Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo

Microsoft And Yahoo! Team Up To Take On Google


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
38 replies to this topic

#1 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 29 July 2009 - 07:52 PM

From a press release earlier today:
QUOTE
Yahoo! and Microsoft announced an agreement that will improve the Web search experience for users and advertisers, and deliver sustained innovation to the industry. In simple terms, Microsoft will now power Yahoo! search while Yahoo! will become the exclusive worldwide relationship sales force for both companiesí premium search advertisers.


#2 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 30 July 2009 - 02:04 AM

In my opinion, we're looking at an antitrust action in action.

I have shared more detail at the SEO Theory blog.

To sum up my points in a nutshell, Microsoft and Yahoo!'s plan will reduce the number of choices that consumers have AND increase the costs of traffic acquisition for vendors. Only Microsoft stands to gain anything in the long-run.



#3 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,862 posts

Posted 30 July 2009 - 09:17 AM

Danny's got a great FAQ regarding the Bing/Yahoo deal.

IMO, it's a shame that all that great technology Yahoo bought years ago (AltaVista, FAST, etc.) will get pushed aside for Bing technology. puke.gif

#4 Nueromancer

Nueromancer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Location:Bedford Uk

Posted 30 July 2009 - 11:18 AM

QUOTE(Michael Martinez @ Jul 30 2009, 08:04 AM) View Post
In my opinion, we're looking at an antitrust action in action.

I have shared more detail at the SEO Theory blog.

To sum up my points in a nutshell, Microsoft and Yahoo!'s plan will reduce the number of choices that consumers have AND increase the costs of traffic acquisition for vendors. Only Microsoft stands to gain anything in the long-run.


well one strong competitor is better than 2 weak ones and compayed to G's share Y+M is not as big a problem - now iif Eric opens his mouth and screws up again like they did last time it coul dbe G facing an AT case.

#5 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 30 July 2009 - 03:27 PM

I read Danny's thoughts on this deal. He seems to be almost as down on it as me -- a rare moment of conjunction in point of view for us. sarcastic_blum.gif

To be honest, I've seen a lot of skepticism in our industry, and a little bit of support. I really think it's a deal that only works to benefit Microsoft. Yahoo! loses. Searchers lose. Advertisers lose.

Why on Earth should the U.S. or European or any other governments allow this deal to go through?

And does anyone want to take bets on how much longer Carol Bartz will last after this fiasco?

#6 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 30 July 2009 - 05:12 PM

QUOTE
Why on Earth should the U.S. or European or any other governments allow this deal to go through?


Well, some might argue that Google is in such a dominate position the only way either of the two could realistically survive is to combine forces. Especially since the combined entity is still less than half as large as the single biggest player.

What is more interesting to me, though I'm not sure there's anything they could do about it, is what's going to happen in other countries where Y! has a larger marketshare. There are some out there there. Not many, but some.

I think it will be interesting to watch however. Basically Google can use many of the same arguments Microsoft made in getting the simple partnership in a couple of areas shot down recently. lol.gif

QUOTE
And does anyone want to take bets on how much longer Carol Bartz will last after this fiasco?


My bet is not long, if the Y! stock continues to tumble as it did right after the announcement. I have the same feeling as you, that there's basically nothing in it for Yahoo! Especially considering what Y! wanted to make a similar pact just a year ago.

I'm sure she has a beautiful golden parachute built into her contract though.

#7 nethy

nethy

    HR 6

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 974 posts

Posted 30 July 2009 - 09:16 PM

I don't expect any serious antitrust. (1) Microhoo are still a distant second. (2) The MSFT antitrust case was a disaster and did nothing to make any market more competitive. I don't think anyone want to get into that again.

I think advertisers may win out of this. I work mostly in a market where google is 10X larger then Yahoo. I rarely bother going past G! for various reasons but they all might boil down to market share.

Note that Yahoo has served all different search results before. They even served Google results for a while. They have never been much of a search company. They just happen to have the largest network of portals. These need a search engine and if they can make money from that, well that's novel. Otherwise, I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to exit the search business. They needed to do something.

Defining themselves as the unprofitable no.2 search engine bleeding market share daily is not a plan. They have been failing at that for almost ten years now. Time for a change.

#8 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 31 July 2009 - 02:16 PM

QUOTE(Randy @ Jul 30 2009, 03:12 PM) View Post
Well, some might argue that Google is in such a dominate position the only way either of the two could realistically survive is to combine forces. Especially since the combined entity is still less than half as large as the single biggest player.


And therefore combining the two doesn't really accomplish anything.

The search market metric that is being used to label Google as the "dominant" search engine is really just an advertising metric: page views. It has nothing to do with search per se. The real search market isn't being measured (because ideally we would need to see how many visits the engines send to sites they don't control).

Google generates more advertising revenue because it leverages its network into search better than Yahoo! and Microsoft leverage theirs.

And Carol Bartz selling off or discontinuing all the Web properties Yahoo! built up through the years doesn't (on the surface) seem to help Yahoo! increase its advertising inventory.

Here's the thing: According to publicly accessible estimates at Quantcast and Compete, Yahoo! and Microsoft combined already get more monthly search visitors than Google -- approximately 160 million (60 million Yahoo! vs 100 million Microsoft) compared to Google's 145 million.

Given that kind of traffic, this BingHoo deal makes absolutely no sense. Instead of focusing on converting those searchers into page viewers (so they can show more ads), Microsoft and Yahoo! just want to eliminate competition so they can make advertising on their combined networks more expensive.

QUOTE
What is more interesting to me, though I'm not sure there's anything they could do about it, is what's going to happen in other countries where Y! has a larger marketshare. There are some out there there. Not many, but some.


People will be faced with a choice: stay with Microhoo/Binghoo (which basically betrayed their loyalty) or switch to another search engine.

This deal, in my mind, is no threat to Google. It's not about market share. It's about milking bad marketing for as much money as can be obtained. At the end of the ten years Microsoft will leave behind a dry empty husk a company once known as Yahoo!.

#9 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 31 July 2009 - 02:25 PM

QUOTE(nethy @ Jul 30 2009, 07:16 PM) View Post
I don't expect any serious antitrust. (1) Microhoo are still a distant second. (2) The MSFT antitrust case was a disaster and did nothing to make any market more competitive. I don't think anyone want to get into that again.


Not being an expert in antitrust, I have to agree that it seems unlikely. Nonetheless, there are competitive issues that I feel have to be addressed. There is nothing to prevent Microsoft and Yahoo! from bamboozling government lawyers with projections and promises, of course, but I think people need to answer some hard questions.

QUOTE
I think advertisers may win out of this. I work mostly in a market where google is 10X larger then Yahoo. I rarely bother going past G! for various reasons but they all might boil down to market share.


That depends on the marketer, though. Some people depend almost completely on Microsoft or Yahoo! for organic search results.

Some people depend heavily on Yahoo! and Microsoft for PPC traffic because they find a better ROI there (which is an oddity in our industry worthy of considerable discussion in another thread, on another day).

If the cost of acquiring traffic through the superior networks (Yahoo!/Microsoft) increases but the ROI remains steady (or, as Ballmer implies, improves), then advertisers will win because they can pass the additional costs on to consumers (who always get stuck with the bill).

QUOTE
Note that Yahoo has served all different search results before. They even served Google results for a while. They have never been much of a search company. They just happen to have the largest network of portals. These need a search engine and if they can make money from that, well that's novel. Otherwise, I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to exit the search business. They needed to do something.


There are two differences between now and then:

First, Yahoo! back in those days served its directory results before the supplemental Web results -- the directory was fresher and more reliable in those days.

Second, Yahoo! did not have a search technology of its own that had earned respect and trust among tens of millions of Internet users. That technology they now have, and it will supposedly be folded into Bing but in reality regardless of what happens with the code the unique flavor of Yahoo!'s search results will vanish forever.

QUOTE
Defining themselves as the unprofitable no.2 search engine bleeding market share daily is not a plan. They have been failing at that for almost ten years now. Time for a change.


I quite agree. However, search has been vital to their business from day one. They've just unfortunately had CEOs who didn't understand this and leverage the search properly. Now Bartz is gutting the company and leaving it with nothing but an advertising business.

Ain't no one but Microsoft going to benefit from this deal. Mark my words, 'cause people will insist on my eating them if I turn out to be wrong, but I'll be saying "I'll told you so" if I turn out to be right.


#10 mcanerin

mcanerin

    HR 7

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,242 posts
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Posted 31 July 2009 - 02:44 PM

You might be able to argue that MS + Yahoo get a lot of search views, but there is no way you could credibly argue to anyone who does a lot of PPC that Google isn't the dominant latin character language search engine where it counts for business and profits - PPC. Follow the money, and the money on the web leads (currently) to Google.

As a general rule around the world, Google leads significantly in every market that uses latin characters - English, French, Spanish, etc. Yahoo and other search engines tend to do much better in non-Latin character languages, such as Japanese, Chinese and Russian.

Since any country that is likely to launch an anti-trust suit is also likely to use the Latin language (Europe and the Americas), I really don't think this will be an issue. I'm sure US politicians don't care about Yahoo's position in China, for example.

I remember when MS invested a significant amount on money into Apple in order to help maintain a credible competitor in the market in order to avoid US anti-trust issues. Unless Google gets a significant competitor soon, they may be looking at the same issue.

Regardless of everything else, I think that the optics of the US government stepping in to *prevent* a strong competitor to Google in the US would simply make it unfeasible at this time in the US., rightly or wrongly.

Do I think MS+Yahoo is the answer? Dunno. Very different cultures and approaches to marketing may make this a troubled marriage from the start. Of course, it could also make it a very exciting one, depending on how it plays out.

One thing I do know - Right now, I'm not happy with the status quo of Google dominance in my online life. I like Google, but power corrupts.

#11 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 31 July 2009 - 06:07 PM

There is no question that Google dominates in paid search. They generate more revenue through that channel than all their competitors combined.

But paid search does not define search. PPC search marketing is only one part of the larger picture.

More people collectively visit the Microsoft and Yahoo! search destinations each month than visit Google. Google nonetheless generates more page views per visitor than its competitors combined.

That's the problem Microsoft faces -- it doesn't matter how many other search engines they "power" with Bing. They're not leveraging their content as well as Google leverages its own content.

Steve Ballmer should be asking, How does Google get so many people to click around Google's pages so much? That's where the advertising revenue ultimately comes from because the longer people hang out at Google, the more likely they are going to click on a paid listing.

I've done it myself, even knowing that someone has to pay for that click. Sometimes it's just easier to click on the ad than it is to find what I really want to find (if I don't know exactly what I am looking for).

Google has created an environment that feels comfortable to the visitor.

Quantcast estimates that about 50% of all Google visits are made by about 10% of Google's visitors. That's a HUGE core audience of people. Are they clicking on only 10% of the ads, 50% of the ads, less than 10%, more than 50%?

We can all throw rocks at the publicly available estimates provided by services like Alexa, Quantcast, and Compete but when you have to analyze the market you need to look at as much information as possible.

Searchers don't care how many page views Google generates versus other search engines -- that metric only works for Web marketers. Searchers care about whether they find what they are looking for, and as most of us have probably read in occasional research papers and news reports by now, most searchers either change their query or change their search engine when they don't find what they are looking for.

Old surveys used to estimate as much as a 60% overlap in audience between Yahoo! and Google. What people forget in these days of "Google has 70% market share" nonsense is that there is still a huge overlap in the audiences between Google and its competitors. Relatively few people actually use only one search engine.

That means that anyone who believes 70% of all searchers are relying on Google and nothing else, leaving the other search engines to fight over 30% of all searchers, needs to take a breather and look at the data again.

Google controls nothing, but it does generate 70-80% of the page views measured across search engine properties.

#12 Randy

Randy

    Convert Me!

  • Moderator
  • 17,540 posts

Posted 31 July 2009 - 08:45 PM

There are so many ways to spin it, and it'll be interesting to see which way Google does when they cry to the Feds. lol.gif

For instance, if you look just at traffic on could probably make the argument that all three are on reasonably the same footing. Of course that's taking all of Yahoo's and all of Microsoft's various properties into account. Which they'll of course say don't count because it's only a Search deal.

Yeah, some lawyers are going to make a lot of money arguing the various sides of this one!

#13 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,862 posts

Posted 01 August 2009 - 08:58 AM

QUOTE
That means that anyone who believes 70% of all searchers are relying on Google and nothing else, leaving the other search engines to fight over 30% of all searchers, needs to take a breather and look at the data again.


I think you need might be the one that needs a breather. Just look at the actual analytics on ANY site and you'll see the true numbers of people using Yahoo and Microsoft. Hardly any.

I have around 50 different sites in my analytics from various client's sites that I've reviewed. They are in different industries and have varying levels of SEO done to them. (From none to tons.) They all show similar percentages of searches coming from Google, Yahoo and Bing. With Google having well over 70% more like 90%+ and the others splitting the rest.

It's often like 10,000 Google visitors. 500 yahoo and 200 bing.

#14 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,012 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 01 August 2009 - 12:36 PM

QUOTE(Jill @ Aug 1 2009, 06:58 AM) View Post
I think you need might be the one that needs a breather. Just look at the actual analytics on ANY site and you'll see the true numbers of people using Yahoo and Microsoft. Hardly any.


And yet I DO look at analytics data, Jill. A LOT of it.

There are plenty of sites out there getting more traffic from Yahoo! or Bing than from Google. More importantly (because our personal access to data is relatively small compared to what's going on out there overall), I see people across the Web complaining that they get more traffic from Yahoo! and Bing than from Google.

As you yourself have pointed out to occasional ranters, you can only get 10 listings on the first page.

Well, now up to 20 with Local Search injections.

Maybe 25 with News, Book, and a couple of other injections from Universal Search.

Everyone else has to get in line behind those folks.

#15 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,862 posts

Posted 01 August 2009 - 03:08 PM

QUOTE
There are plenty of sites out there getting more traffic from Yahoo! or Bing than from Google.


Would love to see that. I've never seen even 1 site where yahoo or bing have more than Google, or even come close.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

SPAM FREE FORUM!
 
If you are just registering to spam,
don't bother. You will be wasting your
time as your spam will never see the
light of day!