| 1:50 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
A lot mor of the web might become relatively invisible if Google dropped ODP. YAHOO! is not likely to start listing many of the sites that ODP lists. Since the ODP offers a free licence, YAHOO! could blend the ODP with its own results.........though they'd probably hate to have to put the dmoz information on the YAHOO! site.
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 1:53 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Good question about the legalities
If ODP is considered open source, then I doubt Yahoo! or Google could be done for anti-competitive practices
Since open source is meant to be "open source", it shouldnt mean that a business is obligated to use it.
I guess it would be illegal if Yahoo "threatened" Google....and that can easily be done in a smoke filled room :)
However, like said, Google has high standards, and you have to ask who is REALLY in control here
| 1:55 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I've never been able to get listed in ODP so any difference to me would be indirect, perhaps by affecting sites who link to me.
| 2:06 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Forcing a company to drop a product as part of a contract would be anti competitive.
Doesn't matter if it is free or not.
The idea is that it hurts consumers.
Lots of companies get away with this stuff - doesn't mean they should.
Of course, Yahoo probably wouldn't phrase stuff that way. And smarter companies can get around this somewhat by implying certain things in negotiations.
One example of somewhat similar conduct:
| 2:12 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|What would be the overall effect to you, if Yahoo told Google to dump the ODP as part of a new contract provision? |
I would start by notifying clientele of the event itself, and then go on to explain why now, even more of my attention is spent away from the ODP.
I would then continue such a notification with a statement regarding why it is that I no longer felt as though the ODP was a legitimate source of targeted traffic.
Thankfully, many existing clients understand that the ODP, alone, is very much worthless - as reflected in traffic statistics.
| 2:12 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 2:12 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
would only apply if you could successfully argue that ODP is better than Yahoo for relevancy?? :)
| 2:21 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Very valid point ChrisR. I would imagine if it happens, no mention of yahoo would be made. More along the lines of, "we aren't happy with the odp" etc..etc.
| 3:33 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If Google dropped ODP then the database would lose a lot of information valuable to their visitors.
If ODP were to be dropped from google it would not hurt me all together but it would change the way things happened. ODP is a nice structure, if google were to lose ODP then a competitor would pull ahead by having the advantage of the ODP.
| 3:36 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If Google dropped the Googlized version of ODP, it wouldn't impact me at all from what I can envision. I think its reasonable to assume that Google would continue to spider the ODP links. So pages with inbound ODP links would get the appropriate PR value for the link. My site is of a business/selling theme and I believe very few in my audience search using the Googlized ODP directory.
My site isn't in ODP right now. The only way this move would affect me, is if it changes Google's algo for computing SERPs. If the ODP links counted for less, then this could actually help me a lot.
| 3:40 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think replacing ODP with Yahoo directory will be a smart move by Google. This will also increase the relevancy of Google directory as IMHO yahoo directory is more relevant and up to date than ODP.
| 3:42 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
przero2 i disagree on the statement you made about Yahoo being more up to date than DMOZ. Yahoo has dozens of dead listings that have been in there for a long time even after reporting them they are still there. Sites are not added unless you pay so many sites are neglected. How can you say a site that is moderated +pay is a better resource than vulenteer workers updating a DB all the time.
That is like you saying Overture only driven results are better than google. :)
| 3:46 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>>>vulenteer workers updating a DB all the time.
This statement is not entirely true either. As many, many people have experienced and become frustrated with ODP as it can sometimes take over 6 months to get a site listed. People are more willing to take the time to get a job done when they are getting paid. Fact of life.
| 3:49 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
agerhart since ODP added their 'Greenbuster' function catagories have been updated more than ever catching up with much of the unlisted sites waiting in the unreviewed.
| 3:52 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
What's the "Greenbuster function" on ODP? It sounds like some sort of product for golfers who don't know how to putt. :)
| 4:38 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
|Yahoo has dozens of dead listings that have been in there for a long time even after reporting them they are still there. Sites are not added unless you pay so many sites are neglected. How can you say a site that is moderated +pay is a better resource than vulenteer workers updating a DB all the time. |
In theory, the ODP can review and list more sites than Yahoo does because it doesn't charge for reviews and has a larger labor force. In practice, the ODP's quality varies enormously from category to category, depending on who the editors are. (And on whether the categories or subcategories even have editors; many don't.)
Bottom line: The ODP might do a better job than Yahoo for "Widgets," but Yahoo might do a better job than the ODP for "Thingamabobs." It all depends on the topic.
| 5:09 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'm another one who wouldn't really be affected by it - I can't get listed in ODP.
It's an interesting thought, though. I rather like the idea ... not just because it wouldn't affect me, but because to me, that would make Google's results more like "pure Google" to me.
| 5:30 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I just can't see Google caving in to a demand from Yahoo to drop ODP. Although Google might have its own reasons for dropping ODP in time, it seems to me that Yahoo needs Google more than the other way around. Not having a Google deal is a great way for Yahoo to continue to lose search market share.
| 5:35 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
ok, so Google lands a contract with AOL. The next thing they do is piss AOL by not using the DMOZ/AOL directory. Yeah, that sounds like a good plan.
Yahoo and AOL are commetitors. I don't think they would like the other guy's directory fueling Google. So yes, Yahoo can try. But AOL will object.
Perhaps Google will create a google.yahoo.com thats directory is powered by Yahoo inself. That would make sense. To Google fuels to choose from.
| 5:40 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
almsot zero effect on me so i dont mind if they drop them.i have two new sites in dmoz that need to be crawled by google and we wil lsee the traffic in next months. right now and even before pr 0 penalty i didnt have a single site in dmoz and traffic was BIG.
| 5:43 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The site that I'm responsible for was only last month listed in ODP, and it is not yet listed in the Google Directory.
It's hard to say what the impact of such a change might be on the site's traffic patterns.
| 6:10 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
>>Perhaps Google will create a google.yahoo.com thats directory is powered by Yahoo inself. That would make sense. To Google fuels to choose from. <<
Indications are that YAHOO! already uses PR in searches. Extending this a little bit to apply it within categories would be much better than the alphabetical listings YAHOO! now has. You wouldn't have to wade through all the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! sites to get to the good ones.
| 6:44 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If I had a say in it, I would only drop DMOZ if I was prepared to do my own directory. But why do this, when it would take much more effort to maintain it, would not make much sense, unless it was such a BIG part of my PR system. Anyway, Y!'s directory is by far inferior to DMOZ's.
I'll 2nd ChrisR's comments as well, Y! does not have enough ground to make this demand, they themselves use another SE's db. They obviously choose to do this with Google, cause they do such a good job. Why force them to be inferior now?
Google is however changing, I'm seeing more and more push toward traditionally advertising their product. I don't disagree with it, but I can see a Overture in the making. Not sure if this is good for the general consumer. Time for someone else to step-up and make another attempt at this SE thing. Teoma, maybe, but not as AskJeeves. Just my opinion.
| 7:17 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If Google dropped odp as a directory I would not consider it a great crisis. Google would be losing a free and valuable service. However, I feel that odp is a major factor in google's pagerank and link pop factoring. If they were to remove this as a factor, their search results may drop a step and I would be disappointed. I am quite confident that google will not do either. Over the long term google seems to be the only search engine with intelligent management. They have not made stupid decisions in the past. I believe that is a pattern that will continue. Furthermore, I feel that the partnership with aol is far more significant to google than the yahoo deal. The yahoo deal displays lower level results. The deal with aol, netscape and compuserve will be displaying nearly pure google results as well as adwords. Since aol ultimately owns dmoz, don't expect to see any rash decisions made by the folks at google. They are much smarter than that. They will continue to build and will soon pass yahoo without looking back.
| 7:20 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Brett hehehe you got me thinking, did you ask that question couz you know something we don't know ? ;)
| 7:26 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Welcome to WebmasterWorld, cpowell.
> The yahoo deal displays lower level results. The deal with aol, netscape and compuserve will be displaying nearly pure google results as well as adwords.
Good point, I completely missed that. For niche terms it doesn't matter much, but for those of us whose inktomi listings don't bring AOL referals in part because they were buried, this could help considerably.
| 7:28 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I think he started it to get things going early this morning :)
Or, if you believe in conspiracy theories he is "really" taking a informal poll for GoogleGuy ;)
| 9:29 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The issue I see with ODP is differing standards across categories and across editors. And also in one of my chats with a ODP editor, it came across that ODP received a junk of submissions because it is FREE ... So the editors have a mammoth task of catching up to ever growing submissions. One would hope that the submissions to Yahoo are much more controlled due to the "fee" involved and only "some what" serious sites ever submit to Yahoo. That said, I do not like Yahoo charging an annual fee of 299 ... It should be more like a 50 or so to compensate the reviewers. Also, I would think DMOZ should change its policy of being FREE/OPEN and charge a one time fee of 50 or so as that would help ODP editors compensated a "little" and keep a "tab" on junk submissions.
Although Yahoo and ODP have flaws and dead listings, I am currently of the opinion, Google switching to Yahoo and dropping ODP is a good idea (not the least of which is it will be beneficial to me:) )
| 10:08 pm on May 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I don't think Yahoo will ask Google to drop ODP. If the Yahoo/Google deal ends, they'll probably start showing Inktomi results again. When people realize Yahoo is supplying this garbage, Yahoo's market share will plummet even more than it already has. In other words, Google wears the pants in this relationship.
| 2:03 am on May 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
More than if Yahoo would ask Google to drop ODP - if I were at Google(:)), I would initiate that myself and offer that as a carrot to save Yahoogle deal. It makes plain business sense to me!. Although Google has AOL now, continuing Yahoo relationship bodes well for Google's future prospects (not the least of which is an IPO soon ..!). And by replacing ODP with Yahoo, Google has little to lose and much to gain. Again a plain common business sense dictates that this should happen IMHO.
As to AOL/Netscape/ODP and how that affects Google/AOL relationship - ask Mr. Steve Case to replace IE with Netscape first for AOLers?
| 2:22 am on May 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
If Google were to drop ODP, I doubt that Yahoo would give them their directory. An Option I have wondered about is Google taking over administrating ODP from AOL. ODP does need major help if it is to continue, Google and AOL would benefit.
| This 76 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 76 ( 1  3 ) > > |