Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Anyone spotted the above with their ads? Kinda strange I think.
but then again... look at the management.
Agree... very unprofessional.
but then again... look at the management.
No kidding, management rated something around a .3 out of 100, the lowest of any S&P 500 company. Way to go Google, you are at the way bottom of the pile.
Repeat: this is a test. :)
To ASA: But how long will this test last?
And...what after?
Thanks!
As it is every little change takes days to make because I got a lot of sites and templates to change. Just...ridiculous...
why havent they registrered the domains that matches? (they are all taken)
Or trademarked the word or phrase? They haven't, apparently.
lars
No kidding, management rated something around a .3 out of 100, the lowest of any S&P 500 company. Way to go Google, you are at the way bottom of the pile.
I don't necessarily disagree, but this is about your 10th post expressing your opinion on Google and its management in the last 48 hours in a number of different threads. Enough already, I get the point.
Back to the subject of this thread, someone thought the change might have an impact on CTR by drawing attention to the ads. I've seen no increase on our CTR.
[edited by: Never_again at 8:22 pm (utc) on Sep. 3, 2004]
why havent they registrered the domains that matches? (they are all taken)
Or trademarked the word or phrase? They haven't, apparently.
I rather think everyone already knows who it is....
TJ
I rather think everyone already knows who it is....My visitors think it's a cheap imitator.
Rights management, separate from identity, is generally taken pretty seriously by most corporations. Branding is a corporate asset. Trademarking assures exclusive use of a phrase. It also insures that somebody else can't trademark it and prevent the originator from using it.
lars
Since goooooooooooogle, my clickthrough rate is on low level which I didn't see before.
And goooooooooogle looks simply stupid in my opinion.
PashenG
