Why Beat Up the Google?
June 30, 2010
I read two stories by publications that bump up against one another for readers.Eweek, once a Ziff flagship in terms of ad pages, is now an online publication. The story is really a slideshow with comments next to each graphic. Navigate to “10 Reasons to Stop Using Google.” The idea is to call attention to Google weaknesses and services that out Google Google. The example that sticks in my mind is Zoho, an online version of Microsoft Office. I understand the need for page views, but I wondered why pick on Google? The analysis is okay, but nothing spectacular.
The second Google kicker is “Why Do We Trust Google?”, which appeared in an Infoworld online publication. Like the eWeek “story”, this write up dances around the “Google is evil” angle. Nothing wrong with that, but the Google has been chugging along in the same mode for more than a decade. Worrying about Google makes it possible to mention lots of Google services and maybe get some traffic.
The more interesting question for me is, “Why are these outfits snapping at Google’s heels?” Like the identical covers that popped up once in a while on Time and Newsweek paper issues, the coincidence is interesting. My opinion is that Google is not an advertiser and writing about Google produces traffic. Google is a juicy target and it is great sport. Substantive articles? It is summer time and the SEO is easy.
Stephen E Arnold, June 30, 2010
Freebie
The Pay Wall Payoff
June 26, 2010
In the early days of this blog, I recycled some information I had in my files from the 1980s. I believe I mentioned that problem that online throws in the path of the uninitiated. The idea is that you can charge for information online, but you must offer “must have” information. Vanilla information will generate some traffic on a fee basis but the take will be a fraction of what is needed to create the content, market the service, and keep the infrastructure alive and well. The “must have” and “nice to have” distinctions are well known to those who have been able to build commercial online products that actually make a profit. Honk. I am in that tiny segment of humanity. No ads needed, thank you. I have a view that ads – through lucrative – are down market. I like the “must have” approach even though I paddled in a goose pond in rural Kentucky. The millions and billions go to the Wal-Mart like folks. “Times Paywall: Initial Data and Analysis” is one of those semi accurate, pundit thingies. The data are cooked up based on whatever log files are available and from traffic sampling methods. Despite these concerns, one has to be in bizarro land not to see the down ward trend in the chart.
What this means is that the pay wall is a traffic inhibitor. That’s okay as long as the online revenue makes up for the downturn. My experience is that traffic will stabilize and revenues will be tough to grow. The fix is to raise the fee which means less traffic. The end game is that there will be a small number of people will to pay whatever the vendor charges. The problem is that costs go up and revenue does not keep pace. Boink. Bad news. On the brightside, some of the cash from the sale of Beliefnet might help out the pay wall play.
Stephen E Arnold, June 26, 2010
Freebie
PDF Search
June 23, 2010
You can pinpoint PDF files in Google via its advanced search option or just keying this string after your query, filetype:pdf. Too much work? Navigate to http://www.pdfpick.com/. The service limits the query to the wonderful PDF files. My acquaintance with PDFs began at Ziff in the late 1980s. I think I had to kick the tires of what was then called “Trapeze”. Over the last 20 years I have watched the file format become the sleek, well formed, round, firm, and fully packed wonder that it is. Bound phrases? Forget it. Snappy rendering. Forget it. Malware safe? Forget it. Tools for limiting file validity by time or number of opens? Forget it. Universally searchable? Forget it. Autoscaling on mobile devices? Forget it. Users who know what a tiff wrapper is? Forget it. Nevertheless, PDFs are part of the landscape. If you want to limit your query to this file type, give PDFPick a try.
Stephen E Arnold, June 23, 2010
Freebie
How to Download Google Books
June 23, 2010
Short honk: The goose prefers tree-killing books. You may want digital books, specifically Google digital books. If so, you will want to read “Download Google Books.” We have not tried the method. Post the results of your tests in the comments section of this blog.
Stephen E Arnold, June 23, 2010
Freebie
Ebook Reality, What Is Hot Sells
June 22, 2010
I enjoyed “Barnes & Noble Confirms New $149 NOOK Wi-Fi, Drops 3G Model Price To $199.” The Barnes & Noble ebook reader is one of those adventures in US corporate innovation that provides fodder to the case studies used in MBA land. The news is that a price cut for the gizmo is in place. The article was quite circumspect and included the Barnes & Noble news release. Three points warrant the goose’s capturing them:
First, the price cut won’t make any difference. The product is not hot and the Apple iPad is. Without buzz, a price cut won’t work. Don’t believe me. Find a 12 year old. Offer the kid a Nook or an iPad. Which will the kid take? Let me know.
Second, companies that are essentially in the middle of deals often are not too good at manufacturing. Compare the first Kindle with the first iPad. Now compare the second Kindle with the Nook. Pick the better of the two devices and go back to the iPad. See any differences?
Third, lowering the cost will clear inventory. A price cut won’t stimulate Barnes & Noble’s revenue itch. The cost of the gizmo, the price cut, and the expensive in store promotions put this product in a tough spot.
So what’s the response of Amazon? Chopping the price of the Kindle. Boy, I am delighted I paid full price. Endears the company to me for sure.
Neither Barnes & Noble or Amazon are hardware pros. Are these devices the Pontiac Aztec’s of the ebook world? Just the view from Harrod’s Creek, and it is an opinion which makes the comments even less valuable.
Stephen E Arnold, June 22, 2010
Freebie
CNN and AP News Shift
June 21, 2010
I read “CNN Drops AP Wire Service.” You may want to check it out as well. I am not sure if I know what to make of the report. Let’s assume the story is accurate. Why would CNN drop a source that many organizations consider “must have”? One view is that AP is no longer a “must have” source. Another view is that CNN wants to innovate with its business model and its vendors have to be sufficiently agile to make CNN comfortable. A few years ago dropping the Associated Press would have been unthinkable. Its state house coverage is tough to duplicate. Maybe CNN wants to cut costs? When i killed a couple of hours between flights last year I realized that CNN is one expensive puppy to keep healthy. With YouTube’s recent news feistiness, CNN may be preparing for battle. If the story is a hoax, the AP is secure. If true, the AP may be showing some signs of losing its magnetism.
Stephen E Arnold, June 22, 2010
Freebie
A Googler on Prediction Markets
June 20, 2010
One of Endeca’s wizards jumped to Google. I have not paid much attention to what former Endeca Googlers do. The machinations of the Google are too far removed from the goose pond here in Harrod’s Creek. However, a reader sent me a link to the story “Why Can’t We Just Use Prediction Markets?” I read the article and did not find much with which to disagree. However, I asked myself, “Is this write up about prediction markets a personal opinion or one of those moments when a Googler sends a signal (intentionally or unintentionally) about notions that fascinate the users of MOMA.
For the fun of it, let’s assume that the article does reveal a fragment of Google’s thinking about the importance and utility of prediction markets. As you may know, a prediction market takes guesses and tries to figure out the future. There are many fancy ways to explain the method, but the idea is that some unidentified, latent magic exists when people offer opinions or bet on something. The data provide a glimpse of the future. I wish to point out that the US government has been known to think about prediction markets, and we know how well most US government decisions work out. Here in Harrod’s Creek we don’t need a predication market to figure out that there will be some unhappy people where the BP “spill” adds to the salty sea air zest.
Three items warrant comment for this alternative view of the write up.
First, the article suggests reviews (Amazon, are your with me here) can be manipulated by humans. The notion of a prediction method might generate a more useful indicator about a product. I think numerical recipes processing Big Data can yield some useful outputs. Google could make a run at Amazon and other review sites, right?
Second, the notion of using data to bet that I would like something also makes sense. I can see the Google kicking the notion of reviews into recommendation land. Again, I am thinking of Amazon and its recommendations. Maybe Google will be doing recommendations in its forthcoming Google TV service. What do you think about the Google predicting what rich media will make you a happy buyer or camper?
Finally, the concept of accuracy is delightful. Now accuracy in the Math Club works out to the old six nines confidence level. But accuracy also means a confidence score better than the lousy confidence score generated by other systems. If Google can generate a higher confidence score, that will give the company an edge. We are not talking about perfection. We are talking about “better than”, right?
My take.
Google will be rolling out more recommendations and predictive services. You may not use them directly, but these methods will allow the company to suggest that if you liked the NBC TV show about Google, you will definitely love these other TV shows. No humans needed to publish this type of indirect Consumers Report information. Many other uses as well I assert.
Now that’s my take away from the article.
Stephen E Arnold, June 20, 2010
Freebie
Another Mom Says Article about Google
June 17, 2010
eWeek demonstrated that it is not going to win the MBA version of Dancing with the Stars. The article “10 Web Companies That Google Should Acquire” is one weird set of “shoulds”. I could almost hear my mom and the other moms in the neighborhood shouting, “Sergey, Larry, you should do this.” Like the kids in my neighborhood, I don’t think Sergey or Larry will listen. Even if both zillionaires did listen, Google is preoccupied with telling countries what to do. You think Google is in listening mode that recommends buying Facebook and Twitter. Why stop there, eWeek tells Google like a legally inept and technically challenged mom that it should snap up Pandora, Zoho, and Expedia. Yikes. A look at Google’s acquisitions reveals that Google marches to the beat of its own drummer. Obvious candidates like Catch Media slip off the hook or out of the net. Not so obvious outfits get ignored in the list of Google’s acquisitions; for example, Transformics. Highly publicized buy outs get little follow up or analysis; for example, Jotspot. eWeek was once a fat, must read. Now I am not sure what it is, but this article sounds like mom-think. Wacky and ultimately ignored. If Google were to make a move on Facebook, I wonder if Microsoft would flex its muscles. Redmond has a piece of the Facebook action and Google doesn’t. Assume Google tries to buy Twitter. Think any regulator would wake up and investigate? I do. Articles designed to generate traffic and create clicks by putting each specious, wacky point on a separate Web page illustrate the sad state of search engine optimization, analytic thinking, and substantive commentary. Too bad. Times change.
Stephen E Arnold, June 17, 2010\
Freebie
June 2010 Columns by Stephen E Arnold
June 7, 2010
Short honk: A reader asked about the for fee columns I do. I don’t put these on my Web site until their value to the publisher has dropped to zero. You can find these columns in the hard copy publications and / or the publisher’s Web sites. Here’s the line up of my June 2010 columns which will run sometime in the next four to 12 weeks. Hey, that’s the way traditional publishing works.
- Information Today, “Google Emulates Bing and Endeca”. The idea is that Google has become a me-too player in the user experience game. The Web site is http://www.infotoday.com
- Information World Review, “A Wandering Yahoo: More Knee Action, Modest Progress”. The point of this write up is that Yahoo has to do more than wave its arms. Real revenue generation is needed, or the company may be in big trouble. Does anyone else see the shadow of Demand Media falling across the purple Yahooligan T shirt? The Web site for the publication is http://www.iwr.co.uk/
- KMWorld, “Google, Rich Media, and the Enterprise”. The idea is that one can learn something about what Google may do with its television / rich media technology by looking at its partner, SnapStream. I know. You never heard of SnapStream. That’s the point of the column. The Web site for the publication is http://www.kmworld.com.
- Smart Business Network, “Dialing in Facebook Privacy”. The column advises a business with a Facebook page about some basic double checks to make on Facebook’s privacy controls. Moving targets are fun, don’t you think? There are 18 or 19 magazines in the SBN network running my column. The 2010 columns are on the company’s Web site at http://www.sbnonline.com. You can see the 2009 SBN columns here.
One person pointed out that my blog sucks compared to these for fee columns. Let me clue you in. The blog is a marketing vehicle, and we crank out stories on a daily basis. Most of the stories in the blog are items that we find potentially useful for our monographs, client reports, speeches, and the for fee columns. Don’t beat up on the people I pay to produce the stories in Beyond Search. We are trying to keep the content flowing in the midst of our begging outside the local Dunkin’ Donuts.
I will try to post the July columns next month. I am a forgetful goose, however.
Stephen E Arnold, June 7, 2010
Freebie. Buddy, can you spare a dime?
Is Demand Media the Facebook of Content?
June 6, 2010
Update: 10 48 am. Link error fixed. The goose screws up again.
Newspapers have not flowed into market for fresh content. The company that has emerged as the Facebook of content may be Demand Media. Most Web surfers don’t know good content from bad content. Google’s smart software also has a tough time figuring out if a comment from an addled goose like me or a highly paid azure chip consultant is “better.” Hey, those former journalists and PR people are much better than a water fowl. At least that’s what the 20 somethings tell me.
The reality of Demand Media is that the company can sell content and generate traffic. Have you looked at Cracked.com or eHow.com today? To get some insight into the Demand Media juggernaut, you may want to read the Ad Age story “Bradford: Demand Media Will Take Out AOL First, Yahoo Later.” If Ms Bradford makes good on her assertion, AOL’s Googler-in-charge may want to ink that Microsoft deal as quickly as possible and become a venture capitalist. AOL is a weak sister in the ring with Demand Media.
For this addled goose, the most interesting comment in the write up was:
Every marketer will tell you they do not have enough content. We are in phase one of “let’s tell our story.” We will package it and make it easy to sell and easy to buy for advertisers. How do we provide content and integrate it with them? We will provide content for brands. Tide, for example. We’ve integrated their point of view into our experience. We’ve had a Tide stain expert sponsor a section. We want to be the biggest, best destination for brands. Our goal ultimately is, No. 1, be bigger than AOL, and No. 2 to be bigger than Yahoo.
Net net: trouble brewing in content land. Here are the war zones:
- Demand is emerging as the Readers Guide to Periodical Literature on steroids. Not only is it providing content, Demand has figured out how to let others index and expose the content. The Readers’ Guide was a great idea decades ago. Demand has leapfrogged the finding and accessing of popular content. Big implications has this action.
- The people with Web sites are not able to sustain content streams. Sure, anyone can do a blog for a short period of time. But blogs are black holes for content. New info must be produced continuously. Demand is in the custom content business and may emerge as the info juggernaut that newspapers and traditional news services failed to become.
- The Demand Media ecosystem is morphing. The company has technology, big name customers, writers, and digital information. These can be mixed in interesting ways. The competitors may not be able to match what Demand can do with its as-is assets.
Who can match Demand Media? AOL? Long shot. Yahoo? Long shot. Established publishing company? Longer shot. Established commercial database company like LexisNexis? Longest shot of all. Need reasons? Alas, not for free, gentle reader, not for free.
Stephen E Arnold, June 7, 2010
Freebie, of course
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
