Forum Moderators: open
In this scenario everyone is happy. The Google 'clean search' brand is not contaminated, but the people who like portals could flock to that alternative entrypoint in their droves. They could even create a separate URL entry point.
This possibility surely cannot have escaped the notice of Yahoo though... which is the point I made yesterday. If you were Yahoo and you knew the dire effect the above development would have, would you not ensure that you could prevent it by signing a bi-lateral delineation contract? I would, but then again we have seen so many examples of portals making disasterously wrong decisions...
I'd like to give Inktomi a little shake.
However, we have seen market share shifts based on the quality of search results. These may occur gradually over 12 months or more, but they happen. Excite was a strong #2 to Yahoo until they stopped updating their database for 8 months. We know what happened to AV. Google's ascendance to it's current strong position hasn't been based on advertising, it's been based on providing the best results. Even non-technical, oblivious-to-everything surfers gradually migrate to quality search results.
I believe that if Yahoo starts providing inferior results, they will lose search traffic over time. If they switch to a different partner that can provide results as good as Google (or nearly so), then, indeed, nobody will notice.
Who's going to twist Googles arm to sign anything that would hamstring them in any way? Why should Google sign any agreement with Yahoo unless there was something in it for Google?
Google are, and always will be, much smarter than Yahoo. Yahoo's foresight and resulting decision making depend on the brainpower of a few of their inner circle executives.
Google's are the result of the total resources at Stanford.
The proof of the above statement is the position Yahoo are now in vis a vis Google. They obviously did not have the foresight to see what Google could do to them nor the smarts to counteract it before it became a problem.
.
[ink.yahoo.com...]
the results look identical to me except that the total number of matches is higher on the second. the second url is the effective on they used when they did use inktomi. I would expect that if there were to switch back to inktomi that would be a leading place to see it.
This is dangerous thinking - IBM was thinking that way many years ago, and they almost went bust.
When one says/thinks "we are and will always be the best/smartest", it is always a recipe for disaster.
Google is the best now, but I strongly believe 2 years from now, someone else will be at the top.
Two years ago all I got for responses was 'Internet' 'Web Search' 'Surfing the Web,' etc. For at least the past year the responses have been more specific (and more helpful) and Google is by far the #1 response; my position on other search engines (except for MSN) is equal to my position on Google. So, obviously people are using Google and they know its Google, and I suspect they know certain results on AOL and Yahoo and etc are Google. I would not anymore call the average surfer "not search savvy."
This is not scientific proof, it is anecdotal (sp?) but it sure differs from what I was getting a year ago. Incidentally most of my customers are women: 99.9%, and they range from the matronly older housewife to young professionals.
Nell said:
But they left a long time ago and no longer have that resource to draw on.
Filo and Yang left in 1995, and the Google guys left in 1998. I guess that means Google gets cut off from this resource you speak of in 2005.
[/tan]
I completely agree with you. So far all the responses I get are "Internet, Websearch or Internet search". Once in a while I get from yahoo or from google but that's it. But yahoo people are getting my results from google and I know that but they don't know that. Majority of the people on yahoo don't know google from crap. Otherwise, they would not be searching there to begin with - I hope you all agree. Not many of us here go to yahoo to search yet yahoo has a large audience like every business has it's own customer base.
With regards to yahoo switching to google, if I were a yahoo I don't even have to ponder about this. I am already a fool because google is dining with me and eating more and more from my plate all the time, while I thought all I would be doing is to introduce google to fine cusine - not eating from my plate. It is a "no brainer" from business standpoint.
No one is arguing that google is not the best for searching, currently - I don't use yahoo for searching, I use goolge. But as a businessman I would never sell competitors products in my store, while I know very well that the competitor has better products to offer and all I am doing is promoting the competition and losing my customers at the same time (who came to my store to buy my products in the first place).
Remember, yahoo users don't care (most of them anyway otherwise they would search on google directly). It's as simple as that from the business standpoint.
Gilmet,
I'm not so sure about that anymore. Two years ago I would have agreed with you completely. But I talk to my customers, and I have some kind of sense for their sophistication on the Web -- and admittedly, it runs the gamut from pure total innocence to wordly wise. But today, more and more know what they do and what they see. I would say, about 50-65% of my customers know exactly what they see and what they get in their searching and who is providing it to them. These are not web gurus, just ordinary shoppers, and as said before: most are women, who are the shoppers of the world.
They know. Believe me they know, because they always want to think they are smarter than I am about how they can get a better price thru searching on the web, than what I offer.
Bottom Line (IMO) : today's shoppers on the web are smarter by far than those two years ago re what they see on a search, and judging it, and outnumber the newcomers who arrive every day. Most know Google, a fair number know who delivers the results on Yahoo and AOL because they see that Google logo out there; and some very savvy ones know the OV system and the results it delivers to MSN and Lycos for paid ads. They know. I am pretty sure about that. How many know? Don't know, but for sure, more and more know.
These folks ain't stupid. It does not take them long to learn what is going on in the search world. Yes, everyday, thousands more novices come on-line and don't know, but I believe they are now outnumbered and forever will be by those already "search-savvy."
Just a thought. I would sure like some scientific research to back up or refute, (HXX I don't care which) my gut.
If they know then they would search directly on google and not on yahoo - they are either not aware or they don't care. It is as simple as that. Either way, it does not make any difference because they prefer searching on yahoo rather than directly on google and that means they like yahoo and it does not matter who provides search results. That is the point I am trying to make.
Sure overall they are better informed about this and that but if they knew that search results came directly from google, why search on yahoo? It is cluttered too and hard to tell categories from web pages and web results and sponsored results and all that.
All other stuff that most people know better now than they did 2 years ago - I agree with that but specifically with yahoo searching, I don't agree with that.
You make sense.
Why can't Yahoo just stay with google and drop the Google name from the results?
This way Yahoo users would have no idea that the results come from Google. Everyone is happy. Yahoo keeps it's users, the users have a good search experience and Google get their money from Yahoo.
Why post that observation in this thread?
Because there is a suggestion that less weight has been applied to an entry in Yahoo. Several people have experienced new Yahoo entries have not flown in Google as expected, and entries that previously were strongly assisted via Yahoo have sunk.
Of course this could all change in the next few days, but if not, I would suggest that this is a clear sign that Yahoo will be moving elsewhere for a backfill partner.
Now watch Google shoot me down by reversing this trend prior to the end of the dance!
Of course this could all change in the next few days, but if not, I would suggest that this is a clear sign that Yahoo will be moving elsewhere for a backfill partner.
I agree with you Napoleon, and I think that new partner`s name will be Fast.
From what I heard, Google used to be just a spin-off company of Yahoo, right? Now the subsidary company is over taking the main company. I think that's quite ironic.
added, just saw this thread [webmasterworld.com...]
From what I heard, Google used to be just a spin-off company of Yahoo, right? Now the subsidary company is over taking the main company. I think that's quite ironic.
NO, Google is not a 'spin off' company from Yahoo.
The founders of both companies went to Stanford, and some of the same venture capital firms invested in both companies.
Yahoo! owns 10% of Google. So why would they switch?
If they keep the contract, it keeps Yahoo! users happy, and Yahoo! gets 10% of Google. Market share wise, Google is *much* bigger than Overture ever was before they went public. So, Yahoo! makes tons of money when Google goes public (if ever) and for now, makes a good 10% of Google's profits...so that investment they made is paying dividends, right now.
The only caveat is will Yahoo! end up losing too much to Google. They aren't interested in the search business, or else they would have bought up more of Google when they could. If Google was public at this point, I think their market capitalization would be higher than Yahoo! so this means Y! can't buy them. (more than likely).
So while Yahoo! could be upset, all they can do is look for other revenue streams but they can't drop Google, because it would hurt them too much, in too many ways, long and short term.
More importantly for Yahoo! it would hurt the VC's that helped breath life to their company. :)
Oh GOD...this is really a Bad News. Yahoo's search experience is going to be worse and it will sure screw the Yahoo brand.
It didn't hurt them the first time...Why would it now?
[edited by: littleman at 1:07 am (utc) on Oct. 2, 2002]
[edit reason] keep it friendly [/edit]
B) Can anyone confirm that Yahoo's web pages lagged behind the Google update for a few days, but are now fully incorporated?
it has to be the worst directory on the web as far as results go - theyve still got loads of geocites listed that expired years ago
back on topic though, even if yahoo own 10% google, theres still no getting away from the fact that google have stole a lot of yahoos thunder - more and more internet users who are less savvy than webmasters are starting to realise that you get better results from google
