poster_boy - 11:54 pm on Apr 23, 2006 (gmt 0)

In my example if apple wants to run thirty ads related to iPods and they all get better click through rates than any other ad, then they get the top 30 positions. Not a complicated concept and totally scalable.

If a searcher has to scroll past multiple pages of ads from one advertiser, who do you think will get the best CTR?

You as an individual searcher may hate the 30 Apple sponsored ads listings, but if other searchers disagree with you based on CTR, then I think Google and its searchers are best served to rely on the collective wisdom of thousands and thousands of independent searchers, not the arbitrary decision of an editorial team designing an algorithm.

Shopping comparison sites are ranked where they are based in large part on searcher interest, i.e. CTR, despite your deeming them of minimal value. The other half of the equation is their budget which may compensate for lesser CTRs - which you seem to be arguing against, but by allowing large advertisers to use their financial clout to corner the market, you're going to get inundated by exactly what you're complaining about. Wisdom will not inspire a searcher to scroll to page 4 for a different perspective. If they're at all wise, they'll simply look elsewhere.