Forum Moderators: open
1) Cut ties with DMOZ (ODP) and introduce Pay For Inclusion for the Google Directory. Existing DMOZ entries will remain in Google Directory for six months only. I would charge anywhere between $25 to $50 per month per entry (much more palatable than $300 per year).
Non-Commercial listings will be free. Google editors will classify websites as "non-commercial" based on a set guidelines.
2) Offer Google News to various portals for a fee.
3) When there are 10 search results per page, why are there only eight AdWords ads? I would include two more per page.
4) Introduce paid telephone webmaster support. Now let's see - How much does a call to Micro$oft tech support cost? $35 per call? I'm sure website owners who have been banned would be more than willing to pay $50 per call.
5) Re-introduce Google Answers and promote it at the end for all the search requests. It is a brilliant idea and has the potential to beat marketplaces like eLance if done right.
6) Syndicate Premium Sponsorship ads to its partners.
7) Give away Google Groups to Yahoo in return for its 15 percent stake in Google :)
Now wouldn't that make potential investors happy? And hey - it doesn't affect the quality of search results either.
Aren't you happy I am not Larry Page or Sergey Brin? ;)
And then, I could actually stop worrying about them and concentrate on making google even better...
I would make my first priority not selling out for cash.
?
$25 per month is $300/yr; but $50 per month = a 'less' palatable $600/yr.......
Fired vibgyor79 for giving bad advice :)
Paid support and paid listings for the Google main database is suicidal. Paid support in effect does change the main database to comemrcial. How many non-commercial websites will pay for that? Result - dagradation of google search in favour of money making sites -> less people come to Google -> less people click on Adwords, premium listings, use Answers, get more info about how good the database is so other companies lease or license it.
That said some ideas are OK. Monetize the services that people find by coming to google for their relevant useful broad search.
You need to have the juiciest innocent looking worm to hook the best fishies in a lake full of upcoming fishermen.
...before they start nibbling on what you want them too!
$25 per month is $300/yr; but $50 per month = a 'less' palatable $600/yr.......
Two more options for Google Directory -
Option 1
Adopt the Looksmart (ugh!) model of paying a fixed amount per click through. Google can even partner with other big portals for the directory and offer them a percentage of the click through amount whenever a visitors clicks on the directory listing.
Options 2
Have a simple AdWords-type campaign management interface for the directory listings too. Whoever pays more/has the highest CTR goes on top of the listings. Again, the directory listings can be syndicated to its partners to improve revenues.
However, in both the options, Non-commercial listings will rot at the bottom of the listings.
concentrate on relevancy
Relevancy will always be there. All those PHDs out there will make sure that you get relevant results when you make a search. I was trying to give ideas to the marketing team.
Fired vibgyor79 for giving bad advice
You wouldn't dare mess with me! :)
You haven't explained why paid listings for Google directory would be suicidal.
I have mentioned before that non-commercial listings will get a free entry into the directory. The ranking problem can be solved by using the PageRank. Websites (both commercial and non-commercial) with higher PR would go to the top.
If you want to rank higher in the Google directory, you need to increase your PageRank.
In this case, why would it be suicidal to introduce PFI for Google Directory? Is it affecting the quality of Google searches? Is it biased against non-commercial listings?
Regarding Paid Support:-
I'm making an assumption that majority of non-commercial websites will not require support. Because they won't be participating in link exchanges etc and get themselves banned! Most of the Google problems are faced by commercial websites who can afford to pay $XX per call.
I would then buy my own island, learn to fly a helicopter, sleep alot, go skiing, have parties and generally enjoy myself for the rest of my life; never mind the searching public.
Never mind selling out- show me my money! ;)
The directory would then have to more explicit what are trade or shopping categories etc and what are non-commercial directories. That way, surfers would know if they are going to a commercial/trade directory or an informational one. But that, as others have pointed out in the thread on dmoz and google, may be difficult.
The key to me as always is G! should most effectivelt move to a message of "click on the left if you are looking for info" and "click on the right if you are looking to buy a product or service". (premium listsings notwithstanding!)
Commercial sites could still appear on the left side if their original content and objective info draws them enough PR. But its far more likely (spam notwithstanding) that on the left is opinion, news, objective reviews, and information)
If paying for a directory listing made it harder to move to that position, i would say its a backward move.
We have free listings on the left for our news and info sites and paid listings on the right for our commercial sites. Works great for us, and it may be that this may be acceptable for many webmasters and browsers. We all have to accept that paying for listing on the web for commercial listings is the future for both Google and webmasters agreed. The old era of SEO being all about getting pages ranking high for free, is finished. Now its all about SEO being far broader as the Web starts to pay for itself.
I can't say that I wouldn't do that.....but I'm sure that this could all be done with MILLIONS of dollars (which I'm sure they already have). The only reason they would need to sell out is if they give in to the pressure of wanting to be BILLIONAIRES.
I'm sure that neither of them have personal financial worries....even if they have severe vices, I think that they probably have a substantial income as it stands without chopping heads for financial gain.
I say.....stay with what works and continue to think the way that got them to the top.....with the customer in mind first.
It's a hard fact of life that when the IPO happens Investors will then start demanding bigger profits and the Board will have to deliver.
As far as I see this will mean extracting more revenue from us.
People keep trying to change google to make it more profitable.
If the latest numbers thrown around here are any clue - they are the most profitable major internet company margin wise in internet history.
If it ain't broke - don't fix it.
Google needs to keep their impartiality.
The day that google charges pay for inclusion - is the day someone else swoops in to take their place. Other engine have had to do this as they were not profitable to begin with. They add more and more stuff - get less and less quality and send more and more people to google.
Google is the most profitable search engine on the web and will contine to do so while all the experts are busy trying to eek more [or some] profit out of their dying portals.
Google gives people what they want. Webmasters who think they should be able to pay for tech support from google DON'T GET GOOGLE.
Aren't you happy I am not Larry Page or Sergey Brin?
Whew ... you got that right! ;)
