05.08.08
Posted in Google, Microsoft, Responses, Search Engines, Technology News, Yahoo at 12:00 am by Brandon Wirtz
Microsoft is moving on to Facebook. Poor MSFT what are you thinking? Facebook isn’t getting rich on it’s ad strategy. If it was it wouldn’t have wanted your money the last time you invested in them. If you are shopping to compete with GOOG then quit looking at big players that aren’t competing, and start looking at little players who might if they had the money.
Despite agreeing with Scoble on the idea that the Google Model’s days are numbered, it is not because Social Sites like Facebook are going to replace them, it is because eventually people are not going to need to go looking, the tools will just know what you want.
I have been working on a Techmeme Style product that works off of your OPML file. Anyone can have their own Meme, bought the domain it is practically ready to launch. Only trouble, the CPU requirements are HUGE. Maybe I’ll convert it to run on Google’s servers…. Oh wait that makes Google Relevant again.
Robert is right the current model will become more like Techmeme and more like Mahalo.com and more like FaceBook… But Google is not going to sit there and do nothing. Google adapts and grows.
I can see all of the pieces being made ready to jump on any of us that are testing the waters, after WE figure out what works. Google doesn’t need to have a finished product just enough beta bits to make sure that whatever models start to look like they could work can be crushed.
Insert your favorite explicative, Google can crush me at any moment just by de-listing me, same for Mahalo. If Google said, "Hey Jason Calacanis your site is just a very pretty splog, or at least that is what we are going to claim so our stocks don’t fall on news that Techmeme’s crowd says you’re going to crush us in 3 years" well Mahalo revenue would drop 80% over night and the 3 years that it takes to recoup the cost of a post would now take 15. That would end the butt kicking.
I just found out about Google "Sets" which looks a lot like what I have been talking about for the last 3 months with figuring out what a set of words category is, so that you can tune the results contextually. If I know that the last 100 searches you did were about food, I know a Chili Dog is just a Chili Dog. If the last 100 searches you did were X rated I know that you are looking for something a bit grosser.
This is just one of the pieces that form the Lego’s that Google is building. And it is one of the public ones, we don’t get to see the ones they don’t care to share. Matt Cutts only tells us what it is in Google’s interest to tell us.
If you read my "rant" about Greatest Living American, you start to get where I’m going with this. This week the "right answer" to who is the Greatest Living American is "Brandon Wirtz" or "Steven Colbert". That is the only time it should be this. If my mom gives her 3rd graders the task of writing an essay on who they think the Greatest Living American is you don’t want them to write about Perry Como, Night of the Living Dead, or How to make grilled cheese because they used Mahalo. And I don’t want them to say it is me because they used Google And really Norman Borlaug may not be the "right" answer but it is the only answer I could find that wasn’t me or Steven.
Results that are free from the possibility of manipulation is part of the future of search. Results that are contextually relevant to the searcher is part of the future of search. Results that are contextually relevant to the events of the moment are part of the future of search.
When Oprah has someone on her show for the next 12 hours a perfect search engine would know that 90% of the people looking for that person wants to know about that person "through" Oprah. Similarly when "Don’t forget the Lyrics" is on searches for things that look very similar to words from a song are about a song, not about what ever the words are about. "Feet Down Below His Knee" is not about how one sprints, or trousers (isayhello gets this wrong too since I don’t have a large enough Lyric library to reference, but I get it right with a YouTube video).
Google Is starting to get this, as Two days ago above search results for Greatest Living American was a link to CNN’s article about the Colbert Webby. All of the points that I and Scoble make about the future of search, and what our "Dashboards for Life" will look like Google is building.
The people who aren’t getting this seemingly is Microsoft. They are in such a race to show they get it by cutting a check they are missing all of the small innovative companies that are making it work. I would encourage MSFT to buy Mahalo. (Jason if they cut you a check for $300 million I want 1% for putting the idea out there) Because Mahalo brings a piece of the Pie that is needed, Human summarized results. There is not enough CPU or a large enough database to classify things the way an army of volunteers/cheap labor can. Mahalo can take the 100 things each hour that people are looking for, and sort them, compile a headline, and find the source of the trend in record time, and if MSFT wants me to use Live.com as a Landing page that is part of what they need.
If Microsoft wants to by Techmeme, I would root them on. Gabe Rivera has proven that he can create Meme’s for various subjects, and I’m sure if someone paid him he could create 300 Meme’s that fit personality profiles for 80% of the people out there, and that would make them happy to start their day on a Microsoft site, and you know what most of those people’s search results could be filtered through the sites in their Meme.
I’m sorry I don’t support the Facebook buy. They just don’t know how to make people happy. I thought Facebook Apps had potential, but they are all such time wasters. I really wanted to like them. Stack on that Facebook doesn’t really know how to monetize their users, and I don’t see anything in Facebook that isn’t in LinkedIn. If LinkedIn goes the way of Facebook, I’m dropping it.
This is a response to:
Anders Bylund: Microsoft is probing Facebook’s merger interest
SmoothSpan Blog: Is Microsoft Playing Possum for Yahoo? It Could Be Much Worse!
Jim Goldman: Microsoft’s About Face With Facebook—Is It In Writing?
MG Siegler: The Microsoft buying Facebook rumors commence, again
Joel Evans: Is Microsoft still shopping?
Nicholas Carlson: Microsoft’s plan for Web growth, minus Yahoo and Facebook
Permalink
05.05.08
Posted in Advertising, Google, Microsoft, Search Engines, Yahoo at 10:26 am by Brandon Wirtz
I have to say that I thought buying Yahoo was the wrong move. Yahoo didn’t have an Adsense/Adwords product that was successful, their use of Adwords in order to raise their Search Engine Earnings is a testament to that. So what should Microsoft do?
1. Convert the Microsoft owned Building on Pear Street in Mountain View to be the first headquarters for Microsoft’s new Ad Product.
It has to be in Silicon Valley, and it would be better if it were NOT on the over crowded SVC campus, and there isn’t time to build a new campus. MSFT has this building and it is a nice size and walking distance to Microsoft SVC, and Google. Which is important because every time Google has a Blogger Event, or an Ad Expo, there needs to be one at Microsoft as well. Microsoft Culture doesn’t always merge well so finding a new home near, but not on an existing campus give the Acquisitions a better chance of bringing their expertise rather than being molded in to Microsofties too quickly.
2. Acquire Adsdaq. Adsdaq is the best non-Google banner ad company out there. There are bigger ones, but Adsdaq has a simple intuitive UI, that makes sense, and with MSFT behind it could achieve the necessary volume to be a true success. I don’t believe entirely in the name your own price ad serving model, but it would be a benefit to MSFT early on because it would allow the expectation that you would get less than 100% fill rate, which would allow time to grow ad inventory to meet demand.
3. Acquire Compete. I don’t even like Compete, but there are a lot of people who trust it more than Alexa for traffic analysis, and that is an important component. Microsoft is going to need to build a better than Google Analytics tools quickly, and it seems like Compete has the biggest jump in this space.
4. Acquire ISayhello.com . Microsoft needs a deep understanding of not just keywords, but keyword relationships, the ability to mine data quickly and efficiently, and ISayHello.com brings that to the table. Until there is an Ad for every keyword on the planet Microsoft will need to be able to do contextual matches against categories, content types, and working out those relationships will also allow Microsoft to do something Google doesn’t. Let you easily decide if you want to run ads on Pages that distinctly say your product sucks. With out the ability to determine the actual meaning of the words on the page you could very well be spending money to advertise on sites that are bashing your product, already selling your product, both of these scenarios should be up to the ad buyer.
5. Don’t Force Dev, on a Microsoft Platform. It should get moved eventually, but time is critical, and many of the companies that are going to need to get bought won’t be running ASP and MSSQL. Encourage Flexibility, and work on building API’s to connect what is out there to Microsoft Platforms. This will do do things, Shorten time to product, and make creation of tools for sale to end users easier. There will be a time in the near future when people will be ready Microsoft Ad Server, for managing their inventory of In House ads, and their ads provided by third parties. Knowing how to talk to anything and everything will be part of building that.
6. Get Scoble Back. You don’t even have to hire him full time, but Scoble brings legitimacy to bloggers. Microsoft needs to be the exclusive ad provider for all of Scoble’s projects. While they are at it, they need to get Dave Winer, Om Malik, Fake Steve Jobs, and Perez Hilton. And for good measure the Technorati Top 100 by Authority and by Favorites.
7. Be an Omnimedia Company. Create products that don’t exist now, that allow for Microsoft to be a "One Stop Shop" for advertising. Cut a deal with Clearchannel, along with other radio stations, PBS and NPR. Yes PBS. Every time there is a "This show sponsored in part by" there is an opportunity to advertise. And the Cost is cheap, and the ads are simple so they are easy to build. Every small town newspaper on the planet, even if it is just to sell classifieds. A reseller program for Adam’s outdoor. You get the picture. The idea should be that every mom and pop shop should be able to go to one place and get any type of ad they need.
8. Build an MCSE equivalent for Advertising. By creating lots of local experts Microsoft can create a partner network to off load support and make the ad buying experience more personal than any of the existing products. Many Graphic Designers would be happy to create ads and manage them, many companies that handle media buys would like to be able to say they were a certified partner. This helps customers know who to trust.
9. Offer payment as products from Microsoft and Partners. A lot of "small fish" will take all year to get $100 from Google. So why not let the Game Blogger get a game at the Microsoft Employee price every so often. Halo 3 for $20, and Blue Dragon for $20 is a great incentive to the High School Kid who wants to get in to Blogging, but is going to take 3 years to get a check from Google.
10. Allow the use of Ad revenue to buy more Ads on the network. I hate having to take my Adsense dollars into my bank accounts so that I can put them back in Adwords. Save some money and just let me pull from one into the other.
11. Maintain Transparency. The most irksome thing about Google for ad buyers and ad sellers, is that you don’t know what commission Google is getting. So are you paying $1 for a click that cost 10 cents? Are you being paid a penny for a click that Google charge a quarter for? I’m confident Google moves the slider around based on the volume of your buy, and the volume of your sell. But it is hard to trust Google. You know you will get paid but it is hard to anticipate your income because the CPM’s seem to flux with where Google thinks it needs to get its earnings.
12. Remember the Little Guy. Google got to the size it is buy taking the big and the small. You can advertise with as little as a dollar, and you can get paid as little as $30 a year. Being a success means growing with your customers.
Permalink
02.13.08
Posted in Microsoft at 1:57 pm by Brandon Wirtz
Maryam who you may know as the good looking one in the Scoble house, asks "Are they Crazy" in response to Yahoo turning down Microsoft’s buy out offer.
No Maryam Yahoo is quite sane. While $31 a share is a better price than Yahoo is getting on its stock at the moment, Yahoo is unlikely to benefit from a merger with Microsoft.
Microsoft hasn’t really figured out how to make money online. Neither has Yahoo. So merging the two companies is unlikely to create a power house, but rather compound the issues they both already have.
The biggest thing Yahoo has going for it is Mail. And Yahoo users are unlikely to like running the Microsoft Live Mail, so the only benefit there would be a unified Advertising front.
Yahoo’s communities, Dating, Games, Answers, and Yahooligans could be made immensely profitable if they could unify their profiles and data.
The problem that both Microsoft, and Yahoo face every day is that they are a collection of Pillars. The teams don’t collaborate, they don’t build on each other’s technologies.
Google on the other hand knows that it’s core business is Data. Everything Google does is about how to get more data about what users are doing, and then figures out how to monetize that information later. This leads to a lot of cross group and cross product collaboration.
Google Merging with Yahoo would be an unstoppable force on the Internet which is why the FTC would never let it happen. Who Yahoo really needs to merger with, that would also make Microsoft and Yahoo share holders happy about. Facebook. Facebook doesn’t know how to monetize yet, but they could learn that, what face book has going is that they are sharing data, too much at the moment, I get a headache from the overload of information about my friends everytime I log in to facebook, but… stay with me on this….
Imagine you are looking for a Date. If you used Yahoo Singles with Facebook integration the service could know if your friends are compatible, I would pay big money for that feature alone.
Imagine you are looking to buy a car, a degrees of separation number could come up, so that you could see if your friends would be willing to buy a car from that person.
The possibilities are endless, and the possibilities would add value. Value you can monetize.
Microsoft doesn’t need Yahoo. It needs Facebook. But it needs Facebook to have free reign to use it’s technologies to make block buster web applications. It needs Facebook to be it’s new Bungie.
Yahoo on the other hand needs to find a middleware company and buy them and make all of its parts speak the same language so it can aggregate data.
This post is in response to: Maryam on Yahoo’s rejection of Microsoft
Permalink
02.11.08
Posted in Microsoft at 6:50 pm by Brandon Wirtz
So are you excited about the newest version of Internet Explorer being only a short ways away? No? How about if I told you that it was actually the most standards compliant IE yet?
Well sort of. The problem with changing how IE renders web pages is that with so many web pages already made, and so much of the population creating pages to render correctly in IE6 or IE7 all of those pages could break.
Imagine being Myspace and all of those millions of templates that used to work, all of a sudden don’t. That could be a support nightmare.
Fortunately Microsoft has a solution.
meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=8"
when stuck in the header of an html file it kicks on the new rendering, and if it is not there IE8 Renders the way IE7 did.
Where this gets tricky is, when you start doing fun things with Meta Tags for IE, is when Safari, and FireFox want to do the same thing. I can’t see having a Meta Tag for every browser on the planet, and since other browsers aren’t likely to support IE 8 Super Standards mode, using this mode will alienate some portion of your users.
I’m not sure what the "Right" answer is.
One person suggested that this should be supported in the HTTP header
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: www.example.org
X-UA-Compatible: IE=8
But I think that would cause problems as files passed around the Internet or get saved to hard disk.
It is important to remember that just because a file started on your server doesn’t mean that will be the last place it lives.
This article is in response to:
IE8 and opt-in versioning mechanism (w3.org)
Compatibility and IE8 (blogs.msdn.com)
Permalink