Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: open
Don't know what P.I.D. or A.I.D. are; are they some sort of affiliate tracking mechanishm *outside* of these three?
If regard to the affiliate idea, they would be shooting themselves in the foot. Their revenue from adwords would drop because all of the affiliates that do sell via that means would leave. You cannnot compete with a service that is competing against you. So, if they did that, then it would definately alienate those affiliate marketeers. I am sure they know that. Maybe, we can get someone from Google to step in here and say a few words about the program? Maybe they will can it if there is no way from them making enough money to run the program without alienating their advertisers whould use adwords to sell the product?
Who knows at this point. Just have to wait on the sidelines and see what happens.
Did you also here about catalogs.google.com? Apparently they pay some unlucky sole to index all of the various catalog oriented sites. Why? Keeping wiht Serge theme to be the organizer of information.
If Google wants to organize something, they should start with my wife's check book.
Prediction for 2004 - Google and eBay merge to form the defacto portal for internet users. Users will be able to do searches from Google that take them directly into eBay. To counter this move Yahoo acquires Amazon and integrates it with Yahoo! Shopping.
MSN then buys Shopping.com.
The end result is that by 2005 there are just 3 primary network channels on the Internet Yahoo, MSN, Google. Everything else is just noise.
Likewise the three major neyworks align themselves with the intyernet portals. NBC = MSN, ABC = Yahoo, CBS = Google. Fox and Turner fealing left out of the equation go after who ever is left and compete as fringe players.
With broadband coming and the advent of PRTV the major TV networks will need to take over internet advertsing.
How do you like them apples?
"The end result is that by 2005 there are just 3 primary network channels on the Internet Yahoo, MSN, Google. Everything else is just noise."
Isn't that what we have now?
So please, come back to earth in terms of your Perspicuous.
No disrespect taken. My point is that as the internet business landscape matures we will see accellerated consolidation of the major players.
From a pure advertising perspective the internet is just another form of media (like TV, radio, print, etc...). The same way in the offline world you have major media conglomorates that consolidated over years of evolution, you will now see the same thing happening in the interent media landscape.
Case in point VCLK acquires CJ, aQuantive acquires GoToast, Yahoo acquire Overture who acquires Inktomi etc..., Google acquires Sprinks. Every CEO/Board of a major internet media company has M&A on their first 2004 corporate goal slide. I do not think we have even begun to see the dominos fall.
Either way, I do not believe that the governments’ of the world would want to have to regulate the Internet. But, if what you are suggesting does happen, then there would be no other alternative (I.E. AT&T, present day baby-bells, Standard Oil Co., and Microsoft).
I am sorry, but I believe that consumers, governments’ reps, and watchdogs will allow another monopolistic revolution in the Internet. Monopolies do no good, and are eventually dismantled by the governments anyway. Also, this would mean that a lot of companies around the world would also go out of business do too the shear force of these new consolidated companies. This would also trigger the DOJ and/or the EU to get involved and demand regulation or break-ups.
So, with all that said, I hope these CEO's that you are talking about have an alternative plan to make revenue. Because the way you are looking at things does not look to good in any scenario.
eBay for one is already a monopoly on the auction space. I do see uBid or Yahoo Auctions crying foul. Heck, I am sure the US government is already planning on using eBay for government related auctions.
I also think consumer watch-dogs and gov't will do little unless consolidation attempts take us from three players to two.
Sure the search engines are a great source of traffic, but they're volatile. If we are completely reliant on one search engine or even 2 or 3 to survive, maybe we should rethinnk our strategies. It's important to diversify.
Make your site sticky... create users, not just visitors.
The internet is such a great arena because there's nothing between a potential visitor and your site but a browser. There's not the barrier to entry like there is in TV.
I'm just saying... think outside the search box. You can drive traffic by other means.
I, for one, think froogle is cool. I don't think it's going to take over the world, but it's a cool little tool. I just need to figure out how in the world to optimize for it.
What I'm afraid of is that the main optimization for Froogle will be lowering prices :(
Froogle will most likely be just another shopping engine like Shopping.com, Nextag, MySimon, et al. Internet users over time will converge on whatever provider they feel best meets there needs. I for one think Froogle is currently crap. If I want to buy something on the internet my first choice is DealTime (i.e. Shopping.com). If I am looking for a product that is out of the ordinary like a tankless water heater or a hot tub, then I just do a Google search and use the AdWords links. My feeling is that if someone is paying to be in a top position for an Adwords, then they are probably a successful online merchant or affiliate that will send me to an online merchant that other people bought from, since the affiliate will only promote Adv that convert.
In regards to the original topic about Froogle being a super affiliate, I do see this happening. There is no reason for Froogle to get SPAM'ed by affiliates the same way their search index is already getting hit hard by affiliates. Froogle will eliminate the middle man affiliate not because they do not like affiliates, but rather do to the Froogle search experience being deteriated. In thr end Froogle will airther be a CPC or CPA based model for Adv to get exposure beyond AdWords and rhe other shopping engines.
To not do so would be to forgoe $150-$250M in annual revenue, and that's just in 2004. I just do not see Google, who is angling for the biggest IPO of all time, passing up on the full Froogle revenue opportunity.
Froogle is currently an R&D asset that is focussing on providing a web surfer with a high quality shopping search experience. Shopping is different that free info on the WWW. There is a reason that big malls have anchor tenents like Nordstrom and Sears. There is a barrier to entry for any joe schmo to get their product in front of potential shoppers.
Overtime the people heading up Froogle will realize that they will need to have some form of quality control to be listed in Froogle. The easiest way to do this is charge the merchant. Reason being is that if the merchant is willing to pay to be listed, then the merchant will most likely be making money, which means that people are probably buying the merchants products, which means that the product being listed in Froogle is probably of interest to other people.
However, this point is mute. As soon as Google goes public in June 2004, there will be outside pressue for Google to monetize all of their assets. R&D managers will be replaced with Business managers. The Froogle business manager will implement a PPC or mutated CPA pricing model to be listed in Froogle. Merchants and affiliates should get the free gravy while they can.