SEO the AP Way
November 14, 2009
I thought another addled goose wrote “AP to Ask Google for a Better Search Ranking.” I blinked and reread the article. Sure looked legitimate to me, but in this era of instant disinformation, one cannot be too sure. Read the story yourself and make up your own mind. Two or three years ago, I rolled out my mantra for some AP folks. I gave a talk and concluded, “Surf on Google.” The idea I have been suggesting since mid 2006 is that Google had the same potential energy as a big boulder perched on the edge of a cliff overlooking a narrow defile. The guy with the lever at the top of the cliff need exert a tiny force to launch the rock on the folks in the defile. Worked when Alexander was getting cute thousands of years ago, and the tactic will work today.
Google dominates Web search. The company has several options in my opinion.
First, Google can do nothing different. In effect, Google will not answer the AP’s phone calls. Time is on Google’s side. Litigation is time consuming, which favors the Google.
Second, Google can cut a deal with the AP. In the spirit of compromise, Google takes a baby step. The AP seems okay with the Great Compromiser’s approach. The AP continues to move forward in a very different world from the one that gave birth to the AP many years ago.
Third, Google just buys up the AP content. With one bold dump truck of cash, Google neuters Bing.com in terms of AP content and makes the constant grouching irrelevant.
Are there other options? Sure, but this is a free marketing oriented Web log. The interesting point in this news story is that AP is dealing with the problem of traffic. Most outfits hire search engine optimization wizards like Tess (pictured on the splash page of this blog) and hope for the best. The AP wants to get traffic, jump into social content (maybe non journalists who post stuff on the Web), and monetize its information services. Great idea, but I don’t think it will work.
The AP has monetized its content by selling it back to those who formed the outfit in the first place. Other markets have been interested but not willing to deliver piles of cash to the AP. Even the US government is watching its information pennies these days. At some point in time, the triple dipping of licensing the same content to multiple government agencies will run into trouble. Google has been monetizing its big Googzilla heart since it was inspired by the Overture model. The AP did not act then, and now it may be too late.
Will Google be indifferent? Will Google cut a deal? Will Google just write a check? I bet the AP would like to get a big fat check from Google and be number one with a bullet in the Google results lists. I am good for a nickel. Any takers?
Interesting days ahead in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 14, 2009
I am in an independent living facility. I had to pay to use the computer to write this essay. I had to pay for an orange juice. I don’t think I need to alert the Illinois State Police that this is a freebie. Maybe to be on the safe side of the Illinois law? Nah. Not necessary. Illinois has its legal and financial hands full. I might have to pay to report.
Search Business Called into Question
November 13, 2009
I noted an article on the 247WallSt.com Web site. “Maybe the Search Engine Business Isn’t So Great” raises some interesting questions. Keep in mind that search and retrieval have been around in digital form for decades, but I suppose it is never too late for a canny analyst to revisit ancient history.
The article begins by revisiting the history of Microsoft’s efforts in search. Short take: Microsoft has spent lots of money and lags behind Google in Web search.
For me, the most interesting comment in the article by Douglas A. McIntryre was:
Microsoft says that search is a “strategic” business, a weapon of sorts against Google and other competitors. It is not entirely clear why that is true. Perhaps it is because Google has something that Microsoft does not, but the Google’s leverage from that, beyond making a lot of money, is not clear. Search does not appear to be critical to Oracle (NASDAQ:ORCL) or SAP (NYSE:SAP), the two largest enterprise software companies in the world. Microsoft must be a special situation, but it has not necessarily made a powerful case of why.
Ouch!
Stephen Arnold, November 13, 2009
No one paid me for this insight, ouch. I want to alert the Housing and Urban Development Department that this intellectual real estate involved neither cash nor loan, deflated or subsidized, in any negotiable paper in the United States of America. Wow, I am glad I am transparent. I feel better.
Guardian Searches Beyond Google
November 13, 2009
I love that “beyond” phrasing. The Guardian, an outfit facing some rough financial seas when it comes to online revenue, published “Why I’m Searching Beyond Google” on November 11, 2009. I think the Guardian is showing that some of its editors are somewhat obsessive about electronic information. Victor Keegan wrote:
Google’s power is no longer as a good search engine but as a brand and an increasingly pervasive one. Google hasn’t been my default search for ages but I am irresistibly drawn to it because it is embedded on virtually every page I go to and, as a big user of other Google services (documents, videos, Reader, maps), I don’t navigate to Google search, it navigates to me.
I am confused. Mr. Keegan no longer makes Google his first choice in search yet he is drawn to it. I wonder if there is a bit of conflict involved when one resists, yet is “irresistibly drawn” to something. In Harrods Creek, I know some folks who have this type of personality. Let me tell you that I find that push-pull quite interesting.
He provided useful links to lists of the top Web sites. He said,
If you want to test other websites try http://bit.ly/vicsearch3 for the top 25 niche engines or http://bit.ly/vicsearch4 for the top 100. Even though Google’s brand dominance doesn’t yet look under threat, competition not only provides choice for ourselves but will keep Google and the others on their toes.
My opinion is that Google has an 80 to 85 percent share of the Web search market. Microsoft and Yahoo make up most of the remaining share. These other systems have a challenging trail to hike. I don’t know if users or the stakeholders in most of the Web search engines have what it takes to continue the journey over a long period of time. Google’s “market share” has been 11 years in the making. Train has left the station in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 13, 2009
A public service posting for the publishing industry. I will report the no-fee nature of this article to Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation in honor of the “buck stops here” president.
Writing about Online Revenue Is Easier than Generating Revenue from Online
November 12, 2009
The Guardian’s new media group took a kick in the kidney. Navigate to “Guardian News & Media to Cut More Than 100 Jobs”. Note these phrases, please:
- revenues have fallen by a worse-than-anticipated £33m
- the Guardian’s Thursday Technology print section will cease publication we cannot offer clarity about who is leaving and who is redeploying
- If we do the right things now, which I believe we are doing
- the organization should “not be paralyzed by change, but galvanized by change”
- December 9
Yep, easier to write about online than make it generate revenue. Happy run up to Christmas?
Stephen Arnold, November 12, 2009
I got my change back fro Stuart Schram who took $5, paid for lunch, and gave me a bottle of Rooibee Red Tea. I must write the Prospect Police and inform them of this financial transaction as I wrote this blog post.
SharePoint 2010 and the Four Gigabyte Gotcha
November 9, 2009
The goslings and I have been trying to figure out some of the implications of migrating from an “old” SharePoint to the whizzy new SharePoint 2010. We ran into a four gigabyte barrier and began the all-too-familiar practice of hunting for explanations, work arounds, and explanations. We found “A Couple of Worrying Changes in SP 2010 Products Compared to the v3 Equivalents” interesting. You will want to read this write up from Mindsharp and then check out the comments to write up.
First, there four gigabyte database size limit is still an issue. Mindsharp point out that “the only slightly bright spot is that it was also confirmed that SPD 2010 and SPD 2007 can be run together on the same client machine. So you don’t need two machines just to be able to work with v3 and v4 sites.”
With regards to this point, Mindsharp reported:
That problem area however fades rapidly into insignificance if you are a WSS 3.0 user using Windows Internal Database. As such you have a free database system which unlike the standard SQL Server 2005 Express it is based on does not have a 4GB database size limit. Well it looks as if people who are running this and have exceeded this figure (non-limit!) or about to do so will have serious problems if they want to upgrade their system to SharePoint Foundation 2010. I don’t have any other explanation that in yesterdays massive batch of over twenty KB articles on the “Pre-Upgrade Checker for WSS 3.0 SP2” two of them are about the Windows Internal Database and both of them are about warnings that you get if you exceed 4GB in the size of a database “The large size of a database can prevent it from being upgraded”.
Second, the comment that caught my attention was:
The second one is not a problem
Within reasonable limits, the second issue is not a problem. Take a look at the following article on Technet: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee663471%28office.14%29.aspx. Databases larger than 4GB (again, within reasonable limits) will be migrated to SQL Server Express with Remote Blob Storage during the upgrade process. BLOBs stored on the file system don’t count against the 4GB limit of SQL Express. Mike’s comment: Setting up Remote Blog Storage is probably beyond the possibilities of many people who today install the Basic Installation version of WSS 3.0. (Anyway Search databases still have a 4GB limit as they can’t use RBS). But my main objection is that having moved to an unlimited database size in one version, MS take it away in the next. Providing a workaround for some cases mitigates that very poor and unfair decision but doesn’t imo justify it.
We downloaded the Microsoft documents. Lots to think about when upgrading SharePoint. Great for billing clients too. Simplicity not. Hard database limits are very 1980 in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 9, 2009
No compensation, not even a wink from a Certified Partner. Too busy billing I assume.
Google Developer Video Now Available
November 9, 2009
The third video of the six-video series called “How to Make Money with Google” premiered today at http://www.arnoldit.com/video. This video, released by Arnold Information Technology, http://www.arnoldit.com, focuses on developing program interfaces using Google resources and leveraging those applications for business use.
The purpose of this short video series–watching all six videos takes about 30 minutes–is to give clear, factual information on four specific ways an enterprising individual, a services company, or a diversified company can use the Google platform to produce revenue while meeting the needs of their customers and prospects. The videos are available for personal and educational use with no fee.
This newest video highlights how using and developing Google APIs–application programming interfaces–can be a big money-maker for your online business. It also describes Google’s certification program which is beginning to take shape. Arnold characterizes how a third party developer can put technical skills to use to build a large business around Google.
Keep in mind that Google is a moving target. The company is evolving and changing policies and procedures very rapidly,” Stephen E. Arnold, president of Arnold Information Technology, said. Arnold has published three Google monographs and these videos are based on the information compiled for The Google Legacy, Google Version 2.0, and Google: The Digital Gutenberg. The monographs are available from Infonortics Ltd., in Tetbury, Glos., at http://www.infonortics.com.
Other videos include an overview of money-making opportunities, including why the Google opportunity is similar to the opportunity Microsoft created with its MS DOS software in the early 1980s; using Google’s AdSense advertising module; search engine optimization consulting and services; the Google partner and reseller program; and a video titled “Google Creates Opportunity,” which emphasizes the opportunity to grow with Google as the company strives for $100 billion in revenue.
“I wanted to provide some basic, factual information about what I see as the Google revenue opportunity. Information about Google is everywhere, but the upside of Google as an opportunity is not widely known,” Arnold said. “The increase in ‘get rich quick’ with Google e-mails I was receiving convinced me that a more measured discussion of the opportunities was needed. I will make these videos available without charge in the hopes that the Google revenue opportunities get broader dissemination.”
The series will be posted at http://www.arnoldit.com/video. Videos will be released on a seven- to 10-day cycle from today to Nov. 20. ArnoldIT.com has no relationship with Google. The information presented in the video represents the views and findings of ArnoldIT.com’s analyses of Google. The videos were directed by Chris Forrester, Perceality Productions, at http://twitter.com/perceality. The samba music is courtesy Sounddogs.com. For information about other uses of the videos, contact ArnoldIT.com at seaky2000 [at] yahoo dot com
The company’s Web site is http://arnoldit.com, and the Beyond Search blog is at http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/.
Jessica Bratcher, November 9, 2009
Jessica was paid to write this marketing write up. Yep, filthy lucre.
ZyLAB Integrates Google Maps
November 8, 2009
According to Documanager.de, ZyLAB has integrated Google Maps with its ZyIMAGE Information Access Platform. Users now have the ability to identify the location of documents in a hit list. ZyLAB says that coordinates detail of the contents of a document can also be displayed on a Google Maps. The function requires no additional work on the part of the user.
Uses of the functionality range from law enforcement to eDiscovery. A user runs a query and each pin represents a document or a set of documents that are displayed on the additional metadata when you hover the mouse over it.
ZyLAB’s Rijnbeek Vincent, said:
This new functionality provides additional options to our use of visualization tools and ensuring more transparency in the information jungle. If, for example included in the context of criminal investigations coordinates of a crime scene in a document, it shows a pin exactly in these Google Maps to. But even in the building and construction sector is the new integration useful, by example, location information from complex construction plans quickly and clearly represents.
The use of visualization tools solves a major problem of the usual file structures: These traditional structures typically do not allow users to view an item that is not currently displayed on the screen. Large document sets pose a particular challenge. A collapsible folder structure is unwieldy, especially if users have to follow several nested folders. The constant scrolling, as is required in table structures, is cumbersome and not conducive to efficient and accurate data investigations.
More information is available from ZyLAB at http://www.zylab.com.
Stephen Arnold, November 8, 2009
No joy, no payment. Report this charitable act to the Red Cross.
MSN Logo Change
November 6, 2009
Short honk: This post is not about search. I wanted to document that MSN has revamped its butterfly.I read the article in Venture Beat “MSN Changes the Butterfly”. The write up included an image of the new look.
I like the look. I struggle with the different faces of Microsoft, but as an addled goose, I am easily confused. There’s Bing.com, Live.com, MSDN, Channel 9, and more. These different visages of Microsoft contribute to the firm’s online traffic. Google is a plain Jane or a plain Wayne indeed. Maybe a better UX will allow Google to catch up with Microsoft’s lead in the Internet?
Stephen Arnold, November 7, 2009
Not only did I have to pay for my Microsoft developer’s license, the last Microsoft person I emailed, ignored me. So, not a penny for this short article. I am reporting this to the Jefferson County Sheriff and the crew at Police Donuts.
Google Pressures eCommerce Search Vendors
November 6, 2009
Companies like Dieselpoint, Endeca, and Omniture Mercado face a new competitor. The Google has, according to Internet News, “launched Commerce Search, a cloud-based enterprise search application for e-tailers that promises to improve sales conversion rates and simplify the online shopping experience for their customers.” For me the most significant passage in the write up was:
Commerce Search not only integrates the data submitted to Google’s Product Center and Merchant Center but also ties into its popular Google Analytics application, giving e-tailers an opportunity to not only track customer behavior but the effectiveness of the customized search application. Once an e-tailer has decided to give Commerce Search a shot, it uploads an API with all its product catalog, descriptions and customization requirements and then Google shoots back an API with those specifications that’s installed on the Web site. Google also offers a marketing and administration consultation to highlight a particular brand of camera or T-shirt that the retailer wants to prominently place on its now customized search results. It also gives e-tailers full control to create their own merchandising rules so that it can, for example, always display Canon cameras at the top of its digital camera search results or list its latest seasonal items by descending price order.
Google’s technical investments in its programmable search engine, context server, and shopping cart service chug along within this new service. Google’s system promises to be fast. Most online shopping services are sluggish. Google knows how to deliver high speed performance. Combining Google’s semantic wizardry with low latency results puts some of the leading eCommerce vendors in a technology arm lock.
Some eCommerce vendors have relied on Intel to provide faster CPUs to add vigor to older eCommerce architectures. There are some speed gains, but Google delivers speed plus important semantic enhancements that offer other performance benefits. One example is content processing. Once changes are pushed to Google or spidered by Google from content exposed to Google, the indexes update quickly. Instead of asking a licensee of a traditional eCommerce system to throw hardware at a performance bottleneck or pay for special system tuning, the Google just delivers speed for structured content processed from the Google platform.
In my opinion, competitors will point out that Google is inexperienced in eCommerce. Google may appear to be a beginner in this important search sector. Looking more deeply into the engineering resources responsible for Commerce Search one finds that Google has depth. I hate to keep mentioning folks like Ramanathan Guha, but he is one touchstone whose deep commercial experience has influenced this Google product.
How will competitors like Dieselpoint, Endeca, and Omniture Mercado respond? The first step will be to downplay the importance of this Google initiative. Next I expect to learn that Microsoft Fast ESP has a better, faster, and cheaper eCommerce solution that plays well with SharePoint and Microsoft’s own commerce server technology. Finally, search leaders such as Autonomy will find a marketing angle to leave Google in the shadow of clever positioning. But within a year, my hunch is that Google’s Commerce Search will have helped reshape the landscape for eCommerce search. Google may not be perfect, but its products are often good enough, fast, and much loved by those who cannot imaging life without Google.
Stephen Arnold, November 6, 2009
I want to disclose to the Department of the Navy that none of these vendors offered me so much as a how de doo to write this article.
Wall Street Journal Proving that Newspaper Marketing Is Off the Rails
November 5, 2009
Okay, I am a real life subscriber to the Wall Street Journal. I have written the company, called its 800 number, and captured the spam attack on me in this blog. The Wall Street Journal simply ignores a customer’s requests to be treated as a – well – paying customer.
Today more spam. Here’s the crap that floats into my personal mail account:
This is the same annoying, repetitive, stupid offer. I am a subscriber. I paid more than $204 for my print subscription. If I am smart enough to subscribe, perhaps I am smart enough to figure out that the WSJ is low balling me. Why would I buy a second subscription at a lower price when I have learned that the WSJ gouged me earlier this year?
But that’s not enough!
The Wall Street Journal mailed me the following offer:
Note that this special offer to me, a paying customer, is yet another astounding discount. How much can I buy a second unneeded subscription to the Wall Street Journal?
The cost is only $59. Keep in mind that I paid more than the spam offer. Now this desperate, confused and inept publisher is reminding me that its premier business publication is worth $59 a year or in the $0.20 per day range.
How stupid does this outfit think I am? Pretty stupid, I assume.
To recap:
- I am a customer.
- I paid hundreds of dollars for one subscription to the Wall Street Journal
- One one day I received an offer via spam email and then a second lower ball offer via snail mail.
Folks, this marketing is a clear signal that the Wall Street Journal does not care about me as a customer. It is marketing special offers that make me feel as if I were duped. The company ignores a customer’s request to be spared unneeded, unwanted offers.
Mr. Murdoch, you have a method that angers me and demonstrates poor business judgment. Keep in mind that I am an existing customer. Amazing.
Stephen Arnold, November 5, 2009
- To the Government Printing Office: I was not paid to write this case analysis. Do you think the WSJ would pay me to do anything for them?
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
