterBrain | Online Keyword Suggestion Tool: "Tools "Speaking of Google, one of the most useful tools for Web
Developers is at WebmasterBrain.com. Check out Prog (formerly
Proogle) at http://www.webmasterbrain.com/proogle/ which
displays Google search results with additional details, namely,
PageRank and incoming links.
Developers is at WebmasterBrain.com. Check out Prog (formerly
Proogle) at http://www.webmasterbrain.com/proogle/ which
displays Google search results with additional details, namely,
PageRank and incoming links.
Yahoo! News - Google Toolbar Can Browse By Name
Yahoo! News - Google Toolbar Can Browse By Name Google Toolbar's new Browse by Name feature, introduced on July 14, takes the concept of searching from the browser Address Bar and kicks it up a notch. All you do is type the name or description of the site you're looking for. If there's a strong match, Google will go straight to that page. For example, "new york times", "ben and jerry", "john kerry" and "strong bad" all zoom directly to the appropriate page. When there's no single obvious match, you haven't lost anything –- you still get a standard Google search results page. The functionality may remind some of the RealNames service (which shut down in 2002). Web sites could pay to register a simple phrase with RealNames as an alternative point of access for their URL. However, sites need not and cannot register for Browse by Name. If a page's relevance to the search phrase is significantly higher than all others, it will be selected. The process is dynamic –- if at a later time a different site's relevance skyrockets, then that site will be selected. There's no connection with Supported Links or AdWords, and sites cannot pay for placement in Browse by Name.
Current Google Toolbar users will be updated automatically over the next few weeks. Those who have already configured Google as their default search engine will have Browse by Name turned on by default. Others can enable it from the Options dialog. If you don't want to wait for the automated update, just download the toolbar from http://toolbar.google.com. Note that during installation you must choose whether or not to allow the toolbar to send non-personal information about the sites you visit back to Google –- if you choose otherwise, you can't get PageRank data in the toolbar. However, you need not enable advanced features to use Browse by Name.
Current Google Toolbar users will be updated automatically over the next few weeks. Those who have already configured Google as their default search engine will have Browse by Name turned on by default. Others can enable it from the Options dialog. If you don't want to wait for the automated update, just download the toolbar from http://toolbar.google.com. Note that during installation you must choose whether or not to allow the toolbar to send non-personal information about the sites you visit back to Google –- if you choose otherwise, you can't get PageRank data in the toolbar. However, you need not enable advanced features to use Browse by Name.
Google adds audio and video clips search
Google, currently in a quiet period in the run-up to its much-anticipated public stock offering, is likely to make quite a bit of noise by adding audio and video clips to its search services, according to a published report.
Company founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page "made no secret" of plans to add multimedia while attending the annual Allen & Co.-sponsored retreat for media executives in Sun Valley, Idaho, last week, the New York Post reported. A spokeswoman for Mountain View, Calif.-based Google could not confirm the plan, the paper reported.
Immediate speculation raised the idea Google would go beyond radio and TV clips and enter the online music business, selling downloads of music files. "You can't ignore it. There is tons of money to be made off of music," Danny Sullivan, editor of searchenginewatch.com, told the Post.
Audio and video search is already available through Yahoo's (YHOO) AltaVista and America Online's (TWX) Singingfish.com.
Company founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page "made no secret" of plans to add multimedia while attending the annual Allen & Co.-sponsored retreat for media executives in Sun Valley, Idaho, last week, the New York Post reported. A spokeswoman for Mountain View, Calif.-based Google could not confirm the plan, the paper reported.
Immediate speculation raised the idea Google would go beyond radio and TV clips and enter the online music business, selling downloads of music files. "You can't ignore it. There is tons of money to be made off of music," Danny Sullivan, editor of searchenginewatch.com, told the Post.
Audio and video search is already available through Yahoo's (YHOO) AltaVista and America Online's (TWX) Singingfish.com.
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
Google registers to list on Nasdaq | CNET News.com
Google registers to list on Nasdaq | CNET News.com: "Google has registered to be listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange for its upcoming $2.7 billion initial public offering, it said in a regulatory filing Monday. "
Friday, July 09, 2004
Wired News: Single Post Wins Google Contest
Wired News: Single Post Wins Google Contest: "Dash became the overall winner by virtue of a single post on his blog in which he asked his readers to link from their own sites. Countless numbers did and -- after his very late entry assumed the top Google spot shortly after the competition's first round ended -- Dash was never seriously challenged.
'The impetus (was) for me, on a fluke, to say, 'Hey, I don't want these guys who do link spamming to win the contest,'' said Dash"
The contest, sponsored by Australian affiliate marketing company DarkBlue and SearchGuild.com, was designed to spotlight the various techniques used by search engine optimizers to boost sites' Google results. Those results are often a key factor in businesses' fortunes.
But Google is known for frequently changing its ranking methods, largely in an attempt to foil people who seek to manipulate its system with new tricks to improve their placement. Some charge that, partly as a result of these repeated adjustments to its ranking methodology, Google doesn't always return the most relevant results.
Nevertheless, Chris Ridings, the competition's organizer, told Wired News at the time of the first-round judging that it's easier for people to claim they can outfox Google than to actually demonstrate their prowess. The competition, he said, provides a stage for search optimization experts to show how strong particular ranking techniques really are.
To Dash, then, winning the flat-screen television awarded to the second-round victor was testament to the power of good content and a longstanding online presence.
"A lot of people are trying to increase their page rank unethically," said Dash. "I think if we show them (that) the best thing you can do is to write really good material, then hopefully, they'll spend their time doing that (instead of) spending time coming up with ways to graffiti other people's pages."
Furthermore, Dash maintained, his victory proves one thing: That the Web is a meritocracy.
"A page that's read by people instead of robots is going to do better," he said.
Have a comment on this article? Send it
More stories written by Daniel Terdiman
Page 1 of 1
Related Stories
A Contest to Outwit Google Jun. 08, 2004
Kerry Gets Google-Bombed May. 24, 2004
Dropping the Bomb on Google May. 11, 2004
How the Word Gets Around May. 07, 2004
Merchants Bemoan Google Rule Mar. 27, 2004
Spammers Clog Up the Blogs Oct. 24, 2003
Search Results Clogged by Blogs May. 16, 2003
Wired News RSS headline feeds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ads by Google White Knight UK
Compare UK prices at different
retailers and save a packet!
www.dealtime.co.uk White Knight
Compare Bargain Prices.
Save Time and Money.
www.kelkoo.co.uk White Knight at Tesco
Free delivery and top brands.
1,000 Extra ClubCard points in July
www.tesco.com/electrical Save up to 40%
On high street prices! Over 5000
home & kitchen appliances
electricshop.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wired News: Staff | Contact Us | Advertising | RSS | Blogs | Subscribe
We are translated daily into Spanish, Portuguese, and Japanese
© Copyright 2004, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Lycos Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions
'The impetus (was) for me, on a fluke, to say, 'Hey, I don't want these guys who do link spamming to win the contest,'' said Dash"
The contest, sponsored by Australian affiliate marketing company DarkBlue and SearchGuild.com, was designed to spotlight the various techniques used by search engine optimizers to boost sites' Google results. Those results are often a key factor in businesses' fortunes.
But Google is known for frequently changing its ranking methods, largely in an attempt to foil people who seek to manipulate its system with new tricks to improve their placement. Some charge that, partly as a result of these repeated adjustments to its ranking methodology, Google doesn't always return the most relevant results.
Nevertheless, Chris Ridings, the competition's organizer, told Wired News at the time of the first-round judging that it's easier for people to claim they can outfox Google than to actually demonstrate their prowess. The competition, he said, provides a stage for search optimization experts to show how strong particular ranking techniques really are.
To Dash, then, winning the flat-screen television awarded to the second-round victor was testament to the power of good content and a longstanding online presence.
"A lot of people are trying to increase their page rank unethically," said Dash. "I think if we show them (that) the best thing you can do is to write really good material, then hopefully, they'll spend their time doing that (instead of) spending time coming up with ways to graffiti other people's pages."
Furthermore, Dash maintained, his victory proves one thing: That the Web is a meritocracy.
"A page that's read by people instead of robots is going to do better," he said.
Have a comment on this article? Send it
More stories written by Daniel Terdiman
Page 1 of 1
Related Stories
A Contest to Outwit Google Jun. 08, 2004
Kerry Gets Google-Bombed May. 24, 2004
Dropping the Bomb on Google May. 11, 2004
How the Word Gets Around May. 07, 2004
Merchants Bemoan Google Rule Mar. 27, 2004
Spammers Clog Up the Blogs Oct. 24, 2003
Search Results Clogged by Blogs May. 16, 2003
Wired News RSS headline feeds
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ads by Google White Knight UK
Compare UK prices at different
retailers and save a packet!
www.dealtime.co.uk White Knight
Compare Bargain Prices.
Save Time and Money.
www.kelkoo.co.uk White Knight at Tesco
Free delivery and top brands.
1,000 Extra ClubCard points in July
www.tesco.com/electrical Save up to 40%
On high street prices! Over 5000
home & kitchen appliances
electricshop.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wired News: Staff | Contact Us | Advertising | RSS | Blogs | Subscribe
We are translated daily into Spanish, Portuguese, and Japanese
© Copyright 2004, Lycos, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Lycos Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions
Google trademarks targeted by kids' site Googles - Best Practices Search Engine Forums
Google trademarks targeted by kids' site Googles - Best Practices Search Engine Forums: "apparently there's a children's site called Googles.com that owns the Trademark for the word Google and there's a suit brewing over it.
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Stelor Productions, the operator of a children's Web site called Googles.com, said on Wednesday it has launched trademark proceedings against Web search leader Google Inc., which is preparing a much-awaited initial public offering.
Stelor, based in Darnestown, Maryland, said it filed two separate actions against Google with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Stelor, which charges that Google's mark is confusingly similar to its own, is opposing Google's trademark application to cover a 'long list of 'Google' goods and services, including children's books, stickers and children's clothing.'
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsChanne...pe=internetNews"
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Stelor Productions, the operator of a children's Web site called Googles.com, said on Wednesday it has launched trademark proceedings against Web search leader Google Inc., which is preparing a much-awaited initial public offering.
Stelor, based in Darnestown, Maryland, said it filed two separate actions against Google with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Stelor, which charges that Google's mark is confusingly similar to its own, is opposing Google's trademark application to cover a 'long list of 'Google' goods and services, including children's books, stickers and children's clothing.'
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsChanne...pe=internetNews"
Thursday, July 08, 2004
Google Filters and Avoiding their Screens
Google Filters and Avoiding their Screens:
"Possible Link Related Filters"
Identical link text
Recripricol links damped
Links pages/ guest books filtered
Interlinking on same IP filtered: Many observers have noticed a cross linking filter resulting from cross linking together too many sites from the same server and especially from the same c level block. A c level block is the part of a website address in the third section. Example: 123.123.xxx.123 xxx = c level There is some belief that the threshold trigger for that filter is about 20 linked sites.
Duplicate content may not only trigger a filter, but sites that contain a large number of pages that are similar in content might be targeted.
The sandbox filter allegedly works this way. A new site will receive a fresh site bonus from Google and rank highly. Following that initial blush with fame and fortune, the site will drop in the search rankings, and drop, and then drop some more. That is where the alleged sandbox occurs.
Once in the sandbox, the site will be anywhere from two to four months rising in the SERPs to a respectable position. During that sandbox period, regardless of the number and quality of inbound links and the PageRank, that site will not rank well at all. It is thought that gaining too many links too quickly might be part of the reason for the sandbox. On the other hand, building up a domain with incoming links prior to site launch may help avoid the sandbox entirely.
"Possible Link Related Filters"
Identical link text
Recripricol links damped
Links pages/ guest books filtered
Interlinking on same IP filtered: Many observers have noticed a cross linking filter resulting from cross linking together too many sites from the same server and especially from the same c level block. A c level block is the part of a website address in the third section. Example: 123.123.xxx.123 xxx = c level There is some belief that the threshold trigger for that filter is about 20 linked sites.
Duplicate content may not only trigger a filter, but sites that contain a large number of pages that are similar in content might be targeted.
The sandbox filter allegedly works this way. A new site will receive a fresh site bonus from Google and rank highly. Following that initial blush with fame and fortune, the site will drop in the search rankings, and drop, and then drop some more. That is where the alleged sandbox occurs.
Once in the sandbox, the site will be anywhere from two to four months rising in the SERPs to a respectable position. During that sandbox period, regardless of the number and quality of inbound links and the PageRank, that site will not rank well at all. It is thought that gaining too many links too quickly might be part of the reason for the sandbox. On the other hand, building up a domain with incoming links prior to site launch may help avoid the sandbox entirely.
Wednesday, July 07, 2004
Google Bans Traffic Power and it's Clients
Google Bans Traffic Power and it's Clients: "GoogleGuy recently broke his silence to confirm that Google has taken action against an SEO firm and it's clients for spammy techniques. The SEO company convinced some its clients to use javascript redirects and place hidden links to doorway pages created by the firm. GoogleGuy explains:
I believe that one SEO had convinced clients either to put spammy Javascript mouseover redirects, doorway pages that link to other sites, or both on their clients' sites. That can lead to clients' sites being flagged as spam in addition to the doorway domains that the SEO set up.
GoogleGuy later reassured webmasters that those who use javascript mousover to place text in the status bar do not need to worry about beeing banned."
I believe that one SEO had convinced clients either to put spammy Javascript mouseover redirects, doorway pages that link to other sites, or both on their clients' sites. That can lead to clients' sites being flagged as spam in addition to the doorway domains that the SEO set up.
GoogleGuy later reassured webmasters that those who use javascript mousover to place text in the status bar do not need to worry about beeing banned."
SearchEngineWatch Forums - Alt Attributes Appearing as Anchor Text in Text-only Cache
SearchEngineWatch Forums - Alt Attributes Appearing as Anchor Text in Text-only Cache: "Regarding the internal links (i.e. company logo that links back to the same page with same alt text), I have a solution that works well on dynamic sites.
On some of my dynamic sites, when I do an allinurl:www.domain.com site:www.domain.com most the results have that 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.' message.
The reason some of my sites had this was because the content closest to the top of the page was the alt tag of the logo that linked back to the homepage. All the pages had the same header with same text at the top.
What I did was change the alternative text to read the same as the page title for each unique page. Now the alt text is different at the top and no more messages like 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.'
Also, I do not have the same alternative text with a link back to the same page on every page. Not that I feel having the same text linking to the same page over and over again is a bad thing. I only did this because I hated getting 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.'"
On some of my dynamic sites, when I do an allinurl:www.domain.com site:www.domain.com most the results have that 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.' message.
The reason some of my sites had this was because the content closest to the top of the page was the alt tag of the logo that linked back to the homepage. All the pages had the same header with same text at the top.
What I did was change the alternative text to read the same as the page title for each unique page. Now the alt text is different at the top and no more messages like 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.'
Also, I do not have the same alternative text with a link back to the same page on every page. Not that I feel having the same text linking to the same page over and over again is a bad thing. I only did this because I hated getting 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the # already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included.'"
SearchEngineWatch Forums - Alt Attributes Appearing as Anchor Text in Text-only Cache
SearchEngineWatch Forums - Alt Attributes Appearing as Anchor Text in Text-only Cache: " Some believe that all identical anchor text is fine, while others believe that if the identical phrase goes over a certain percentage of total links it can trip a penalty or filter. I'm one of those that believes it can happen, even just within the site itself without regard to inbound links, though inbounds also could possibly make it even worse if there's a problem. I've had it happen to me; that was one of the factors I identified as causing problems with the site.
Then there's on-page KWD and number of phrase occurences. While for Yahoo a certain ideal density and number of occurences is fine, some believe that for Google it's necessary to whittle down number of occurences of an identical phrase on a page to avoid problems."
Then there's on-page KWD and number of phrase occurences. While for Yahoo a certain ideal density and number of occurences is fine, some believe that for Google it's necessary to whittle down number of occurences of an identical phrase on a page to avoid problems."
Google Pulls Plug on "onmouseover" Pages
Google Pulls Plug on "onmouseover" Pages: "June 23, 2004 (utc 0)
Along with todays PR update, I've also noticed that several sites that used the increasingly popular tactic of creating keyword stuffed entry pages that forward to the true home page via the onmouseover javascript command are no longer found at all in the index.
This tactic has been discussed here for a number of months now. Nice to see that these sites are no longer appearing in the SERPS.
The sites that were doing this seem to have been completely booted from the index, too. Toolbar shows a gray PR. "
Along with todays PR update, I've also noticed that several sites that used the increasingly popular tactic of creating keyword stuffed entry pages that forward to the true home page via the onmouseover javascript command are no longer found at all in the index.
This tactic has been discussed here for a number of months now. Nice to see that these sites are no longer appearing in the SERPS.
The sites that were doing this seem to have been completely booted from the index, too. Toolbar shows a gray PR. "
Monday, July 05, 2004
Google Cracks Down
Google Cracks Down: "According to threads taking place in several popular search engine marketing forums, it seems that Google has adjusted their algorithms to catch a batch of sites using a JavaScript technique known as 'onmouseover.' "
Google Alters AdWords; Sharpens Relevancy Matching - The Search Engine Marketing Weblog - sem.weblogsinc.com
June 30th 2004 Google Alters AdWords; Sharpens Relevancy Matching - The Search Engine Marketing Weblog - sem.weblogsinc.com: "Google sent an e-mail to AdWords advertisers today announcing an algorithmic change to the matching of ads and keywords. For now, the change affects only broad-matched keywords associated with AdWords ads displayed on Google.com, but Google promises the improved relevance will ultimately affect other matching options and other portions of the advertising network... it is clear that broad matching will no longer be as broad. Although Google expresses a somewhat defensive tone in the e-mail and related FAQ, the truth is that this change should be good news for advertisers, especially those who rely on broad matching to eliminate the work of fine-tuning keyword. Here is the example Google uses—"
”For example, an advertiser specializing in Alaskan cruises may have selected cruises (broad-matched) for their campaign. Previously, this keyword may have been disabled due to poor performance on more popular queries such as Hawaiian cruises. Instead of disabling all broad match variations of cruises, we will now show this ad for specific query variations that are more relevant to the ad, such as Alaskan cruises.”
The big question is HOW—how will Google determine niched relevancy in an ad? Is the change really algorithmic as I stated above, or will human resources be used to evaluate ads? (The second possibility is far less likely than the first.)
One implication seems clear: Google is de-emphasizing broad matching in favor of exact matching.
If the keywords are matched more intelligently to start with, the chances of poor performance are lessened. Is it possible that Google is using this after-the-fact determination to refine the matching relevancy? Nobody outside Google knows, but some posters at WebmasterWorld are already seeing changes in ad positioning.
Includes comments by "adwords advisor"
AdWords Announce Improved Ad Relevancy: "Power posting enables you to put in a unique max CPC and URL for a bunch of different keyword tied to one ad. It helps to make things a little faster on the setup but if you want to have unique ads for each keyword ya still have to type all that in. "
”For example, an advertiser specializing in Alaskan cruises may have selected cruises (broad-matched) for their campaign. Previously, this keyword may have been disabled due to poor performance on more popular queries such as Hawaiian cruises. Instead of disabling all broad match variations of cruises, we will now show this ad for specific query variations that are more relevant to the ad, such as Alaskan cruises.”
The big question is HOW—how will Google determine niched relevancy in an ad? Is the change really algorithmic as I stated above, or will human resources be used to evaluate ads? (The second possibility is far less likely than the first.)
One implication seems clear: Google is de-emphasizing broad matching in favor of exact matching.
If the keywords are matched more intelligently to start with, the chances of poor performance are lessened. Is it possible that Google is using this after-the-fact determination to refine the matching relevancy? Nobody outside Google knows, but some posters at WebmasterWorld are already seeing changes in ad positioning.
Includes comments by "adwords advisor"
AdWords Announce Improved Ad Relevancy: "Power posting enables you to put in a unique max CPC and URL for a bunch of different keyword tied to one ad. It helps to make things a little faster on the setup but if you want to have unique ads for each keyword ya still have to type all that in. "
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Google invests in Chinese search | CNET News.com
Google invests in Chinese search | CNET News.com: "Search giant Google and venture capital firm Draper Fisher Jurvetson ePlanet Ventures are among the new investors in Chinese search engine Baidu.com."
Google added to its presence in the Chinese search market earlier this year with its advertising product called AdWords in two Chinese dialects. China has a thriving Internet market with 80 million Internet users--a figure that is projected to jump to 100 million by end of this year, according to China Internet Network Information Center.
Beijing-based Baidu, which launched its search service in 2001, is the most frequently used search engine in China, the company said. It offers a Chinese Web page index of more than 300 million pages, in addition to paid search services
Google added to its presence in the Chinese search market earlier this year with its advertising product called AdWords in two Chinese dialects. China has a thriving Internet market with 80 million Internet users--a figure that is projected to jump to 100 million by end of this year, according to China Internet Network Information Center.
Beijing-based Baidu, which launched its search service in 2001, is the most frequently used search engine in China, the company said. It offers a Chinese Web page index of more than 300 million pages, in addition to paid search services
The Sandbox Effect: Not a Nice Place to Play
The Sandbox Effect: Not a Nice Place to Play: "Named for the phenomenon of new websites being held back, in the search engine results pages (SERPs) by leading search engine Google, the Sandbox Effect has many website owners upset. When a new website is indexed in Google, it often receives what many observers consider to be a new site bonus. The brand new site will rocket to the top of the SERPs charts for a brief, shining moment. From there, it's all downhill."
Many observers believe the purpose of the Sandbox filter is to discourage unscrupulous webmasters from using practices that are against Google's Webmaster Guidelines. Some of the techniques that Google is attempting to disrupt are the use of throw away spam sites to build early traffic, and to slow down the purchase of expired domain names to get a jump start from any pre-existing Google PageRank.
One technique, to avoid spending too long in the sand, is to purchase and register a domain name and park it. By placing the domain on a parked basis, some of the sand time will be run through the Google hourglass, by the time your site is ready for launch. During the time period of your parked domain, you can be preparing content when your site goes public.
Conclusion
Google has placed a dampening filter in its search algorithm, which holds back new sites for three or four months, following the initial fresh site bonus.
The so-called Sandbox Effect places new websites into a brief moratorium, where they will not rank well, if they appear at all, in the SERPs.
Because the Sandbox appears to affect every new website, the onus is on the webmaster to plan for it happening to them. To counter the Sandbox, website owners are encouraged to carefully select their launch date to limit the damage.
During the sojourn in the sand, a tremendous opportunity exists to add content and incoming links to your website. That time period affords you the chance to find additional links, optimize your site, and submit to the many Internet directories.
With a little planning, and using your time in Sandbox hiatus wisely, your site can burst forth from the filter to the top of the rankings for your keywords.
NB UK SITE STARTED SHOWING PR 28 April 2004
Many observers believe the purpose of the Sandbox filter is to discourage unscrupulous webmasters from using practices that are against Google's Webmaster Guidelines. Some of the techniques that Google is attempting to disrupt are the use of throw away spam sites to build early traffic, and to slow down the purchase of expired domain names to get a jump start from any pre-existing Google PageRank.
One technique, to avoid spending too long in the sand, is to purchase and register a domain name and park it. By placing the domain on a parked basis, some of the sand time will be run through the Google hourglass, by the time your site is ready for launch. During the time period of your parked domain, you can be preparing content when your site goes public.
Conclusion
Google has placed a dampening filter in its search algorithm, which holds back new sites for three or four months, following the initial fresh site bonus.
The so-called Sandbox Effect places new websites into a brief moratorium, where they will not rank well, if they appear at all, in the SERPs.
Because the Sandbox appears to affect every new website, the onus is on the webmaster to plan for it happening to them. To counter the Sandbox, website owners are encouraged to carefully select their launch date to limit the damage.
During the sojourn in the sand, a tremendous opportunity exists to add content and incoming links to your website. That time period affords you the chance to find additional links, optimize your site, and submit to the many Internet directories.
With a little planning, and using your time in Sandbox hiatus wisely, your site can burst forth from the filter to the top of the rankings for your keywords.
NB UK SITE STARTED SHOWING PR 28 April 2004
Tuesday, June 15, 2004
adsense income...Files: How Google Took the Work Out of Selling Advertising
The New York Times > Business > Your Money > Techno Files: How Google Took the Work Out of Selling Advertising: "The highest returns seem to go to sites devoted to very specific tasks - like SeatGuru.com, which rates best and worst seats on airplanes. Though he was not specific, Matthew Daimler, 26, the founder of SeatGuru, said the program brought him thousands of dollars a month. This new revenue, he said, let him 'change from a hobby site to a business, and the best part is that I don't have to have an ad sales force but am still exposed to hundreds of thousands of advertisers.'"
Friday, June 11, 2004
Froogle Search: manchester airport flights airlines guide
Froogle Search:
From; 'searchenginejournal@yahoogroups.com' "I don't know if it helps the searchengine visibility, but it can't hurt. I know that when someone does a search, Froogle will only display 1 listing from each vendor in the results, but customers can see more listings for a certain vendor by clicking a 'more listings' link under each image. My company has been in Froogle almost since its inception, and the only challenge we've experienced is that no one really has any control over WHICH products are displayed for a particular search.
From; 'searchenginejournal@yahoogroups.com'
Slashdot | Google Finally Moves Toward RSS Standard
Slashdot | Google Finally Moves Toward RSS Standard:
Posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday June 10, @05:19PM
from the i-miss-ultramode dept.
declan writes 'My News.com colleague Evan Hansen just got his hands on an internal email thread revealing that Google is planning to embrace RSS. Evan's co-authored News.com article quotes from the email (sent to Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Eric Schmidt) confirming that Google is rethinking only supporting Atom. "
Posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday June 10, @05:19PM
from the i-miss-ultramode dept.
declan writes 'My News.com colleague Evan Hansen just got his hands on an internal email thread revealing that Google is planning to embrace RSS. Evan's co-authored News.com article quotes from the email (sent to Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and Eric Schmidt) confirming that Google is rethinking only supporting Atom. "
Thursday, June 10, 2004
China & Google purchases
Instant Position Search Engine Marketing Forums: "Google has been trying to go strong in China for some time, with lots of problems.
Now they are going for a different strategy:
'Now, Google is making an investment in one of China's largest search engines, Baidu, which means ``hundred times.'' Google won't comment, but the investment was confirmed by U.S. investor Tim Draper of Menlo Park's Draper Fisher Jurvetson, which invested $10 million in Baidu. The move might give Google a way to secure its position in China and gain leverage over its chief competitor there.'
Full story: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/technology/8867532.htm?1c "
Now they are going for a different strategy:
'Now, Google is making an investment in one of China's largest search engines, Baidu, which means ``hundred times.'' Google won't comment, but the investment was confirmed by U.S. investor Tim Draper of Menlo Park's Draper Fisher Jurvetson, which invested $10 million in Baidu. The move might give Google a way to secure its position in China and gain leverage over its chief competitor there.'
Full story: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/technology/8867532.htm?1c "
Wednesday, June 09, 2004
Yahoo tests new home page | CNET News.com
Yahoo tests new home page | CNET News.com: "Yahoo has begun quietly testing a makeover of its home page, as evidenced by trial mock-ups seen by some Web users over the past few weeks when they accessed the portal... Yahoo's home page changes are few and far between. The company has long remained militant about maintaining the site's speedy load time and visual style, resisting a heavy use of graphics and animation. Before its 2002 makeover, Yahoo's home page had maintained its basic framework since 1995. "
Yahoo email: The e-mail revamp, slated to launch this summer, will include a boost in memory to 100MB for free users and "virtually unlimited" storage for its paid customers. The move is meant to counter archrival Google, which plans to launch a free e-mail service called Gmail that offers 1GB of storage.
Yahoo email: The e-mail revamp, slated to launch this summer, will include a boost in memory to 100MB for free users and "virtually unlimited" storage for its paid customers. The move is meant to counter archrival Google, which plans to launch a free e-mail service called Gmail that offers 1GB of storage.
BBC NEWS | Technology | Inside the Google search machine
BBC NEWS | Technology | Inside the Google search machine: "Google used to update its web index every month which, because it caused results to jump around a little, was dubbed the Google Dance. But not anymore, says Mr Cutts.
'Within the last year we have improved out way of processing and indexing the web,' he says. 'You are not going to see Google dances.' 'Now we crawl a percentage of the web everyday,' he says, 'so after a relatively small time frame we hit every page.' "
'Within the last year we have improved out way of processing and indexing the web,' he says. 'You are not going to see Google dances.' 'Now we crawl a percentage of the web everyday,' he says, 'so after a relatively small time frame we hit every page.' "
Thursday, June 03, 2004
Google Gains Overall, Competition Builds Niches
Google Gains Overall, Competition Builds Niches: "Hitwise placing Google at the top for search in April 2004, with Yahoo! as the number one portal. Google registered more than a 21 percent gain in market share from August 2003 to April 2004, while Yahoo!'s search engine lost nearly 1 full percentage point, and MSN's search function registered a nearly 9 percent decrease in market share during the same period. "
Just as an iProspect study revealed that searchers viewed results differently across the top search engines, Hitwise also found differentiators among the top three search applications. MSN Search had the highest percentage of U.S visits from the sites Hitwise categorized as Shopping and Classifieds; Business and Finance; and Travel, while Yahoo! Search and Google received more U.S. visits from the sites in the Education; News and Media; and Entertainment categories.
Women found paid ads to be more relevant than the men did when searching across Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and AOL. College graduates and Internet veterans found organic results to be more relevant than their non-graduate and Internet novice counterparts.
Demographically, Hitwise found that Google was the preferred search tool for males, while MSN Search appealed to females. Yahoo! was the more popular engine for 18 to 34 year-old searchers, and MSN Search captured the over 55 crowd
Just as an iProspect study revealed that searchers viewed results differently across the top search engines, Hitwise also found differentiators among the top three search applications. MSN Search had the highest percentage of U.S visits from the sites Hitwise categorized as Shopping and Classifieds; Business and Finance; and Travel, while Yahoo! Search and Google received more U.S. visits from the sites in the Education; News and Media; and Entertainment categories.
Women found paid ads to be more relevant than the men did when searching across Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and AOL. College graduates and Internet veterans found organic results to be more relevant than their non-graduate and Internet novice counterparts.
Demographically, Hitwise found that Google was the preferred search tool for males, while MSN Search appealed to females. Yahoo! was the more popular engine for 18 to 34 year-old searchers, and MSN Search captured the over 55 crowd
google primer - if anyone out there hasnt a clue how it works still
Google: World's Best Search Engine?:
Evaluating Results
Google's web-page-ranking system, PageRank, tends to give priority to better-respected and trusted information. Well-respected sites link to other well-respected sites. This linking boosts the PageRank of high-quality sites. Consequently, more accurate pages are typically listed before sites that include unreliable and erroneous material. Nevertheless, evaluate carefully whatever you find on the web since anyone can:
Create pages
Exchange ideas
Copy, falsify, or omit information intentionally or accidentally
Many people publish pages to get you to buy something or accept a point of view. Google makes no effort to discover or eliminate unreliable and erroneous material. It's up to you to cultivate the habit of healthy skepticism. When evaluating the credibility of a page, consider the following AAOCC (Authority, Accuracy, Objectivity, Currency, and Coverage) criteria and questions, which are adapted from www.lib.berkeley.edu/ENGI/eval-criteria1001.html.
Authority
Who are the authors? Are they qualified? Are they credible?
With whom are they affiliated? Do their affiliations affect their credibility?
Who is the publisher? What is the publisher's reputation?
Accuracy
Is the information accurate? Is it reliable and error-free?
Are the interpretations and implications reasonable?
Is there evidence to support conclusions? Is the evidence verifiable?
Do the authors properly list their sources, references or citations with dates, page numbers or web addresses, etc.?
Objectivity
What is the purpose? What do the authors want to accomplish?
Does this purpose affect the presentation?
Is there an implicit or explicit bias?
Is the information fact, opinion, spoof, or satirical?
Currency
Is the information current? Is it still valid?
When was the site last updated?
Is the site well maintained? Are there any broken links?
Coverage
Is the information relevant to your topic and assignment?
What is the intended audience?
Is the material presented at an appropriate level?
Is the information complete? Is it unique?
Evaluating Results
Google's web-page-ranking system, PageRank, tends to give priority to better-respected and trusted information. Well-respected sites link to other well-respected sites. This linking boosts the PageRank of high-quality sites. Consequently, more accurate pages are typically listed before sites that include unreliable and erroneous material. Nevertheless, evaluate carefully whatever you find on the web since anyone can:
Create pages
Exchange ideas
Copy, falsify, or omit information intentionally or accidentally
Many people publish pages to get you to buy something or accept a point of view. Google makes no effort to discover or eliminate unreliable and erroneous material. It's up to you to cultivate the habit of healthy skepticism. When evaluating the credibility of a page, consider the following AAOCC (Authority, Accuracy, Objectivity, Currency, and Coverage) criteria and questions, which are adapted from www.lib.berkeley.edu/ENGI/eval-criteria1001.html.
Authority
Who are the authors? Are they qualified? Are they credible?
With whom are they affiliated? Do their affiliations affect their credibility?
Who is the publisher? What is the publisher's reputation?
Accuracy
Is the information accurate? Is it reliable and error-free?
Are the interpretations and implications reasonable?
Is there evidence to support conclusions? Is the evidence verifiable?
Do the authors properly list their sources, references or citations with dates, page numbers or web addresses, etc.?
Objectivity
What is the purpose? What do the authors want to accomplish?
Does this purpose affect the presentation?
Is there an implicit or explicit bias?
Is the information fact, opinion, spoof, or satirical?
Currency
Is the information current? Is it still valid?
When was the site last updated?
Is the site well maintained? Are there any broken links?
Coverage
Is the information relevant to your topic and assignment?
What is the intended audience?
Is the material presented at an appropriate level?
Is the information complete? Is it unique?
Saturday, May 29, 2004
GMAIL & PRIVACY LEGISLATION
Wired News: Tightening the Reins on Gmail: "California's Senate voted on Thursday to support a bill to limit a new e-mail service by No. 1 Web search company, Google, over concerns it could threaten the privacy of users. "
Monday, May 24, 2004
Froogle nuts & bolts
Questions for Froogle's Mastermind, Part 1: "Questions for Froogle's Mastermind, Part 1"
Froogle is Google's shopping search engine.
Rated very user-friendly shopping experience
Users can view search results in a list or a grid format
List view gives the product photo, product name, price, description, and link are displayed in each search result
Grid view appears with only one click & shows more product photos on one screen.
Search results can be sorted from low-to-high or high-to-low prices & you can set a price range
Nevill-Manning (CNM) : Our two overriding aims in developing Froogle are comprehensiveness and ranking quality... Froogle uses the same business model as Google -- no money changes hands in order to appear in the results, and we sell clearly marked ads on the side of the page.
Other shopping search engines have a quandary: If they charge merchants to be involved, then they can't be comprehensive. If they include others at no charge, they remove the incentive to pay for inclusion. If they take a middle road -- show the paid results first, then the unpaid results -- then relevancy suffers. With Froogle, we give away lots of valuable traffic to merchants for free but end up with a higher-quality user experience...
Ranking is done using a function that is based on the Google ranking but is tuned especially for Froogle, making use of the structured data that is unique to Froogle: name, description, price, image, etc.
Apart from comprehensiveness and ranking quality, we apply the Google formula of a simple user interface and fast response times...CNM: We have no plans to move either Google or Froogle to a paid inclusion model, for the reasons I outlined above. If you provide users with the best possible experience, it's possible to monetize it with clearly marked, highly relevant ads.
ST: Why do some Froogle search results show above Web page matches on Google?
CNM: For a fairly small subset of queries that we strongly believe indicate users are looking to purchase a product, we show three results above the Web results. They are intended to help people get the information they need as quickly as possible -- just as we show results from News or Local Search if we detect that it might be helpful.
CNM: We have a long list of features that we'd like to add to Froogle, but we'd like it to be a surprise.
Froogle is Google's shopping search engine.
Rated very user-friendly shopping experience
Users can view search results in a list or a grid format
List view gives the product photo, product name, price, description, and link are displayed in each search result
Grid view appears with only one click & shows more product photos on one screen.
Search results can be sorted from low-to-high or high-to-low prices & you can set a price range
Nevill-Manning (CNM) : Our two overriding aims in developing Froogle are comprehensiveness and ranking quality... Froogle uses the same business model as Google -- no money changes hands in order to appear in the results, and we sell clearly marked ads on the side of the page.
Other shopping search engines have a quandary: If they charge merchants to be involved, then they can't be comprehensive. If they include others at no charge, they remove the incentive to pay for inclusion. If they take a middle road -- show the paid results first, then the unpaid results -- then relevancy suffers. With Froogle, we give away lots of valuable traffic to merchants for free but end up with a higher-quality user experience...
Ranking is done using a function that is based on the Google ranking but is tuned especially for Froogle, making use of the structured data that is unique to Froogle: name, description, price, image, etc.
Apart from comprehensiveness and ranking quality, we apply the Google formula of a simple user interface and fast response times...CNM: We have no plans to move either Google or Froogle to a paid inclusion model, for the reasons I outlined above. If you provide users with the best possible experience, it's possible to monetize it with clearly marked, highly relevant ads.
ST: Why do some Froogle search results show above Web page matches on Google?
CNM: For a fairly small subset of queries that we strongly believe indicate users are looking to purchase a product, we show three results above the Web results. They are intended to help people get the information they need as quickly as possible -- just as we show results from News or Local Search if we detect that it might be helpful.
CNM: We have a long list of features that we'd like to add to Froogle, but we'd like it to be a surprise.
Sunday, May 23, 2004
India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers - Rupees for Clicks
SecurityForumX :: View topic - India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers - Rupees for Clicks: "Since the introduction of Google Ads and various other 'pay for click' advertising schemes, I have been saying that it was open to abuse and that advertisers that 'pay for clicks' are probably 'paying to support some family in India and not attracting real clients or potential customers...'.
Here is a nice little story out of The Times of India that helps explain why advertisers are getting RIPPED OFF by these ' pay for click schemes '.
Quote:
India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers
The Times Of India:
With her baby on her lap, Maya Sharma (name changed) gets down to work every evening from her eighth-floor flat at Vasant Vihar. Maya's job is to click on online advertisements. She doesn't care about the ads, but diligently keeps count � it's $0.18 to $0.25 per click.
A growing number of housewives, college graduates, and even working professionals across metropolitan cities are rushing to click paid Internet ads to make $100 to $200 (up to Rs 9,000) per month.
'It's boring, but it is extra money for a couple of hours of clicking weblinks every day,' says a resident of Delhi's Patparganj, who has kept a $300-target for the summer.
Traffic to click overseas Internet ads � from home loans to insurance � is spreading fast in India. 'I have no interest in what appears when clicking an ad. I care only whether to pause 60 seconds or 90 seconds, as money is credited if you stay online for a fixed time,' says another user.
Here's how it works: online advertisers in developed markets agree to pay hosting website each time an ad is clicked. With performance-based deals becoming dominant on the Internet, intermediaries have sprung up"
Here is a nice little story out of The Times of India that helps explain why advertisers are getting RIPPED OFF by these ' pay for click schemes '.
Quote:
India's Secret Army of Ad Clickers
The Times Of India:
With her baby on her lap, Maya Sharma (name changed) gets down to work every evening from her eighth-floor flat at Vasant Vihar. Maya's job is to click on online advertisements. She doesn't care about the ads, but diligently keeps count � it's $0.18 to $0.25 per click.
A growing number of housewives, college graduates, and even working professionals across metropolitan cities are rushing to click paid Internet ads to make $100 to $200 (up to Rs 9,000) per month.
'It's boring, but it is extra money for a couple of hours of clicking weblinks every day,' says a resident of Delhi's Patparganj, who has kept a $300-target for the summer.
Traffic to click overseas Internet ads � from home loans to insurance � is spreading fast in India. 'I have no interest in what appears when clicking an ad. I care only whether to pause 60 seconds or 90 seconds, as money is credited if you stay online for a fixed time,' says another user.
Here's how it works: online advertisers in developed markets agree to pay hosting website each time an ad is clicked. With performance-based deals becoming dominant on the Internet, intermediaries have sprung up"
Friday, May 21, 2004
Google moves toward clash with Microsoft | CNET News.com
Google moves toward clash with Microsoft | CNET News.com: "Edging closer to a direct confrontation with Microsoft, Google is preparing to introduce a powerful file and text software search tool for locating information stored on personal computers. "
Google Guide: Table of Contents
Essential websiite for anyone strating out optimising for google...Google Guide: Table of ContentsPart II:
Understanding Results
• How Google Works
• Results Page
• Links Included with Your Results
• Spelling Corrections (Suggestions)
• Definitions
• Cached Pages
• Similar Pages
Understanding Results
• How Google Works
• Results Page
• Links Included with Your Results
• Spelling Corrections (Suggestions)
• Definitions
• Cached Pages
• Similar Pages
Google Corporate Information: Software Principles
Very timely as my Yahoo! toolbar was hijacked yesterday by Mysearch...
Google Corporate Information: Software Principles: "Feedback requested: A proposal to help fight deceptive Internet software
Send your feedback to software-principles@google.com."
Discussion: Slashdot | Google's Software PrinciplesGoogle has just posted a new set of "Software Principles"at their [1]site on how they feel about spyware and the like. It is interesting to see the company whose motto is "Do no evil" trying to get the rest of the internet world to follow, with proposed principles dealing with upfront installation, clear behavior, simple removal, and keeping good company. The question is, though - why would a company who makes spyware (whose very nature is to be secretive and hard to remove) want to follow Google's principles?"
Google Corporate Information: Software Principles: "Feedback requested: A proposal to help fight deceptive Internet software
Send your feedback to software-principles@google.com."
Discussion: Slashdot | Google's Software PrinciplesGoogle has just posted a new set of "Software Principles"at their [1]site on how they feel about spyware and the like. It is interesting to see the company whose motto is "Do no evil" trying to get the rest of the internet world to follow, with proposed principles dealing with upfront installation, clear behavior, simple removal, and keeping good company. The question is, though - why would a company who makes spyware (whose very nature is to be secretive and hard to remove) want to follow Google's principles?"
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
The Definitive Guide to Google AdWords - Action form
The Definitive Guide to Google AdWords - Action form: "Perry Marshall's Definitive Guide to Google AdWords"
Geico sues Google, Overture over trademarks | CNET News.com
Geico sues Google, Overture over trademarks | CNET News.com: "Auto insurance company Geico has sued Google and Overture Services for allegedly violating its trademarks in search-related advertisements, in the latest legal salvo against the Internet companies.
Geico, a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, the investment company owned by Warren Buffett, filed suit against Google and Yahoo-owned Overture on May 4, in federal court in Alexandria, Va.
The insurer charged the two companies with infringing on its trademarks when they sold them as keywords to Geico's rivals, so that the protected terms could appear in sponsored search results. According to the suit, that practice causes consumer confusion, in violation of the Lanham Act, the primary federal law covering trademark registration and protection. "
Geico, a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, the investment company owned by Warren Buffett, filed suit against Google and Yahoo-owned Overture on May 4, in federal court in Alexandria, Va.
The insurer charged the two companies with infringing on its trademarks when they sold them as keywords to Geico's rivals, so that the protected terms could appear in sponsored search results. According to the suit, that practice causes consumer confusion, in violation of the Lanham Act, the primary federal law covering trademark registration and protection. "
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Google Search: totaltravel.com -site:www.totaltravel.com
Google Search: totaltravel.com -site:www.totaltravel.com: "Results 1 - 10 of about 47,600 for totaltravel.com -site:www.totaltravel.com."
Google would not display all the links it knows linking to your website. While the exact criterion of display is not published, generally we have seen that Google displays links from web pages having a PR of 4 and above. Please rest assured that even though Google may display a lesser number
of links pointing to your site, you will get benefit from all the links Google has learned as long as they have a positive PR (i.e. PR > 0).
While there is no accurate command to find out all the sites linking to you, the following command will give you a bigger list of sites who are possibly linking to you:
yoursite.com -site:www.yoursite.com
The above syntax instructs Google to show all the pages that have the word "yoursite.com" without showing pages from your own site. While it will list a lot more sites than their standard link command does, the flaw in the above command is that all pages that mention your site name may not necessarily be linking to you. There are also instances where it shows up pages where an email address containing 'yoursite.com' is listed on the page.
Despite its shortcoming, this syntax is a good way to evaluate approximately the number of sites linking to you. Notice that in the above command the www is omitted in the first part, because sometimes sites link to your domain name without including 'www' in the text
Google would not display all the links it knows linking to your website. While the exact criterion of display is not published, generally we have seen that Google displays links from web pages having a PR of 4 and above. Please rest assured that even though Google may display a lesser number
of links pointing to your site, you will get benefit from all the links Google has learned as long as they have a positive PR (i.e. PR > 0).
While there is no accurate command to find out all the sites linking to you, the following command will give you a bigger list of sites who are possibly linking to you:
yoursite.com -site:www.yoursite.com
The above syntax instructs Google to show all the pages that have the word "yoursite.com" without showing pages from your own site. While it will list a lot more sites than their standard link command does, the flaw in the above command is that all pages that mention your site name may not necessarily be linking to you. There are also instances where it shows up pages where an email address containing 'yoursite.com' is listed on the page.
Despite its shortcoming, this syntax is a good way to evaluate approximately the number of sites linking to you. Notice that in the above command the www is omitted in the first part, because sometimes sites link to your domain name without including 'www' in the text
Cre8asite forums. Google - New Sites Put Into a "Sand Box" by Google. [ Search Engine Optimization, Usability and Web Design. ]
Cre8asite forums. Google - New Sites Put Into a "Sand Box" by Google. [ Search Engine Optimization, Usability and Web Design. ]: It appears that Google is holding out on new domain names for a 2 - 4 month period of time. So a new domain name might rank very well a few weeks after the site is launched, but soon after it will get bumped down in the results for a 2 - 4 mont period for no apparent reason.
5 Days to Success with Google AdWords
5 Days to Success with Google AdWords:
"The price you bid is almost never the price you actually pay. You almost always pay less. First, it's a little bit like Ebay: You pay 1 cent above the position below you, not the maximum that you bid"
Your Click Thru Rate (CTR) is MORE important than how much you bid.
The Click Thru Rate is the percentage of people searching who click. If 100 people search, your ad shows up 100 times, and one person clicks through, that's a 1% click thru rate.
So let's say I've got a 1% CTR and I'm paying $1.00 for position #2. Let's say you've got a 2% CTR --- you only have to pay 51 cents to get position #2 and knock me down to position #3. That means if you're 2 times as relevant, you pay 1/2 as much!
Here's an example of two ads - one got nearly twice the CTR as the other:
Simple Self Defense
For Ordinary People
Easy Personal Protection Training
www.tftgroup.com
Clickthrough Rate: 0.8%
Simple Self Defense
For Ordinary People
Fast Personal Protection Training
www.tftgroup.com
Clickthrough Rate: 1.3%
Notice what happened: Only ONE word changed - "Fast" instead of "Easy" - and the Click Thru Rate jumped from 0.8% to 1.3%. That means that the ad on the right gets almost twice as much traffic for the same amount of money.
NB Google ranks your ad higher as your CTR goes up. Overture does not do this. In Overture, the highest bidder always wins. That rewards people who have more money than brains. Which means that for the smart marketer, Google is vastly superior....
"The price you bid is almost never the price you actually pay. You almost always pay less. First, it's a little bit like Ebay: You pay 1 cent above the position below you, not the maximum that you bid"
Your Click Thru Rate (CTR) is MORE important than how much you bid.
The Click Thru Rate is the percentage of people searching who click. If 100 people search, your ad shows up 100 times, and one person clicks through, that's a 1% click thru rate.
So let's say I've got a 1% CTR and I'm paying $1.00 for position #2. Let's say you've got a 2% CTR --- you only have to pay 51 cents to get position #2 and knock me down to position #3. That means if you're 2 times as relevant, you pay 1/2 as much!
Here's an example of two ads - one got nearly twice the CTR as the other:
Simple Self Defense
For Ordinary People
Easy Personal Protection Training
www.tftgroup.com
Clickthrough Rate: 0.8%
Simple Self Defense
For Ordinary People
Fast Personal Protection Training
www.tftgroup.com
Clickthrough Rate: 1.3%
Notice what happened: Only ONE word changed - "Fast" instead of "Easy" - and the Click Thru Rate jumped from 0.8% to 1.3%. That means that the ad on the right gets almost twice as much traffic for the same amount of money.
NB Google ranks your ad higher as your CTR goes up. Overture does not do this. In Overture, the highest bidder always wins. That rewards people who have more money than brains. Which means that for the smart marketer, Google is vastly superior....
BW Online | May 17, 2004 | Just How Different Is Google?
BW Online | May 17, 2004 | Just How Different Is Google?: "if you look closely at the areas that matter in any company's operations and personality -- the dissemination of power and money -- you discover that Google isn't really different from many other tightly-run and successful emerging businesses. It is at once highly controlling and focused.
THE BOTTOM LINE. How do they run the company? The simple answer is that they seem to run a tight ship. Larry and Sergey each made a base salary last year of $150,000, with $206,000 in bonuses. And they were smart enough to pay Eric Schmidt, the CEO, more than themselves -- $250,000 of base salary, plus a $301,000 bonus. For a company with nearly $1 billion of revenue last year, the executive compensation is quite modest. Equally impressive is that directors haven't been receiving cash compensation. Yes, the stock they received in the past is now quite valuable, but it wasn't always that way.
Perhaps most impressive is one statistic that hasn't received a great deal of attention: last year's $961.9 million of revenue, when apportioned among Google's 1,907 employees, translates into more than $500,000 revenue per employee. That is a hefty number for a young fast-growing company -- a number likely to grow substantially as the company cashes in further on its dominance of online information retrieval. "
THE BOTTOM LINE. How do they run the company? The simple answer is that they seem to run a tight ship. Larry and Sergey each made a base salary last year of $150,000, with $206,000 in bonuses. And they were smart enough to pay Eric Schmidt, the CEO, more than themselves -- $250,000 of base salary, plus a $301,000 bonus. For a company with nearly $1 billion of revenue last year, the executive compensation is quite modest. Equally impressive is that directors haven't been receiving cash compensation. Yes, the stock they received in the past is now quite valuable, but it wasn't always that way.
Perhaps most impressive is one statistic that hasn't received a great deal of attention: last year's $961.9 million of revenue, when apportioned among Google's 1,907 employees, translates into more than $500,000 revenue per employee. That is a hefty number for a young fast-growing company -- a number likely to grow substantially as the company cashes in further on its dominance of online information retrieval. "
Google to Give New Advertisers Jumpstart
For the UK?? Google to Give New Advertisers Jumpstart: "Google is angling for new AdWords advertisers with the promise of a helping hand for those who open new accounts and make a $299 pre-payment.
Marketers participating in the new offering, called Jumpstart, have Google 'specialists' assigned to write ads, choose relevant keywords, and set cost-per-click amounts -- within a specified budget -- designed to maximize ad exposure. Google laid out the terms of the program on its Web site, although it hasn't yet been officially announced.
Though Google offers larger advertisers and publishers assistance with its AdWords and AdSense programs, this is its first major service initiative designed for smaller advertisers. It's not clear how many staffers will be assigned to the new offering. Google didn't respond to requests for comment by press time
The search company has been testing technologies designed to parse Web sites for appropriate keywords, according to search engine marketers. That technology, along with a service team, is apparently being deployed in this new offering.
Those interested in participating in Jumpstart fill out an application, confirm their e-mail addresses, and wait two to five business days for their Web site to be reviewed and a campaign created. Then, they review the campaign and activate it. Google encourages advertisers to handle further tweaks and optimization themselves, though it also says it will respond to customer service requests in one business day."
Marketers participating in the new offering, called Jumpstart, have Google 'specialists' assigned to write ads, choose relevant keywords, and set cost-per-click amounts -- within a specified budget -- designed to maximize ad exposure. Google laid out the terms of the program on its Web site, although it hasn't yet been officially announced.
Though Google offers larger advertisers and publishers assistance with its AdWords and AdSense programs, this is its first major service initiative designed for smaller advertisers. It's not clear how many staffers will be assigned to the new offering. Google didn't respond to requests for comment by press time
The search company has been testing technologies designed to parse Web sites for appropriate keywords, according to search engine marketers. That technology, along with a service team, is apparently being deployed in this new offering.
Those interested in participating in Jumpstart fill out an application, confirm their e-mail addresses, and wait two to five business days for their Web site to be reviewed and a campaign created. Then, they review the campaign and activate it. Google encourages advertisers to handle further tweaks and optimization themselves, though it also says it will respond to customer service requests in one business day."
Monday, May 17, 2004
How Much Does Your Adwords Position Impact Ctr? -> High Rankings Search Engine Optimization Forum
How Much Does Your Adwords Position Impact Ctr? -> High Rankings Search Engine Optimization Forum: "Here is my advice.....This might not work on Adwords but it works on Overture and other PPC Search Engines.
Take a minute to look at which companies are actually bidding over you. I did manage a campaign on Overture and I saved a lot of money by using the following strategy:
Let's say I was managing a campaign for a company selling candy... I then found out that the best keyword related to candy was 'Great Tasting Candy.'
I found that the number 1 bid was for a company trying to get people to sign up for a pay service that gave great recipes for candy. Hence, people signed up, paid money and got a recipe telling them how to make Great Tasting Candy.
The number 2 bid were selling a really bad product.
I therefore, chose to go as the number 3 bid, because I really believed that 90 percent of the people searching for 'Great Tasting Candy' wanted to buy Great Tasting Candy.
The best part was that the number 1 bid was trying to intimidate the bidders buy bidding over $1.00. The crappy product company then bid .99 so I bid .98 but only paid around .35 cents for every click.
This way the people looking for 'Great Tasting Candy' clicked on the number one bid. They found out that this was not what they were looking for. They then clicked on number 2 just to see that they had a crappy product. Then they clicked on the company I was bidding for and boom....I had made my two biggest competitors lose a buck each.
It took around 2 weeks before they realized that they could not compete and crawled behind me.
However, be aware this was an exceptional case but it illustrates that you need to know what companies you are bidding against. In Adwords it might be harder to see who you are bidd"
Take a minute to look at which companies are actually bidding over you. I did manage a campaign on Overture and I saved a lot of money by using the following strategy:
Let's say I was managing a campaign for a company selling candy... I then found out that the best keyword related to candy was 'Great Tasting Candy.'
I found that the number 1 bid was for a company trying to get people to sign up for a pay service that gave great recipes for candy. Hence, people signed up, paid money and got a recipe telling them how to make Great Tasting Candy.
The number 2 bid were selling a really bad product.
I therefore, chose to go as the number 3 bid, because I really believed that 90 percent of the people searching for 'Great Tasting Candy' wanted to buy Great Tasting Candy.
The best part was that the number 1 bid was trying to intimidate the bidders buy bidding over $1.00. The crappy product company then bid .99 so I bid .98 but only paid around .35 cents for every click.
This way the people looking for 'Great Tasting Candy' clicked on the number one bid. They found out that this was not what they were looking for. They then clicked on number 2 just to see that they had a crappy product. Then they clicked on the company I was bidding for and boom....I had made my two biggest competitors lose a buck each.
It took around 2 weeks before they realized that they could not compete and crawled behind me.
However, be aware this was an exceptional case but it illustrates that you need to know what companies you are bidding against. In Adwords it might be harder to see who you are bidd"
Cre8asite forums. Google - PageRank is not dead. [ Search Engine Optimization, Usability and Web Design. ]
Cre8asite forums. Google - PageRank is not dead. [ Search Engine Optimization, Usability and Web Design. ]: "Who remembers talking to clients about the meaning of pagerank?
Now I see myself telling clients and prospects to take PageRank as 'materiality', like Bill said. It is kind of like Alexa's ranking numbers, in the sense of it being an ego trip for someone.
Of course I do not own a PR9 site, only PR6s. I might have a different view if I ran a PR9 or 8 site. But the SERPs do not lie, many pages in the top rankings have an average PR and rank above the higher PRs."
Now I see myself telling clients and prospects to take PageRank as 'materiality', like Bill said. It is kind of like Alexa's ranking numbers, in the sense of it being an ego trip for someone.
Of course I do not own a PR9 site, only PR6s. I might have a different view if I ran a PR9 or 8 site. But the SERPs do not lie, many pages in the top rankings have an average PR and rank above the higher PRs."
The Definitive Guide to Google AdWords
The Definitive Guide to Google AdWords: "So.... when they began to sell Pay Per Click advertising, they were extremely concerned that advertisers also put out messages that were highly relevant.
Google rewards you for being relevant, and they let people who are searching vote for you. If your ad gets clicked on, it's relevant. If it doesn't, it's not. It's that simple.
If you can't get 5 out of 1000 people (0.5%) to click on your ad, Google disables your ad. The higher your click thru rate, though, the less you have to pay for the position you want.
So this creates a 'Darwinian' effect, a deliberate natural selection that weeds out bad advertisers and rewards good ones. What's good for Google's customers is good for Google and good for you.
When all the dust has settled, what really matters is that your ads and your content be relevant to the keywords you're bidding on. Your message must match what the person is thinking.
So... what were they really thinking when they typed in 'California butterflies?' That is the question. Figure that out and put it in front of them, and you'll win on Google. Write an ad that matches exactly what they're searching for and you'll beat your competitors by a country mile."
Google rewards you for being relevant, and they let people who are searching vote for you. If your ad gets clicked on, it's relevant. If it doesn't, it's not. It's that simple.
If you can't get 5 out of 1000 people (0.5%) to click on your ad, Google disables your ad. The higher your click thru rate, though, the less you have to pay for the position you want.
So this creates a 'Darwinian' effect, a deliberate natural selection that weeds out bad advertisers and rewards good ones. What's good for Google's customers is good for Google and good for you.
When all the dust has settled, what really matters is that your ads and your content be relevant to the keywords you're bidding on. Your message must match what the person is thinking.
So... what were they really thinking when they typed in 'California butterflies?' That is the question. Figure that out and put it in front of them, and you'll win on Google. Write an ad that matches exactly what they're searching for and you'll beat your competitors by a country mile."
New $$$ spinner by Kalena Jordan...Search Engine Marketing Courses - Search Engine College
Search Engine Marketing Courses - Search Engine College: "Here at Search Engine College we offer a range of search engine marketing short courses designed to teach you everything you need to know about successfully promoting a web site via search engines"
Saturday, May 15, 2004
Google's IPO and SEM: Predictions
Google's IPO and SEM: Predictions:
Increased contextual inventory
Increased search inventory. Media hype over Google's IPO has increasingly more people trying Google, and even the Internet in general. The entire search engine marketing (SEM) space will see increases in search inventory as new searchers come online
Smarter searchers. Media focus on Google will result in the public learning how to search more intelligently. This may accelerate the current trend of longer search queries (searchers using more keywords in a phrase). This shift in behavior will force marketers to embrace campaign management strategies that align well with searcher behavior. Broad campaigns and broad match listings will become the norm. XML paid inclusion, the automation of ad creation from data feeds, site crawls, or programming scripts/spreadsheets,, will increase
More advertisers, consequent higher costs (CPCs). Marketers who are either sitting on the SEM sidelines or just dabbling in it will begin to understand SEM's true power. This trend is already underway as engines, agencies, search optimizers, and nonprofit organizations such as SEMPO, AIM, and the IAB educate the marketplace on search's value.
Ironically, because SEM is a zero-sum game, the return on investment (ROI) on both paid and organic search for all participants will drop as the marketplace learns more about and adapts SEM. The auction marketplaces for search clicks will become more efficient, and competition for organic search engine optimization (SEO) positions will require more work from internal IT and marketing staff, SEO agencies, and consultants."
Product enhancements
Government scrutiny on the industry.The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other government agencies are busy fighting e-mail spam, with limited success. Although the FTC has released disclosure guidelines relating to the labeling of paid search listings, thus far the level of scrutiny has been relatively low. Google's IPO and the related media visibility, in combination with a major election year, could result in additional guidelines and event regulation. Links explaining what sponsored links are may become larger and more prominent. The resulting FAQ pages may be more standardized. If the scrutiny is high enough, regulation could even extend to organic SEO practices (though I doubt it).
Increased contextual inventory
Increased search inventory. Media hype over Google's IPO has increasingly more people trying Google, and even the Internet in general. The entire search engine marketing (SEM) space will see increases in search inventory as new searchers come online
Smarter searchers. Media focus on Google will result in the public learning how to search more intelligently. This may accelerate the current trend of longer search queries (searchers using more keywords in a phrase). This shift in behavior will force marketers to embrace campaign management strategies that align well with searcher behavior. Broad campaigns and broad match listings will become the norm. XML paid inclusion, the automation of ad creation from data feeds, site crawls, or programming scripts/spreadsheets,, will increase
More advertisers, consequent higher costs (CPCs). Marketers who are either sitting on the SEM sidelines or just dabbling in it will begin to understand SEM's true power. This trend is already underway as engines, agencies, search optimizers, and nonprofit organizations such as SEMPO, AIM, and the IAB educate the marketplace on search's value.
Ironically, because SEM is a zero-sum game, the return on investment (ROI) on both paid and organic search for all participants will drop as the marketplace learns more about and adapts SEM. The auction marketplaces for search clicks will become more efficient, and competition for organic search engine optimization (SEO) positions will require more work from internal IT and marketing staff, SEO agencies, and consultants."
Product enhancements
Government scrutiny on the industry.The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other government agencies are busy fighting e-mail spam, with limited success. Although the FTC has released disclosure guidelines relating to the labeling of paid search listings, thus far the level of scrutiny has been relatively low. Google's IPO and the related media visibility, in combination with a major election year, could result in additional guidelines and event regulation. Links explaining what sponsored links are may become larger and more prominent. The resulting FAQ pages may be more standardized. If the scrutiny is high enough, regulation could even extend to organic SEO practices (though I doubt it).
CitySearch teams with Overture | CNET News.com
CitySearch teams with Overture | CNET News.com: "CitySearch said Thursday that it has signed a deal with Yahoo's Overture Services to run the latter's paid ads in its local search listings for select cities and categories.
Overture specializes in selling advertising links that accompany search results on sites such as Yahoo and MSN. Under the deal, Overture ads will appear in categories where CitySearch has available ad inventory, such as home services, professional services and medical specialists. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.
The move comes little more than a year after CitySearch, which is owned by InterActiveCorp, introduced its own advertising service to compete with Overture on a local level. The company unveiled a pay-per-click ad service, called Local Pay for Performance, which reflected the business model of Overture's national ad network. CitySearch sought to match up advertisers with consumers searching for local dining, entertainment and shopping services. Advertisers pay for the ads only when people click through.
Under terms of the deal, Overture ads will appear as 'sponsored results' when a customer uses CitySearch for conducting a local search.
Local search has been the rage of late. Last month, Google launched what it called Google Local, a service that helps Web surfers find local businesses by typing in a search term and a city name.
The market for local advertising online is small, but analysts are predicting it will eventually take a larger chunk of the $12 billion overall market for local ads in the United States. CitySearch had been talking with Google about a partnership."
Overture specializes in selling advertising links that accompany search results on sites such as Yahoo and MSN. Under the deal, Overture ads will appear in categories where CitySearch has available ad inventory, such as home services, professional services and medical specialists. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.
The move comes little more than a year after CitySearch, which is owned by InterActiveCorp, introduced its own advertising service to compete with Overture on a local level. The company unveiled a pay-per-click ad service, called Local Pay for Performance, which reflected the business model of Overture's national ad network. CitySearch sought to match up advertisers with consumers searching for local dining, entertainment and shopping services. Advertisers pay for the ads only when people click through.
Under terms of the deal, Overture ads will appear as 'sponsored results' when a customer uses CitySearch for conducting a local search.
Local search has been the rage of late. Last month, Google launched what it called Google Local, a service that helps Web surfers find local businesses by typing in a search term and a city name.
The market for local advertising online is small, but analysts are predicting it will eventually take a larger chunk of the $12 billion overall market for local ads in the United States. CitySearch had been talking with Google about a partnership."
Thursday, May 13, 2004
Google Adding Image Ads to AdWords Search Engine News Journal
Google Adding Image Ads to AdWords Search Engine News Journal: "Google Adding Image Ads to AdWords "
Google AdWords Support: "My image ads
�How do I create an image ad?
�What are the image ad requirements?
�What do image ads look like?
�Will you show image ads on Google?
�What are image ads?
�How do you decide whether to show my image ad or my text ad?
�Why is Google offering image ads?
�How are image ads different from traditional banner ads?
�Where are my images stored?"
Google AdWords Support: "My image ads
�How do I create an image ad?
�What are the image ad requirements?
�What do image ads look like?
�Will you show image ads on Google?
�What are image ads?
�How do you decide whether to show my image ad or my text ad?
�Why is Google offering image ads?
�How are image ads different from traditional banner ads?
�Where are my images stored?"
Wednesday, May 12, 2004
SEO to the limit : E-consultancy.com
SEO to the limit : E-consultancy.com: "Removing session Id�s from online shops / forums (in my own case) and other dynamic websites. This could be considered a form of cloaking as it often involves a referrer check (user_agent/IP). If it is Googlebot, drop the session id. If it is a human with a browser, generate a session id. Session ids are a definite way to make your site invisible on the search engine results pages. Word still hasn�t got round yet to some major corporation webmasters about the real damage session ids can do to a ranking. �We need to know the full click paths of our visitors� is a common statement. �You aren�t going to get many visitors if you don�t do something about the session ids� is my usual reply. A little programming could solve the majority of problems online shops for example have at getting deep crawled and indexed. Google has officially said it regards the removal of session ids as valid search engine optimization. "
Google blog somewhat less than 'bloggy' | CNET News.com
Google blog somewhat less than 'bloggy' | CNET News.com: "Google has officially started publishing a corporate Web log, keeping up with the Joneses it aspires to serve.
On Monday, the search engine started publishing a diary of corporate musings, as it seeks to promote a new, simplified tool for user Web publishing through its Blogger division...
the effort is apparently not as offhand as one might think. In a move that seems out of character with the informality of blogging, Google edited itself in a Monday note about the Mountain View, Calif., company's recent expansion to Bangalore, India. In an earlier, more lighthearted version of the posting, Google said too much has been made out of U.S. companies outsourcing jobs in India. A later version of the note, posted Tuesday without identifying the changes, takes a less opinionated tone over what is a topic of heated political debate."
Link to google blog: Google Blog: "Insight into the news, technology, and culture of Google"
On Monday, the search engine started publishing a diary of corporate musings, as it seeks to promote a new, simplified tool for user Web publishing through its Blogger division...
the effort is apparently not as offhand as one might think. In a move that seems out of character with the informality of blogging, Google edited itself in a Monday note about the Mountain View, Calif., company's recent expansion to Bangalore, India. In an earlier, more lighthearted version of the posting, Google said too much has been made out of U.S. companies outsourcing jobs in India. A later version of the note, posted Tuesday without identifying the changes, takes a less opinionated tone over what is a topic of heated political debate."
Link to google blog: Google Blog: "Insight into the news, technology, and culture of Google"
Tuesday, May 11, 2004
John Battelle's Searchblog: More S-1 Grokking: Google Purchases Ignite Logic, Inc.
John Battelle's Searchblog: More S-1 Grokking: Google Purchases Ignite Logic, Inc.: "le Purchases Ignite Logic, Inc"What is Ignite Logic, Inc.? It's a startup which helps law firms set up web sites. But why buy them? Hey, if you have good tech and processes to get a law firm's site up and running, one might imagine it just might scale to the entire SMB market (and beyond). Recall my "Incubation Platform" post - about how Google might leverage its platform to let others build on top of their infrastructure? You thought I was smoking something, eh? Nope.
Google Overhauls Blogger
Google Overhauls Blogger: "Today's upgrade adds new features to Blogger, most of which have been in high demand from users. New features include:
Posting via email: Users can now publish to their blogs from any email-enabled device, including cellular phones and PDAs.
Comments: Enables people to invite their readers to respond to blog entries.
Profiles: Enables Blogger users to share information about themselves so readers can learn more about the people behind the blogs, and discover others who share similar interests.
Other new features include 26 new templates designed by leading web designers, and unique URLs for each individual posting. Williams said that the primary reason for creating unique URLs was to make them easier to link to.
That may be true, but it's also likely that unique URLs for each posting will make them more search friendly -- not to mention making it easier for Google to gain a better understanding of each posting for targeting its contextual paid listings. "
Posting via email: Users can now publish to their blogs from any email-enabled device, including cellular phones and PDAs.
Comments: Enables people to invite their readers to respond to blog entries.
Profiles: Enables Blogger users to share information about themselves so readers can learn more about the people behind the blogs, and discover others who share similar interests.
Other new features include 26 new templates designed by leading web designers, and unique URLs for each individual posting. Williams said that the primary reason for creating unique URLs was to make them easier to link to.
That may be true, but it's also likely that unique URLs for each posting will make them more search friendly -- not to mention making it easier for Google to gain a better understanding of each posting for targeting its contextual paid listings. "
Monday, May 10, 2004
Google's man behind the curtain | Newsmakers | CNET News.com
Google's man behind the curtain | Newsmakers | CNET News.com: Some computer scientists suspect that PageRank is dead, because Internet marketers have managed to exploit it by creating false popularity for their sites. Is that true? Has it been altered, or is it playing less of a role?
The point of view that PageRank is dead is kind of a very static view of the world. It will always continue to be a part of our ranking scheme but, over time, as we develop new ideas on how to do ranking, as we tweak existing ideas, as we think about new ways to have them play together--the role of any one of the techniques that we use will obviously change.
Are there any other algorithm techniques that you are using that are playing a bigger role?
Well, there are certainly other techniques that we are using. Talking about it is the trickier part. In broad terms, techniques we use fall into, like, two or three categories, and one is we try to understand and leverage human intelligence. We look for signals that people put in to indicate intelligence, like deciding to link from one page to another or annotating text with the description of what the text is about.
The point of view that PageRank is dead is kind of a very static view of the world. It will always continue to be a part of our ranking scheme but, over time, as we develop new ideas on how to do ranking, as we tweak existing ideas, as we think about new ways to have them play together--the role of any one of the techniques that we use will obviously change.
Are there any other algorithm techniques that you are using that are playing a bigger role?
Well, there are certainly other techniques that we are using. Talking about it is the trickier part. In broad terms, techniques we use fall into, like, two or three categories, and one is we try to understand and leverage human intelligence. We look for signals that people put in to indicate intelligence, like deciding to link from one page to another or annotating text with the description of what the text is about.
Google preps new tool to juice revenue | CNET News.com
Google preps new tool to juice revenue | CNET News.com: "Search engine leader Google is close to releasing new tools that could expand its profitable keyword-advertising business and fuel growth as it prepares for a highly anticipated initial public offering, according to sources familiar with the plan.
The technology aims to enable Google to examine the Web sites of large advertisers and to develop automated lists of keyword combinations that are likely to turn up in search queries, the sources said. If successful, the system will match more searches to advertisements, and thus boost revenue.
Google is preparing new tools that could expand its profitable keyword advertising business and fuel growth as it prepares for a highly anticipated initial public offering. The new system will match more searches to advertisements, creating new revenue as well as risks by increasing Google's reliance on automation.
More stories on this topic An analysis of search-engine advertising suggests there is significant room for growth in this area. Only 40 percent to 45 percent of the 120 million Internet searches a day in the United States are currently linked to an ad, according to research firm ComScore Networks. But such a service could also create new risks for Google, which has stumbled in the past with automated advertising efforts."
Google preps new tool to juice revenue | CNET News.com: "The technology aims to enable Google to examine the Web sites of large advertisers and to develop automated lists of keyword combinations that are likely to turn up in search queries, the sources said. If successful, the system will match more searches to advertisements, and thus boost revenue."Google wants to take the technology even further. Its proposed service would allow marketers to pay to have a Web page examined more often for inclusion in sponsored listings, according to one source. Instead of having to bid on thousands of keywords, a large advertiser--such as Amazon.com--could rely on Google's search technology to automatically create connections between its Web pages and related search queries. Amazon would pay Google to examine thousands of its pages and to serve an ad whenever the software deemed it appropriate. Amazon would pay an amount previously bid at auction for those pages, whenever people clicked on its listings.
In this scenario, a Web surfer who searched Google.com for "Stevie Wonder" might see a sponsored listing for "Stevie Wonder at Amazon.com," for example. Amazon may not have bid on those granular keywords, but Google's crawlers will have found CDs and books on the musician during the engine's indexing and will have automatically placed an ad based on that query.
Mind over machine?
By contrast, Overture takes a slightly more human approach to advertising. It employs slews of account managers who help marketers invent new keyword combinations to drive people to their online stores, according to an Overture representative. It also offers technology that lets marketers measure the effectiveness of their search campaigns, as well as of campaigns via e-mail, Google or banner ads.
"We work with advertisers closely to make sure they're bidding on the most possible keywords," said the Overture representative.
Google has faced criticism of its automated marketing tools in the past. In one case, it served up an advertisement for a suitcase maker in a news article about a murder investigation in which body parts were discovered in a travel case.
Nevertheless, ad-matching technology could become essential as search queries get more complex over time. And as Web surfers get more savvy, they tend to enter more search terms for better results, according to search experts.
"The limitations of search-engine marketing are the burdens on marketers. Managing keyword campaigns is a nightmare...and lots of keywords are left on the table," said James Lamberti, a research director at ComScore. "A move from a manual to a highly automated process will be the next big shift for the industry."
The technology aims to enable Google to examine the Web sites of large advertisers and to develop automated lists of keyword combinations that are likely to turn up in search queries, the sources said. If successful, the system will match more searches to advertisements, and thus boost revenue.
Google is preparing new tools that could expand its profitable keyword advertising business and fuel growth as it prepares for a highly anticipated initial public offering. The new system will match more searches to advertisements, creating new revenue as well as risks by increasing Google's reliance on automation.
More stories on this topic An analysis of search-engine advertising suggests there is significant room for growth in this area. Only 40 percent to 45 percent of the 120 million Internet searches a day in the United States are currently linked to an ad, according to research firm ComScore Networks. But such a service could also create new risks for Google, which has stumbled in the past with automated advertising efforts."
Google preps new tool to juice revenue | CNET News.com: "The technology aims to enable Google to examine the Web sites of large advertisers and to develop automated lists of keyword combinations that are likely to turn up in search queries, the sources said. If successful, the system will match more searches to advertisements, and thus boost revenue."Google wants to take the technology even further. Its proposed service would allow marketers to pay to have a Web page examined more often for inclusion in sponsored listings, according to one source. Instead of having to bid on thousands of keywords, a large advertiser--such as Amazon.com--could rely on Google's search technology to automatically create connections between its Web pages and related search queries. Amazon would pay Google to examine thousands of its pages and to serve an ad whenever the software deemed it appropriate. Amazon would pay an amount previously bid at auction for those pages, whenever people clicked on its listings.
In this scenario, a Web surfer who searched Google.com for "Stevie Wonder" might see a sponsored listing for "Stevie Wonder at Amazon.com," for example. Amazon may not have bid on those granular keywords, but Google's crawlers will have found CDs and books on the musician during the engine's indexing and will have automatically placed an ad based on that query.
Mind over machine?
By contrast, Overture takes a slightly more human approach to advertising. It employs slews of account managers who help marketers invent new keyword combinations to drive people to their online stores, according to an Overture representative. It also offers technology that lets marketers measure the effectiveness of their search campaigns, as well as of campaigns via e-mail, Google or banner ads.
"We work with advertisers closely to make sure they're bidding on the most possible keywords," said the Overture representative.
Google has faced criticism of its automated marketing tools in the past. In one case, it served up an advertisement for a suitcase maker in a news article about a murder investigation in which body parts were discovered in a travel case.
Nevertheless, ad-matching technology could become essential as search queries get more complex over time. And as Web surfers get more savvy, they tend to enter more search terms for better results, according to search experts.
"The limitations of search-engine marketing are the burdens on marketers. Managing keyword campaigns is a nightmare...and lots of keywords are left on the table," said James Lamberti, a research director at ComScore. "A move from a manual to a highly automated process will be the next big shift for the industry."
Saturday, May 08, 2004
AOL exercises Google warrants | CNET News.com
AOL exercises Google warrants | CNET News.com: "America Online unit has purchased 7.4 million preferred shares in the search leader for $22 million, or about $3 a share. The purchase stems from a warrant issued to AOL in 2002 that gave the company the option to buy these shares at that set price.
AOL currently has an agreement to run Google's AdWords commercial search links alongside its own search results. Google charges advertisers a fee every time a Web surfer clicks such a link and shares the fee with AOL for links that appear in results hosted by AOL's various services.
The partnership has become lucrative. In 2003, AOL generated $200 million from Google, up from $35 million in 2002.
AOL isn't the only company slated to benefit from Google's IPO. Yahoo also has a minority stake in Google, despite considering it one of its biggest competitors"
AOL currently has an agreement to run Google's AdWords commercial search links alongside its own search results. Google charges advertisers a fee every time a Web surfer clicks such a link and shares the fee with AOL for links that appear in results hosted by AOL's various services.
The partnership has become lucrative. In 2003, AOL generated $200 million from Google, up from $35 million in 2002.
AOL isn't the only company slated to benefit from Google's IPO. Yahoo also has a minority stake in Google, despite considering it one of its biggest competitors"
Saturday, May 01, 2004
Google's fancy new float (for US eyes only)
Features: "Google's earnest but likeable founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin are asking potential Google investors to read the entire, 164-page prospectus submitted to the SEC last night. Then, based on what they have read, they must decide how many shares they want and how much they would like to pay for them.
Based on these applications, Google - in league with underwriters Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse First Boston - will fix an initial public offering price that it hopes will last and will then allocate shares to those people who either matched or exceeded (but not by too much) it. It is thus like a giant game of 'make a thoroughly well-informed guess at the number of sweeties in the sweetie jar'.
The shares on sale will be some of those of Page and Brin themselves, along with those of other existing investors that the two are hoping to persuade to get involved. Its investors include Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tiger Woods and Shaqille O'Neill; no wonder they'll be called Class A stocks.
But, since it is clear at this stage neither how many shares will be on sale, nor how much they will go for, there is no real guessing at the value of this first visit of the world's most eagerly awaited stock to the stock market. The only figure Google has committed to is $2.7bn, an estimate of the total offering price generated so NYSE could set a registration fee ($344,000).
However, for most of our readers there is something of a problem: no-one 'located' outside the US will be able to bid. For such a global business, this is vexing, especially given Google's reasoning: 'We have not undertaken any efforts to qualify this offering for offers to individual investors in any jurisdiction outside the US.'In other words, it was too much like hard work to do all thi"
Based on these applications, Google - in league with underwriters Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse First Boston - will fix an initial public offering price that it hopes will last and will then allocate shares to those people who either matched or exceeded (but not by too much) it. It is thus like a giant game of 'make a thoroughly well-informed guess at the number of sweeties in the sweetie jar'.
The shares on sale will be some of those of Page and Brin themselves, along with those of other existing investors that the two are hoping to persuade to get involved. Its investors include Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tiger Woods and Shaqille O'Neill; no wonder they'll be called Class A stocks.
But, since it is clear at this stage neither how many shares will be on sale, nor how much they will go for, there is no real guessing at the value of this first visit of the world's most eagerly awaited stock to the stock market. The only figure Google has committed to is $2.7bn, an estimate of the total offering price generated so NYSE could set a registration fee ($344,000).
However, for most of our readers there is something of a problem: no-one 'located' outside the US will be able to bid. For such a global business, this is vexing, especially given Google's reasoning: 'We have not undertaken any efforts to qualify this offering for offers to individual investors in any jurisdiction outside the US.'In other words, it was too much like hard work to do all thi"
By the Numbers: Google IPO Filing Tells Story of '03
By the Numbers: Google IPO Filing Tells Story of '03: The first quarter of '04 is positively eye-popping: $390 million in revenue, $64 million in net income. This is a company on track to do $1.8 billion in business in 2004 only six years after launching.
Partner Pay Intrudes on Google Fantasy: "The folks at Google would have you believe that they've modeled their company on the principles of Warren Buffett.
But investor beware: The more appropriate comparison is Willy Wonka"
Gmail accounts go up for bid | CNET News.com: "Google, which last month announced it was testing a new e-mail system, invited 1,000 people to join the trial. Gmail offers 1 gigabyte of storage and includes a news aggregation page and newsgroup interface, and allows users to search through their e-mail. The service has generated excitement, but not as much as Google's upcoming IPO...
Beta testers invited by Google to take part in its new free e-mail service also received invitations to give to another person, but many are being auctioned on eBay, so far fetching bids as high as $61.
"Gmail is still in beta testing, so Google is strictly limiting how many people are using the service at this time," wrote one seller, who has five days left on the auction and six interested bidders. "This is an opportunity to get in 'on the ground floor' with this interesting new e-mail service."
Currently, 42 testers have listed their invitations on eBay, with one offering to sell an additional invitation outright--for a mere $199. "
Partner Pay Intrudes on Google Fantasy: "The folks at Google would have you believe that they've modeled their company on the principles of Warren Buffett.
But investor beware: The more appropriate comparison is Willy Wonka"
Gmail accounts go up for bid | CNET News.com: "Google, which last month announced it was testing a new e-mail system, invited 1,000 people to join the trial. Gmail offers 1 gigabyte of storage and includes a news aggregation page and newsgroup interface, and allows users to search through their e-mail. The service has generated excitement, but not as much as Google's upcoming IPO...
Beta testers invited by Google to take part in its new free e-mail service also received invitations to give to another person, but many are being auctioned on eBay, so far fetching bids as high as $61.
"Gmail is still in beta testing, so Google is strictly limiting how many people are using the service at this time," wrote one seller, who has five days left on the auction and six interested bidders. "This is an opportunity to get in 'on the ground floor' with this interesting new e-mail service."
Currently, 42 testers have listed their invitations on eBay, with one offering to sell an additional invitation outright--for a mere $199. "
Friday, April 30, 2004
Google Weblogs
How to sound like a Google insider
By Frank Barnako, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 9:49 AM ET Apr 30, 2004
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- Bloggers have come to the aid of those who can't bring themselves to read the prospectus for the Google stock offering and lack their own spy networks in Silicon Valley.
Aaron Swartz, a self-described "teenage writer, coder and hacker," maintains a Google watch at Google Weblog: His latest post comes from a temporary worker, who described trying to eavesdrop on yesterday's company meeting about the stock offering. Afterward, "We grabbed someone we knew, who told us, 'I think we're doing the right thing.'"
Jason Calacanis, a serial Internet entrepreneur, sponsors The Unofficial Google Weblog - google.weblogsinc.com: as part of his Weblogs Inc. venture. Nino Marchetti, a freelance journalist in San Mateo, Calif., writes it. He watches for stories and information, often picking up bits and pieces the major media don't have.
Google Blogoscoped - About Me - Why a Google Blog?: is written by a 20-something-year-old German, Jan Philipp Lenssen. His day job is designing Web sites. Lenssen concentrates on the technology behind Google. His programming skills come in handy as he passes along links and tips on how he makes Google do even more.
Google IPO Central - Unofficial Site for Latest Investing and Stock Offering News has been reporting on its eponymous beat for eight months. Other sites for interested potential investors include Watching Google Like A Hawk - Google News Watch Site; We Love Google :: Google Rules!: "Google Fan", which reported that one of the company's founders drives a Toyota Prius; and � Google Indicateur: .
By Frank Barnako, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 9:49 AM ET Apr 30, 2004
WASHINGTON (CBS.MW) -- Bloggers have come to the aid of those who can't bring themselves to read the prospectus for the Google stock offering and lack their own spy networks in Silicon Valley.
Aaron Swartz, a self-described "teenage writer, coder and hacker," maintains a Google watch at Google Weblog: His latest post comes from a temporary worker, who described trying to eavesdrop on yesterday's company meeting about the stock offering. Afterward, "We grabbed someone we knew, who told us, 'I think we're doing the right thing.'"
Jason Calacanis, a serial Internet entrepreneur, sponsors The Unofficial Google Weblog - google.weblogsinc.com: as part of his Weblogs Inc. venture. Nino Marchetti, a freelance journalist in San Mateo, Calif., writes it. He watches for stories and information, often picking up bits and pieces the major media don't have.
Google Blogoscoped - About Me - Why a Google Blog?: is written by a 20-something-year-old German, Jan Philipp Lenssen. His day job is designing Web sites. Lenssen concentrates on the technology behind Google. His programming skills come in handy as he passes along links and tips on how he makes Google do even more.
Google IPO Central - Unofficial Site for Latest Investing and Stock Offering News has been reporting on its eponymous beat for eight months. Other sites for interested potential investors include Watching Google Like A Hawk - Google News Watch Site; We Love Google :: Google Rules!: "Google Fan", which reported that one of the company's founders drives a Toyota Prius; and � Google Indicateur: .
OOP
OOP: "There is no over optimization penalty:
From GG: 'Has Google applied some sort of OOP or filter to the algorithm since the Florida update or was the drastic change in SERPs purely the result of new ranking criteria?'
It's the second one. People post around here about filters, blocking, penalties, etc. etc. A far better explanation is 'things which used to work before don't receive the same amount of credit now.' It's natural for people who are way out there with their linking strategies or their page-building strategies to think of a drop as an over-optimization penalty, but it's more realistic to conclude that Google is weighting criteria differently so that over-optimized sites just aren't doing as well now. http://www.markcarey.com/googleguy-says/archives/discuss-denial-of-google-over-optimization-penalty.html "
Later in discussion: OOP: "I had 2 sites with 2 owners both targeting the same phrase
they had the one and 2 postions
they both got kicked out during florida
the one guy didn't sweat it , the ohter was emailing wanting to try anything
I took the keywords out of about 50 inbound links and took the keywords out of the title tag and a bunch of the text
nothing happened then suddenly they where both back except the guy whose site was the same was at number 1 and the one i had chaged was number 25 "
From GG: 'Has Google applied some sort of OOP or filter to the algorithm since the Florida update or was the drastic change in SERPs purely the result of new ranking criteria?'
It's the second one. People post around here about filters, blocking, penalties, etc. etc. A far better explanation is 'things which used to work before don't receive the same amount of credit now.' It's natural for people who are way out there with their linking strategies or their page-building strategies to think of a drop as an over-optimization penalty, but it's more realistic to conclude that Google is weighting criteria differently so that over-optimized sites just aren't doing as well now. http://www.markcarey.com/googleguy-says/archives/discuss-denial-of-google-over-optimization-penalty.html "
Later in discussion: OOP: "I had 2 sites with 2 owners both targeting the same phrase
they had the one and 2 postions
they both got kicked out during florida
the one guy didn't sweat it , the ohter was emailing wanting to try anything
I took the keywords out of about 50 inbound links and took the keywords out of the title tag and a bunch of the text
nothing happened then suddenly they where both back except the guy whose site was the same was at number 1 and the one i had chaged was number 25 "
Form S-1 googles registration doc
Form S-1: "As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 29, 2004 Registration No. 333-
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM S-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
Under
The Securities Act of 1933
GOOGLE INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter) "
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM S-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
Under
The Securities Act of 1933
GOOGLE INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter) "
John Battelle's Searchblog on Googles open letter
John Battelle's Searchblog: "While my summary of the letter may sound negative, it's my honest and initial response: to me, the letter comes off pretty strong, and likely will anger many on Wall Street. But I have to commend the founders for sticking to their beliefs, and using the IPO as something of a megaphone/soapbox. It is brave, unique, and rather commendable to very publicly state that the founders are controlling the company, and the founders will decide what is best for Google, not Wall Street. They've set themselves a very high long-term bar, claiming they will best the system, in essence. I think it will be very interesting to see how Wall Street responds. There is a chance, in the end, that the Street will feel slighted, and turn its back on the company."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)