Chicago - 2:59 am on Mar 2, 2003 (gmt 0)

how can you be that positive:

1) the user is looking at a newsgroup NOT searches for antivirus software.
2) the ads look like they are part of the content mix and they disrupt the continuity of the users attention
3) users will click on the text ad by accident, thereby incurring costs
4) 95% of the users viewing this example are on the page to read about a virus -compare that to someone typing antivrus sofware in google
5)margin of error on click error alone dictate a reduction of cost relative to a SERP ad
6)publisher fraud, and blocking redundant IPs and cookies is not the answer
7)the overwhelming majority of commerce acitivity on the Internet takes place when someone goes to the web already having the intention of buying something
8) ONE SHOULD NOT have to BID a property -listing they can't see.
9)One has to opt-out of the program rather than opt in
10)90% of NEW product buys for a user/prospect that is looking for a NEW vendor (referred to as new customer acquisition) comes from an AOL, Yahoo, Google, or MSN SERP
11)reactive ads can not equal proactive ads (my physics teacher told me)
12) and most important----this is not about Google's new service in and of itself---it is about who Google is becoming, and what you will need to feed your appetite for new property in the future.

I am done- if my opinions are not the shared concern of others then this is futile and I must stop taking the time to speak with myself and the few others that share my perspective.

[edited by: Chicago at 3:19 am (utc) on Mar. 2, 2003]