Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Google is risking somewhere between $150M to $1B, more or less, on the notion that more Firefox browsers on the Internet favors Google, isn't it? - Or is Google simply performing a public service as Mr Nice Guy and helping out the Firefox people?
- Is it significant that this referral program is being introduced through Google's Adsense program?
- Could Google be wary of a powerful Microsoft that completely destroyed Netscape's business several years ago?
- $1 per install of Firefox... with the size of the market, couldn't that make a lot of rich Adsense folks with the right composition of traffic and website topics?
- Isn't the Firefox referral money something that would make Microsoft verrry nervous?
- Is this the start of a more visible struggle between Microsoft and Google to establish net dominance or parity in the coming years?
And speaking to the $100 referral for Adsense publishers...
- Google owns the contextual ad market presently... why does it need to spend big bucks to recruit more publishers when possibly a $10 or $20 fee would do?
- Could Google's latest earnings show that there is indeed a much larger share of the total advertising dollar to be had and ever more publishers are needed?
- Will this bring about some stability insofar as publishers are concerned, since Google seems to be admitting that it needs publishers badly?
- Is Google mustering a small mercenary army of publishers to help it in what appears to be its coming battles with Microsoft?
Those of us in the Adsense program are equally pioneering, as is Google. Two or five or ten years from now, will we look back on these Google decisions as positive or negative factors in a program that has brought such thrills and enrichment to many of us? Google has done well by most of us so far... will it continue?
Why the insistance on Firefox downloads? Why doesn't Google just want toolbar downloads? Is it vanity?
It's not enough getting Google's name onto the browser. It's getting Microsoft's name off that really makes it sweet for them.
Could Google be wary of a powerful Microsoft that completely destroyed Netscape's business several years ago?
Netscape comitted suicide with the terrible Netscape 4.nn. That's the truth. It had nothing to do with Microsoft.
Netscape comitted suicide with the terrible Netscape 4.nn. That's the truth. It had nothing to do with Microsoft.
jomaxx:
Where are you getting this $150 million to $1 billion estimate? If you're referring only to the $1 per install, I'd be surprised if they paid as much as $1 million in commissions on this.
Google search is the default home pagefor Firefox. Do a search people see Adsense ads, Google makes money. $1.00 invested will probably be several earned.
Perhaps they feel it would be good for their young and in touch image to back the browser. Maybe they're testing the water to see the interest in a Google branded browser.
Also people who know what firefox is probably already have it installed and people who don't know what it is will probably just go to firefox's main site and download it there.
Also the $100 Adsense thing is only if the person makes $100 who signed up for Adsense via your link. So Johnnyspancakes.org, a new site, clicks on your adsense referral link, signs up, then you have to wait for johnny to make $100.
Most adsense users make less than $10 per month, I've read.
And speaking to the $100 referral for Adsense publishers...
- Google owns the contextual ad market presently... why does it need to spend big bucks to recruit more publishers when possibly a $10 or $20 fee would do?
- Could Google's latest earnings show that there is indeed a much larger share of the total advertising dollar to be had and ever more publishers are needed?
- Will this bring about some stability insofar as publishers are concerned, since Google seems to be admitting that it needs publishers badly?
- Is Google mustering a small mercenary army of publishers to help it in what appears to be its coming battles with Microsoft?
I've been arguing here for a long time that the most important cog in the system is the publisher. Not google, not the advertiser. Publishers are what are in short supply ... and getting in an even shorter supply with competitors now making inroads.
$10-$20 fee won't do. Even the $100 is too little. Chitika pays 10% (for first 12 months). I make more than $100 every week from the Chitika referral program.
Why does it need to spend any money? Because search is a miniscule part of how people reach their destinations online. And it's only publishers that can get Google into all those spots they currently do. Google always needed publishers badly and can't afford to lose publishers to the competitors. There does not seem any immediate danger of that but should Google lose even 10% of their publisher base (in $ terms) the stock market reaction won't be pleasant.
Long before Microsoft becomes a contender they've got other wolves at the door.
When you start your post Christmas sales in the first week of December business must be rotten. If you start dishing out rewards for publisher recruiting this early in the game - and before the competition has even warmed up - I say that they're more than a bit concerned about their publisher base back at the 'plex.
If there is one way Google can shove advertising to more users - and without the help of publishers - it's by owning the browser. So they've covering that angle but they appreciate it's small change. The big bucks is still on your pages. You are the #1 partner in the three parties that make the system work.
Am I allowed to ask my members to download firefox and google toolbar on my forums?
While it seems like this program might benefit from a blitz of personal encouragement from publishers, many here have suggested treating this like one would Adsense ads - no undue attention. I would suggest getting a determination directly from Google... and please let us know what Google says.
