June 29, 2009

Microsoft, Publicis Form Ad Partnership; Is Sale of Razorfish Involved?

Microsoft and advertising agency Publicis have formed a advertising alliance, according to ClickZ. The partnership involves online advertising as well as a TV ad exchange. This could put a damper on Google's inititave to create a tv ad exchange. Google is also a partner with Publicis, with the companies having staff working out of each other's offices.

But another interesting tidbit of the Microsoft-Publicis partnership is breaking today. Rumor is that Razorfish, ad interactive advertising agency arm owned by Microsoft, is for sale. Razorfish was part of the $6 billion aQuantive acquisition in 2007. Microsoft has contacted Morgan Stanley to arrange the sale. The even bigger rumor is that Publicis is poised to buy.

This all comes on the heels of comments by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that traditional media is heading to its grave.

Posted by Nathania Johnson at 11:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

July 8, 2008

Microsoft Secures Search Ad Partnership with Rodale's Health Sites

Microsoft has announced a new search advertising partnership with Rodale's roster of health sites. The agreement is exclusive and includes sites like MensHealth.com, WomensHealthmag.com, Prevention.com, RunnersWorld.com and Bicycling.com.

"Rodale is the authoritative source for trusted content in health, fitness and wellness around the world and on the Web, and we are pleased to provide our advertisers greater access to this valuable audience segment," said Scott Howe, vice president of the Advertiser and Publisher Solutions Group at Microsoft. "The inclusion of Rodale in our lineup of syndicated advertising partners is a strong indicator that we're continuing to gain significant traction with our advertising platform and further complements our vertical expertise in health, finance, travel, autos and entertainment."

July 2, 2008

SEW Experts: Yahoo's Judgment Day

Microsoft was set to save Yahoo from certain death with a solid offer to purchase assets, or so we thought. According to yesterday's shareholder presentation, the deal wasn't such a great idea. In today's Searching for Meaning column, "Yahoo's Judgment Day," Kevin Ryan notes that, while the jury is still out on the merits of the Google-Yahoo partnership, this is the first time since the Yahoocrosoft insanity began that it's publicly outlined strategic thought and tactical execution plans that make sense for Yahoo's future.

» Full story

Posted by Kevin Newcomb at 12:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 25, 2008

Microsoft Tries to Compete with OpenSocial

Microsoft, in an clear attempt to compete with Google's OpenSocial, has announced a partnership to create data portability across 5 social networking sites. Facebook, Bebo, Hi5, Tagged and LinkedIn are all part of the arrangement, which will "exchange functionally-similar Contacts APIs." Microsoft says the move will allow them to create a safe, secure two-way method for users of the sites to move their relationships among the respective services.

Microsoft is including Windows Live Messenger in the mix. Invite2messenger.net was developed to help users invite their friends from the five social networks to join their Windows Live Messenger contact list, if they have one.

What's unclear is what Microsoft would do with Yahoo if the proposed acquisition takes place. Earlier today, it was announced that Yahoo has joined Google's OpenSocial. And AOL's Bebo is now part of Microsoft's data portability network, which should fan the flames of some analysts' commentary that Microsoft should buy AOL instead. The soap opera continues.

Posted by Nathania Johnson at 11:37 AM | Permalink

February 5, 2008

Microsoft-Yahoo: No Mention of Publisher Deals

With all the news about Microhoo, no one's mentioned how current content deals with publishers might change -- for better or worse. Yet these licensed resources drive substantial portal traffic and ad dollars today.

As an example, let's take a quick look at news licensed by all three players:

* Yahoo licenses many well-known news sources. * Microsoft offers MSNBC-branded news content. * Google doesn't license; it scours thousands of sources.

At the SIIA (Software & Information Industry Association) conference last week, major publishers seemed more interested in driving traffic to their destinations than in licensing their online content to the portals. Even the most hide-bound publishers have delivered some content openly, and many have made their archives available online as well. In addition, they understand that engineering prowess will matter as much as editorial strength.

With these shifting priorities, do the large publishers win, lose or draw from Microhoo? It's a draw, assuming steady portal traffic and no change in news providers. Fat chance. I'm betting that most licensing deals aren't assignable -- which means anything goes with a merger.

Microhoo might play smarter, however, if they coordinate services to increase revenue for publisher sites along with their portals. They have an array of services that appeal to print and broadcast suppliers, who haven't made all their content completely crawlable yet.

Otherwise the publishers will be drawn, by default, to Google to meet their traffic and ad revenue goals. As Google's David Eun told publishers at the SIIA confab, Google will continue to provide services which help publishers become “more ubiquitous online."

Posted by at 10:15 AM | Permalink

January 30, 2008

Microsoft adCenter Partnering With WSJDN

Microsoft has announced it will provide the advertising for the Wall Street Journal Digital Network (WSJDN), which includes Barrons and marketWatch as well as WSJ.com.

Microsoft signed a deal to be the exclusive third-party provider of contextual and paid search advertising on their sites. WSJDN is a leading provider of business and financial information news and analysis on sites such as WSJ.com, Barrons.com, MarketWatch.com, allthingsD.com and more. WSJDN reaches a savvy worldwide audience of over 20 million unique users and serves over 330 million page views per month on its sites specific to the highly sought-after financial services audience for advertisers. In addition to being a traffic leader in the Business & Finance verticals, the WSJDN reaches a highly qualified audience:

• A larger concentration of C-level Executives than any other original financial news sites • A higher concentration of affluent males than any online network • More Business Decision Makers and Technology Decision Makers than any other online publisher of original financial news • A high number of active investors, both institutional/professional and self-directed • 983,000 WSJ.com subscribers • 723,000 C-levels • Average age: 48 years • 67% male

The Microsoft press release noted:

“Relevant and targeted digital advertising is important to our business and to the quality of the experience that we deliver to our users,” said Gordon McLeod, president of The Wall Street Journal Digital Network. “Microsoft's state-of-the-art advertising platform will enable us to dramatically improve our revenues from this key sector, and we look forward to working together.”

“This deal is a significant win for Microsoft for two key reasons. First, it makes the extended Microsoft advertising network the premier destination for advertisers interested in reaching financially minded users, as it complements our offering in this vertical through MSN Money and other syndication partners,” said Brian McAndrews, senior vice president, Advertiser and Publisher Solutions at Microsoft. “Second, this deal is a strong indicator that we're gaining significant traction with our advertising platform. The Wall Street Journal Digital Network is one of the largest financial services publishers in a very dynamic vertical segment, and we're delighted to add it to our portfolio.”

Posted by Frank Watson at 11:25 AM | Permalink

October 24, 2007

Microsoft Invests $240 Million In Facebook

Seems Microsoft is continuing its push at Facebook. Last year, Microsoft became the banner ad supplier for Facebook in the United States. Today they purchased a 1.6 percent stake in the company for $240 million - making the whole company worth $15 billion - and announced they will now handle distributing banner advertising for Facebook outside of the United States, the New York Times reported.

If Facebook were to add a web search box into their interface the search number could well grow Microsoft's percentage of searches significantly.

UPDATE: For more on the story, see Microsoft Named Exclusive Advertising Partner for Facebook on ClickZ News, or one of the hundreds of accounts on Techmeme.

Posted by Frank Watson at 5:21 PM | Permalink

August 6, 2007

Is an Ask-Microsoft Partnership on the Horizon?

Ask.com and parent IAC have been cozying up to Microsoft lately, leading to the question of what will become of the current 5-year-old partnership Ask.com has with Google once it comes up for renewal at the end of the year.

The most recent tie-up only unofficially involves Microsoft and Google. It's a deal that IAC made with aQuantive to serve ads on several of its properties, leaving DoubleClick the dust. For those of you confused about the Microsoft-Google angle, remember that Microsoft is in the process of acquiring aQuantive, and Google is in the midst of acquiring DoubleClick. Hence, IAC left future Google for future Microsoft.

Last month, Microsoft's Office Live added Ask Sponsored Listings to its adManager service. A week later, Microsoft and Ask teamed up to present a united front in the fight for user privacy, intimating at the same time that Google was not as concerned with privacy as they are. And of course, the two are linked by the common bonds of Steve Berkowitz, who left Ask.com in 2006 to head Microsoft's search efforts.

IAC's Barry Diller was rumored to be considering a change of ad partner when the original deal expired in 2005, but a 2-year extension was agreed upon by both parties. Diller has been coy lately when asked about future plans. During an investor call last week, Diller said: As it relates to building our very long association with Google which expires on December 31, we are in a position we had hoped we would be when we originally got into this and purchased this Ask company, which is that we have interesting discussions from the three ad networks. That interest level is good enough for us to believe that whatever happens with this we're going to be in a very good position in ‘08 for our ad businesses.

Ask has also been hard at work improving its own ad capabilities. It expanded its Ask Sponsored Listings product last fall, and is in the process of launching a contextual ad network across its own IAC-owned sites and third-party sites.

Think these clues are leading up to an Ask.com-Microsoft partnership? Share your thoughts in the SEW Forums.

Posted by Kevin Newcomb at 4:22 PM | Permalink

May 23, 2007

"Microsoft Does Not Need Yahoo Anymore" MSN Strategist Claims

With the purchase of aQuantive and its other advertising assets, Microsoft nolonger needs to buy Yahoo to conquer the online advertising world, Microsoft Chief Advertising Strategist Yusuf Mehdi stated, according to 247WallSt.com.

"The whole thing rings a bit hollow. Numbers from Hitwise show that Microsoft's US search share dropped from 12.6% in April 06 to 8.5% last month. Google's share of market rose sharply to 65.3%," wrote Douglas A. McIntyre, at the 247wallst.com site.

"While search is not everything when it comes to building a successful online advertising business, it is something. Or, perhaps a lot of something. Microsoft may hope its new aQuantive's ad serving platform and MSN and Microsoft Live can dig that company's online business out of its hole," McIntyre stated.

Posted by Frank Watson at 2:11 PM | Permalink

March 8, 2007

AP, Microsoft Joint Venture Video Platform

The Associated Press is launching a new video platform, courtesy of Microsoft, to help its news affiliates to better monetize their online video content.

Both Microsoft and AP confirmed they will be launching the new product in the next 30 days, Silicon.com reported today.

The previous platform was customised by Microsoft using a platform from MSNBC, Silicon.com noted, but "the new platform, however, uses technology developed specifically for the news wire service", according to Jim Kathman, AP's director of product management for global broadcast.

The platform will allow the partners to sell ads that will be served along with their content, Silicon.com noted.

1,500 media companies have signed on to be affiliates, AP has reported.

The new system will allow tagging and categorizing the news, as well as syndicate the content, sell localized advertising and upload one version of the video but have it available in both Mac and PC formats.

Posted by Frank Watson at 1:08 PM | Permalink

January 18, 2007

PPC Back Fill Map or Who Is King Of Garbitrage

While this is not news - it really should be. Most of the small search engines are arbitraging one way or another. And the Big Three (clearly 3 since Ask back fills Google PPC) make their cuts on the front end.

A Bruce Clay map for all the PPC partnerships and the rules that govern them would be handy.

My rant here started when I noticed at Ask that we were not being served Ask ads but rather our Google ads. Spoke to one of the people over at Ask and was told that they back fill with Google when the CTR drops below their acceptable level.

Guess that is the level where Google would pay them more to put their ads in... so some of our $10 plus Google terms pay Ask more (rumors of what percentage vary but let's work with 60%) - they get $6 a click from Google when we advertise for say $3 on Ask.... so the CTR would have to be 200% to make them enough money to change....

They are not the only ones.... I see many of the small engines pushing their results out into even thinner search provider portals.... the search results may stay at the site but the results are feed straight from another engine... yet many of these engines also arbitrage their onsite inventory with one of the Big Three so they force their advertisers to bid up to at least what these other people are willing to pay.

Not making much sense - after a while people are going to realize they are just using variations on Google, Yahoo and MSN and just go there first.

I want to start a Back Fill Map - so everyone post what you know in the forum and I will develop something that we all can use.

Posted by Frank Watson at 4:05 PM | Permalink

December 14, 2006

Microsoft Using Baidu PPC Ads. Does Google Know?

Okay this seems a little too like the end game of DodgeBall.... Microsoft agrees to serve Baidu paid listings in its Chinese online properties. But Google owns a piece of Baidu, so is Microsoft selling for Google?

"Microsoft will display Baidu's paid listings - which appear mixed in with search results when key words are typed in - on Microsoft Websites including MSN, Live and other partner Websites in China" the Daily Shanghai reported.

Baidu serves under 64 percent of the Chinese search market, Google under 20 percent, Yahoo under 8.

Since Google has bought into their competitor perhaps to build a relationship, Microsoft's alliance with Baidu creates another suitor.

Posted by Frank Watson at 11:23 PM | Permalink

November 16, 2006

Sprint Launches Mobile Search Relationship With Microsoft

According to the Wall Street Journal, Sprint has launched mobile (local) search has part of a broad new strategic relationship with Microsoft, "allowing its subscribers to use their phones to look up information on local businesses and events and find downloadable multimedia content such as ringtones, videos and games." (Here's the Microsoft release.)

According to the article, the new Microsoft-powered search will appear on the "home page of Sprint's browser." The local search component of the partnership will be monetized with advertising. But there's ambiguity in the way the WSJ describes the ad model and I haven't yet had a chance to discuss this with either party.

Here's how the WSJ describes the advertising aspect of the deal. "The local-search component offers a new revenue stream as well: Businesses can bid to be listed as sponsored links in the local-search directory and will pay a fee when consumers click those links to call them through the service."

So the clicks initiate phone calls to merchants. Whether these placements will be separately auctioned and billed as "calls" or as "clicks" is not clear. I'm assuming this is PPCall advertising and will be priced accordingly.

Microsoft is currently monetizing local search online at MSN search and Live Local through its relationship with SuperPages.com, which includes local PPC and PPCall advertisers. It separately has an exclusive relationship with Ingenio to provide PPCall advertisers for the mobile version of Live.com. Whether advertisers in the Sprint deal are being provided via either or both of those Microsoft relationships is not clear at this moment.

Regardless, the move will likely boost AdCenter's fortunes in the near-to-medium term, with Sprint as a mobile distribution partner. It also further solidifies PPCall as an ad vehicle well suited to mobile.

Sprint has an existing mobile local search relationship with InfoSpace, whose downloadable FindIt application works with Java-enabled Sprint GPS phones. Recently, Sprint also announced a deal with Google's new Java-based "GMail for mobile" initiative. But this is a broader and deeper involvement with Microsoft at the level of the carrier deck.

The WSJ article discusses some of the other partnerships between U.S. carriers and mobile search vendors, such as JumpTap and Medio Systems.

If one steps back, what may now be emerging is a kind of mobile search/feature war among the carriers that may trump their collective concern about being relegated to "dumb pipe" status. Sprint has apparently thrown that conventional wisdom to the wind in its most recent announcements with Google and now Microsoft. The emphasis seems, instead, to be on providing the best mobile search and user experience -- as it should be -- in their competition with other carriers for customer acquisition and loyalty.

There's something of an irony here in that on Windows Mobile smartphones (I have the Sprint PPC-6700) the mobile IE browser is the focus of the mobile Web-search experience. In that context, the mobile search experience is much more a duplication – albeit comparatively weak – of the online experience. What that means is the Window Mobile OS (on smartphones) is likely to merely replicate the market position of Google (or Yahoo) rather than boost Live.com or this new Microsoft-powered Sprint mobile search.

Posted by Greg Sterling at 2:34 AM | Permalink

October 19, 2006

Searching Via Internet Explorer 7 & The Battle To Be The Default Search Engine

Now that Internet Explorer 7 has been released in final format, I wanted to look at how search is being handled within the browser. There's been lots of discussion and worries about this in the past. Speculation time is over; reality is here. In this article, how the IE7 search box works, how you can change it and how Google and Yahoo's toolbars behave within it to try and maintain their default status, once gained.

The biggest difference with Internet Explorer 7 is the one that's been most discussed, a visible search box built into the "chrome." In the picture below, you can see the search box, complete with the word "Google" in light text to remind me what search engine is my default.

(NOTE: I've used a lot of screenshots, drawing off my Flickr account and picked a day when Flickr has became sluggish after I wrote this. Apologies if the pictures don't show when you view the page. Try reloading or checking back).

Google is my default search engine because it was that way in Internet Explorer 6. It became my default there with my permission, when I installed the Google Toolbar on my laptop (where I did today's testing) ages ago.

I removed the Google Toolbar for the purposes of testing IE7. That didn't cause the IE6 default settings to change, and to Microsoft's credit, they didn't try to override it when I upgraded to IE7.

Microsoft had previously said that if it detected a particular search engine was set to be a default, it would respect that. So, IE7 did -- sort of. Notice however what comes up in the main window of Internet Explorer 7 when I relaunched it:

Here, I'm notified that Google's my default, and I'm asked to confirm this or make another choice. Overall, I think that's fine. Yes, it's Microsoft hoping to change some minds. Maybe "Keep my current default search provider" should be ticked already. But I'd say most people who have Google as their default now will confirm keeping it that way. It's hardly anti-competitive.

Google, in particular, has disagreed. On a new machine, where Google has no presence or partnership, Microsoft Live Search will be the default. Google had suggested that users should be explicitly asked to make a choice from one of several providers. In my past article about this, I wrote about not being sympathetic to that idea, given that Google has had no problem paying to override consumer choice to gain the default position through deals with Firefox or through Dell installations.

Since then, deals have only accelerated. Yahoo partnered with Acer and also with HP. Google cut a deal with Adobe. It's difficult to know how a consumer is going to buy a "virgin" machine where the defaults haven't already been decided or influenced by some business deal.

Given this, let's focus on how consumers can make their choices after the fact. That's pretty easy. From that opening screen that IE gives after installation, tick the "Let me select from a list of other search providers" option and then choose Save Settings at the bottom of the page.

That will brings up this page (other pages might come up for other language/country configurations):

Very fairly, Microsoft isn't positioning themselves at the top of the list or more prominently than others. In fact, I think Microsoft is making a terrible mistake by just saying "Live Search" rather than "Microsoft Live Search." I think relatively few people know the Live brand right now. I can well imagine some people thinking, "Live Search -- what's that?" and skipping the search engine from consideration.

I selected Live Search from the list. That made a pop-up box appear:

Notice the option to make the choice as my default is NOT ticked. This allows you to add several search engines to the search box, which you can then selectively use while still maintaining your default search engine. You can add a bunch of different providers, and I'll come back to this more below.

It's worth noting that the Search Provider page links to information about the OpenSearch system, a way for anyone to easily create search engines that can be added to IE7. Of course, that doesn't mean you get added to the all-important Search Provider page. It just means someone visiting your site might be able to use a button that you promote to them to change their IE7 settings.

That Search Provider page also has an interesting box allowing you to visit any search engine, then do a copy-and-paste action to make your own search box. It's very clever. You simply search for TEST on anything that gives you a search box. Copy-and-paste the resulting URL, and IE7 will automatically create the right way to access that search engine for you. I added Search Engine Watch as a search engine to my IE7 installation easily by doing this.

In the example above, I didn't change my default search provider. Now let's say I want to, perhaps some time after I've initially installed IE7. Google has previous spun the idea of changing settings in IE7 as some complicated task. It even cited research saying only one third of users could figure it out. I have more faith that people can do it, so let's go through the steps.

Click the Tools button in IE7's menu, then pick Internet Options
On the General tab of the Internet Options window that appears, there's a Search area. Click on the Settings button here.
That brings up a Change Search Defaults menu: (FYI, I wish the "Find more providers" link was much more visible here. If you didn't pick more providers from when IE was initially installed, you won't have any choices in the main selection area -- and you might miss that link. This is handled in a better way through an alternative method I'll cover below).
Choose the search engine you want, push the Set Default button, then OK. Now you're done.

Well, not necessarily. After I did this, Google was shown as my choice within the search box in the chrome. Evil Google! No, it seems more an IE thing. When I closed and restarted IE7, the default was changed to Live Search.

Let's go back to that search box in the chrome. Obviously, you can use it to search. Enter some words, hit return or click the magnifying glass icon/button, and the browser will pull back results from your default search engine.

The box also allows you to temporarily or permanently change your default search provider. Next to the box, use the down-arrow to get a drop-down menu like this:

From it, any search engine you've added to your providers list is shown. You can see how several providers I've selected are added, including the custom choice I made for Search Engine Watch.

Choose a provider, and then your search will go to that provider for that particular search, similar to how the box in Firefox works. It stays this way until you change it back or until you close IE7 entirely.

Look at the bottom of the menu. The drop-down box lets you get to the IE7 search providers page or bring up the Change Search Defaults box I showed in step 3 above. That makes changing providers a two step process.

Next up, I wanted to see how the search engines competing with Microsoft were reacting to a freshly minted copy of IE7 showing up at their doorsteps. Would I get prompts to change, as we've seen in the past from both Google and Yahoo?

Google and Yahoo surprisingly did nothing. I wonder if this might because the final release of IE7 has made some type of browser agent change that the two have set to identify. We'll see. Meanwhile, Ask gave me this box enticing me to change:

Next up, time to deal with concerns that Google might be too aggressive in protecting itself once installed as the default via the Google Toolbar. I loaded up a fresh copy. In short order, Google asked me if I wanted to make it both my default search provider and notify me if something tries to change that:

To help avoid controversy, Google ought to make these separate options. But from a usability perspective, I can well understand the logic of making then a single choice. If I want Google to be my default, I probably don't want something to try and change that behind my back -- and many have had bad experiences with adware and spyware doing exactly that.

I told it Google fine, then I was surprised that the next screen made me decide whether to have PageRank display enabled or not.

In the past, I recall this as an option you were never prompted to enable. Instead, I recall it as something that search engine optimization folks (about the only ones who care) would enable by diving into the advanced options and switching it on.

I could be wrong in my recollection. If so, my apologies. But even with Google's clear "in your face" warning that enabling PageRank will send data to them, I still wonder if perhaps the screen should be different.

Maybe PageRank display should be disabled by default, rather than making you choose. The screen that appears would then ask explicitly if you wanted to change to enabled. It would explain what it provides to the user (the screen itself tells you nothing, not even a short description such as here). It would then warn, as it does now, that enabling the feature allows Google to see every page you are visiting.

All installed, Google gives me a big notice to let me know I'm ready to go with the toolbar:

I then tried to change search providers using the steps above. That seemed to work, but then I got this small notification in my task bar, along with an audible signal:

My task bar is at the top of the screen (where it belongs, in my opinion!). By default, the task bar is at the bottom of Windows machines by default, so the notification could be less noticeable there. The sound helps, but frankly I don't know why this was blocked at all.

There's a big difference between spyware changing your default setting and users themselves trying to change the default using the options within Internet Explorer. Google ought to be able to distinguish the two. Changes made by a user shouldn't be blocked. Moreover, any blocking ought to ask me for confirmation that it's going to happen, not just be done on my behalf.

In other words, consider this. I'd consented for Google to notify me if something was trying to change my default settings, as shown on that earlier screenshot. I did not consent to it doing the blocking on my behalf, which is what it did. It would have been far better if Google had produced some type of pop-up box telling me that something wanted to change my defaults and asking me if I wanted to allow this. Leave the choice with me.

I'll follow-up with Google about this. Meanwhile, what to do if you want to override the decision Google made for you? When that notification happens, you have to click on the little G button in your task bar (if the notification is gone, try changing again to make it come back). Clicking on the G brings up a box like this:

That box is what I think Google should actually show you, rather than processing it behind the scenes unless you manually make it appear. It tells you something wants to change your default, asks if you want to allow that to happen and lets you override what Google wants to do, remain the default, if that's your decision.

If you override, that should disable Google from doing any future monitoring, as it tells you will be the case:

That's what I found to happen. In fact, I see no signs that Google is still monitoring despite being told not to. That's what happened in July, when the GoogleToolbarNotifier.exe program continued to run. Google said this was a bug, which got some dubious laughs in some quarters. Bug or not, I certainly don't see it happening now.

To further test it, I went back to Ask.com and let it make it my default search provider. That worked fine.

Once you've disabled monitoring, what if you want it back? Use the Settings menu of the Google Toolbar, then on the More tab, you'll see two options:

The two different options intrigued me. What was the difference between:

Set and keep Search settings to Google
- Notify me on settings change

I enabled only the first. Bad, bad choice. If you do this, you simply cannot change your settings at all unless you go back into the Google Toolbar and override the option. Google will silently keep any settings from being altered. If you enable them both, then you get back to the behavior where at least Google will give you a notification.

Overall, here's what I'd like to see. The Google Toolbar should ask if you want to be notified about changes. If something tries to make a change, it should then ask you for explicit permission whether to override this, at least the first time -- perhaps it gives you an option to let Google handle these changes without notifications behind the scenes after that. But yes -- get in the users face more about what you're going to change initially, so they know what's going on.

Having played with Google, I next loaded up the Yahoo Toolbar. Ugh, not fun. First, Yahoo by default wants to cram Norton Spyware scan down your throat. Yes, right under the big Download Yahoo! Toolbar button in smaller text is an option to get just the toolbar without it. I'd rather see that option get equal play.

After the installation, like Google, Yahoo stands ready to be both my default search engine and help me get back to Yahoo if something changes my default settings:

Like Google, Yahoo makes it clear you've got the toolbar with this big pop-up window:

Decide to personalize the toolbar, as Yahoo suggests? To do that, you've got to have a Yahoo account. That means the toolbar does more than drive searches for Yahoo. Unlike Google, Yahoo's trying to generate user registrations, as well. The toolbar works without registration, of course -- but it no doubt encourages some people to sign up.

I manually changed my default provider from Yahoo to Google, using the steps above. Yahoo didn't block this. But when I closed the browser and relaunched it, I got this:

Fair enough. Unlike Google, Yahoo didn't silently switch itself back. It asked me to make that choice. It was also a one time thing. I told it to allow the change, then closed my browser and reopened it. Yahoo didn't come back and try to get me to switch back to Yahoo again.

Actually, I wouldn't have minded that. I find it very helpful that Firefox or Internet Explorer will keep asking me if I want them as a default unless I explicitly use the offered tick box not to be asked again. That's because it's easy to accidentally hit the wrong button. It's harder to both hit the wrong button and enable a tick box.

All this effort by the toolbars to maintain default status comes off the fear that the IE7 search box is going to somehow gain Microsoft tons of search traffic. I've been pessimistic about this actually happening. I've noted for ages that despite Microsoft long having hooks into IE for its own search, Google and Yahoo have both survived and thrived. My Google Worried About Microsoft's Browser Advantage? What Advantage? article goes into much more depth about this.

It's uncertain to me that the search box in the "chrome" is going to make that much of a difference, but I haven't seen much user behavior data here. I could be completely wrong, and Microsoft's competitors are certainly worried about it. We'll know in short order. IE7 is being rolled out in a mandatory fashion to Windows users beginning November 1 through the Windows update system. If Microsoft's search share rises, the chrome search box may be working.

However, I think many people will still fire up their browser and go back to the search engines they regularly use. Google and Yahoo might not have the enticements to switchover today up, but those will come. And I think those will help them to largely preserve their shares despite the IE7 rollout.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 10:16 AM | Permalink

October 9, 2006

Microsoft Partners With Blinkx On Video Search

Blinkx signs Microsoft pact from Reuters covers how video search company Blinkx is expected to announce today a partnership with Microsoft to power Microsoft's video search needs, such as at Windows Live Search Videos.

Interestingly, Blinkx is to get a licensing fee rather than a cut of revenues. Licensing fees for search results largely died out around 2001.

Microsoft Live's video search is currently powered by AOL Truveo technology (compare a search for cars on Windows Live Video to AOL's Truveo-powered SearchVideo and you'll see the results are the same). Microsoft said last month it was planning to develop its own video search tech.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:18 AM | Permalink

Windows Live Search Mobile PPCall Deal With Ingenio

A few weeks ago Google introduced sponsored listings into mobile search. Yahoo followed last week. Now Microsoft has partnered with Ingenio to deliver pay-per-call listings into Windows Live Search for mobile. But unlike the other two programs this is not being launched in beta.

Ingenio's advertisers are the only paid listings that will appear when users conduct a geotargeted search on Window Live for mobile. There will only be one advertiser shown for any given search and Ingenio's entire inventory will be funneled into Windows Live. When there are no relevant Ingenio advertisers, no sponsored listings will appear. (The company has existing mobile distribution through Jingle Networks' 1800-Free-411 and go2.)

Since Ingenio announced its original deal with AOL (see example) more than a year ago it has been steadily building distribution with smaller players in the local market. This is obviously a very significant relationship and may be a prelude to a broader deal with Microsoft. Ingenio wouldn't comment on that possibility, however.

Microsoft currently offers "call for free" click-to-call functionality on Live Local.

All three of the dominant search providers have now flipped the switch on sponsored listings in mobile. We should see a continuing acceleration of product development and competition in the wireless space. Early evidence argues that response rates (clicks/calls) in a wireless environment will be much higher than clicks on sponsored listings online because there are fewer competing advertisers (due to smaller screens) and users' needs are typically more immediate.

While the number of users conducting searches in a mobile environment is currently a very tiny fraction of what it is online, mobile search will be a significant channel in the next several years as the user experience improves.

Posted by Greg Sterling at 8:45 AM | Permalink

September 20, 2006

Microsoft To Enter Chinese Market With China Telecom

People's Daily Online reports in Microsoft opens search market with China Teleco that Microsoft is starting push their way into the Chinese search market through a new deal with China Telecom. China Telecom China's is said to be China's largest "network operator and internet provider, providing 25 million customers with broadband service. It has more than 80 million internet users and over 400 city portal webs." The deal, in some way, will give the 25 million customers Live Search features (not sure how exactly). As we noted earlier, Baidu is rocking in China, Google is doing OK and Yahoo is in the race.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 8:54 AM | Permalink

August 23, 2006

Facebook Partners With Microsoft In Ad Deal

The New York Times reports that Microsoft is to provide and sell banner ads and sponsored ads on FaceBook, a popular social networking site "aimed primarily at college students." The ads will be "graphical ad placements as well as automated text-based advertisements targeted to content, and over time, aggregate user behavior on an anonymous basis." The Facebook deal is for three years and is at a smaller scale to Google's MySpace deal.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 8:16 AM | Permalink

July 20, 2006

Lycos Powered By Windows Live & Retriever Directory

It's been a long time since I've looked at Lycos, given how far it has slipped in the search world. Someone asked me about it today, so I took a look -- and what's this at the bottom of the page? "Portions powered by Windows Live."

So hey, it looks like an unannounced Microsoft win. Not much of a win, in that Lycos doesn't have much traffic. And maybe it was announced, and I missed it. By the way, only the unpaid results come from Microsoft. Paid results come from Google -- unless Lycos is showing me Google results because it knows I'm in the UK and has a partnership on this side of the Atlantic. Those in the US potentially are seeing Microsoft adCenter listings.

Lycos also has a new Lycos Retriever directory that I hadn't heard about until seeing Martin Belam dissect it this week. In part 1 of his look, I'd say he's pretty underwhelmed by it.

He is intrigued that it is an attempt to scale through technology. But that just makes me think that Lycos perhaps dusted off the WiseWire technology it bought and deployed back in 1998 for its Lycos Community Guides. Those weren't a killer app for Lycos then. I kind of doubt doing a similar thing in the midst of Web 2.0 hype will help much now.

Meanwhile, part 2 of Martin's look basically asks if the new directory isn't just a scraper site designed to draw in search traffic from elsewhere. Perhaps. To be fair, some pages like this for Belarus use the meta noindex tag, which should keep them out of other search engines. The same thing is true for the blank page example Martin shows in his report. But other pages like this for Minsk have no such restrictions.

Postscript: Brian Ulicny sends me this:

I was one of the guys who worked on Lycos Retriever before Lycos got rid of its search staff (well, all but 2) in February. It is not based on WiseWire technology at all. The idea was to build an automated, self-updating Wikipedia. In any case, the idea was interesting, and it was a fun project to work on. I wrote a paper about it recently, which I can send if you like.

Some topics came out pretty well. For example, see e.g.

But we had quite a way to go before Retriever was all we'd hoped it would be. In any case, I'm sure we'll see more things like it in the future.

Cool -- and I'm asking Brian for a link to his paper, to add to the above. Meanwhile, Lycos also wrote to say that the Windows Live partnership was indeed an unannounced change and that:

Retriever is a beta project our search group launched several months ago. We will continue to capitalize on our assets with our Daum engineers in Korea, taking full advantage of Daum's knowledge and expertise, in continuing to build out the Retriever product and other search initiatives

Postscript Barry: If you would like to view the presentation and paper on this, Brian posted them at his blog. You can download the paper on Retriever and also the slides & presentation.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 7:40 AM | Permalink

July 11, 2006

SuperPages Upgrades Maps With Microsoft

I never saw a press release. But today I discovered that SuperPages, which had dynamic mapping almost before anyone else in local (though it was "cludgey"), has upgraded the mapping on its site using the Microsoft Virtual Earth platform. The "new" maps are much nicer and easier to use than the last time I checked, which was admittedly a long time ago.

While there is aerial photography, there's no "Birds Eye" view here. YellowPages.com licensed Virtual Earth, including Birds Eye, several months ago.

Posted by Greg Sterling at 5:44 PM | Permalink

June 30, 2006

MSN Search To Officially Not Use Yahoo Search Marketing For Sponsored Search July 1

I reported over the Search Engine Roundtable that Yahoo's and MSN's relationship is coming to an official end this month. The official Yahoo announcement can be seen here and it states, "MSN's U.S. search distribution agreement with Yahoo! Search Marketing ends this month, and Yahoo! Sponsored Search listings will no longer appear in MSN's U.S. search results." MSN has been displaying mostly Microsoft adCenter ads on their search results pages for a couple months now. So the transition has been pretty gradual for advertisers and searchers.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 9:42 AM | Permalink

May 23, 2006

MySpace In Partnership Talks With Google & Microsoft

The Financial Times reports that MySpace, the huge social networking site, is in talks with Google and Microsoft over partnership opportunities to better monetize MySpace with contextual and search ads. MySpace, that has "nearly 80m registered users", is seeking a search company, like Google or Microsoft to "supply internet searches on its pages, along with adverts tied to results." The Financial Times says that Yahoo is "less interested," possibly because they have their own consumer generated content going on there. This deal can be huge for both Google and Microsoft, and also MySpace.

Postscript From Danny: Oddly, the story doesn't mention that Yahoo is the current provider of search results to MySpace -- which suggests that the lack of interest might be based on an existing bad experience with conversion over there

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 8:50 AM | Permalink

May 16, 2006

MSNBC.com News Search Powered By Windows Live

The MSN Search Blog noted last night that MSNBC.com is now powered by Windows Live Search. If you perform a search at MSNBC.com, such as on pentagon you will notice that it divides the "most recent" and "full search." The MSN Search team explained that the implementation of this new search feature was "pretty simple" for them to get up and running.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 9:29 AM | Permalink

May 3, 2006

Yahoo & Microsoft Have Talked Partnering, Merging

I was talking with Kevin Delaney of the Wall Street Journal on Monday about search things in general and mentioned the sense it makes for Microsoft and Yahoo to get together. Microsoft is behind with the core search technology. Yahoo's been struggling to upgrade its paid search service. Let's get these two kids together! And today in the Wall Street Journal, it turns out that there's apparently a faction at Microsoft that wants to do just that.

Via Paid Content, A Microsoft, Yahoo Tie-Up? from the Wall Street Journal has the details. Kevin and colleague Robert Guth write of there being two factions within Microsoft -- the "let's built it ourselves" group that has been in control so far and the "let's acquire" group apparently led by Microsoft senior vice president Hank Vigil.

Vigil is said to have led the failed negotiations to combine MSN with AOL. Frankly, a Yahoo deal makes more sense than that. AOL would have provided existing traffic but not solid search technology. Yahoo provides plenty of traffic, along with core search technology and a healthy, first-hand advertiser base.

What's not to love? Probably the high price of the acquisition, plus whether Yahoo -- especially cofounder Jerry Yang -- would go for it. But apparently it's plausible enough that both companies have talked informally over the past year.

The Wall Street Journal cites the hiring of Steve Berkowitz by Microsoft as perhaps being a tipping point. I'd certainly agree. Steve is the first serious outside person Microsoft has brought in for its battle in the search wars. Bringing him on was a big sign that what Microsoft has been trying to do internally hasn't been working -- and so something radical such as an Ask or Yahoo acquisition might be in order.

The big downside is that such an acquisition would give Microsoft yet another brand to confuse consumers with. After spending hundreds of millions of dollars over the years to push MSN, they've now shifted things behind making the stupid Windows Live brand their flagship. It's stupid for so many reasons. Let me bullet point two major ones:

Most people I know don't really like the Windows brand. Heck, I'm a Windows person, fairly anti-Mac, but Windows still represents crashes and glitches to me. And this is the label you want to attach to your online services?
We're moving into a world where the operating system and my web-based services aren't necessarily connected. I love Outlook. I live in Outlook. But online, I might want to sync Outlook with Yahoo or Google's calendar. Forcing me to think -- overtly or indirectly through branding -- that I have to use all your products makes me want to use none of them. Let MSN operate as if it wasn't linked to your operating system or your browser and it will be a stronger service in the long run, not weaker.

So Microsoft's already coping with the confusion of two major brands. Adding in Yahoo further confuses matters, unless they perhaps make a brave, bold move and put everything behind the brand leader in the space, Yahoo.

Meanwhile, via Valleywag, Ballmer defends Microsoft's spending increase from the Seattle Times covers a likely leaked memo from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer naming Google as one of the company's chief competitors and requiring further "heavy investments" in search. The goal, which we've heard before, is to create "the web's largest advertising network, giving us an engine that twill enable us to monetize our services and compete against Google."

Ah -- but to compete against Google, you don't need an advertising network. You first need a quality core web search engine, which your heavy investment to date has failed to create. And so back to Yahoo, which has exactly what Microsoft needs, that core technology.

Microsoft's AdCenter May Fail to Topple Google From Dominance from Bloomberg covers how advertisers are getting a more formal look at the MSN adCenter service that Microsoft has rolled out over the past few months. Unlike Microsoft's failure in web search, I'd say adCenter is a big success. The service already has plenty of advertisers using it -- and anecdotally continues to draw lots of praise for its features.

Features ultimately mean little, of course. As the story cites, it's about volume. MSN could have rolled out a terrible product that advertisers would have coped with simply because it was the only way to reach MSN's substantial traffic. But to the company's credit, they did not do that. Instead, they've continued to refine and tweak and take advertiser feedback in a way that has earned them raves I rarely hear recently about the systems at Google or Yahoo. Volume remains key, but the features and wooing still certainly help.

And that brings us back to Yahoo, which has been struggling with an antiquated paid listings toolset. The Counterattack On Google from BusinessWeek covers how Yahoo's "Panama" update to its paid listings system has been progressing over the past two years and is nearing completion. But BusinessWeek correctly summarizes, in my view, the changes are more about bringing Yahoo up to Google's level of features rather than leapfrogging past Google and into features like MSN offers.

It's another argument that makes the idea of Yahoo and Microsoft getting together not wacky at all.

Want to comment or discuss? Visit our Search Engine Watch Forums thread, Yahoo & Microsoft To Combine.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:00 AM | Permalink

May 2, 2006

More On Amazon Dumping Google & Missing Paid Listings

Barry noted yesterday that Amazon's A9 was no longer carrying Google results. More important, this means that Amazon itself no longer carries Google's search results -- and in particular, Google's paid listings.

Google and Amazon partnered back in 2003 for Amazon to offer Google searches on the Amazon site. Google ads also were displayed there. I'm pretty sure at one point, the Google logo was on Amazon's home page, along with a search box. Unfortunately, the Internet Archive simply serves up pages from 2000 no matter what links I try from the years 2003 through 2005 to check on this.

Anyway, these days, there's a small A9 Web Search box in the upper right-hand corner of the Amazon site. Until last week, that box brought back A9 results that were powered by Google. Now they are powered by Microsoft's Windows Live Search.

Few people use A9 -- but many more use Amazon. How many did web searches at Amazon is unclear, but in either place, they are no longer seeing the paid listings that Google also used to provide.

In addition, I'm also pretty certain that an ordinary Amazon search (which lots and lots of people do) used to bring up Google paid listings as part of Amazon search results. Today, I don't see these at all. Over at Threadwatch, others report not seeing these either.

MSN syndicates Search to Amazon from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer has more on the new Amazon-Microsoft agreement. The issue of who is providing paid listings isn't covered, but since the Amazon-Google agreement wasn't renewed, I'd assume these are to come from Microsoft.

Amazon Search Finds Microsoft from the Washington Post also has some details on the move, including the inspiring answer to whether Amazon felt Microsoft was providing better search results: "It will be up to users to try that out." So more a business move than a relevancy issue, fair to say :)

Want to comment or discuss? Visit our SEW Forums thread, Amazon Ditches Google For Microsoft.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 10:15 AM | Permalink

Google Worried About Microsoft's Browser Advantage? What Advantage?

I was off yesterday (it was a holiday in England), so I merrily missed the fireworks over Google's objections to Microsoft's plans for search in Internet Explorer 7. Nevertheless, a few calls from reporters penetrated my holiday bubble, and I added a brief note with my thoughts below Barry's post about the news. But today, I wanted to more formally revisit the issue. In short, I find Google's concerns pretty overblown, somewhat hypocritical and most important, worry over something that's not likely going to hurt them.

I am nauseatingly exhausted by idea that Microsoft will conjure up some magical method of yanking people into its MSN Windows Live Whatever You Want To Call It search service via the Windows operating system or the Internet Explorer browser. Microsoft has failed for years to be successful in this, which is why it's amazing anyone would still believe it.

In the longer version of this post for Search Engine Watch members, I revisit the tired facts in more depth:

How search has been integrated into Windows and Internet Explorer since 1996 but failed to help Microsoft.
How even when MSN Search was made the default choice by 2001, Google still rose in traffic share.
How putting the search box into the "chrome" of the browser doesn't necessarily mean Microsoft will have a major win this time.
How search via toolbars still remain the minority of the way searches happen.

Meanwhile, skip past the business aspects. What about the consumer issue of choice? The New York Times writes of Google's preferred solution:

The best way to handle the search box, Google asserts, would be to give users a choice when they first start up Internet Explorer 7. It says that could be done by asking the user to either type in the name of their favorite search engine or choose from a handful of the most popular services, using a simple drop-down menu next to the search box. The Firefox and Opera browsers come with Google set as the default, but Ms. Mayer said Google would support unfettered choice on those as well.

Sure, I can get behind the "give people a choice from the beginning" idea. But if Google wants Microsoft to do that, then Google should make it happen right now in Firefox, which pretty much is Google's surrogate browser. If this is the best way for a browser to behave, then Google should be putting its weight on Firefox to make it happen. And Google should also ensure it does the same with Dell, where it has a partnership that I believe makes it the default search engine on new Dell computers.

It would be much easier to back Google's suggestions for IE7 if it was already doing this with its own partnerships. That's especially so given this latest article comes two months after the Wall Street Journal gave big play to Google's concerns with IE7. Back in February, the Journal wrote:

In December, for these and other reasons, Google refused to sign an agreement with Microsoft relating to the new browser's search capabilities. Microsoft left Google off the list of alternative search services. A month later, Microsoft notified Google it would be included on the list with or without a signed agreement, according to people familiar with the matter. Microsoft says after a review of its legal position, it realized it could include Google without a formal pact.

So Google's been concerned about choice for months. Nevertheless, it has failed to make any changes in Firefox, as I wrote after reviewing the Wall Street Journal article:

It's an odd argument, given that Google has not demanded that Firefox make consumers do similar choices in that browser. A partnership deal makes Google the default in Firefox, except for Asian-language versions where Yahoo cut its own deals.

In the end, I find it almost amazing that Google feels it needs to drop hints to the US Justice Department and the EU that it perhaps needs protection. In the search space, it's Google that remains the major player that many people feel may need to have a counter to. A list of the most popular search engines? Since those are largely US-dominated companies, I suspect the EU would want to change the playing field not to stop Microsoft but to hinder both Google and Microsoft. Is that a box Google really wants to open?

Finally, some second-day stories, that I've reviewed after writing the article above:

Google supports choice...except on FireFox and Opera from Microsoft's Don Dodge raising the same issue I covered above, that Google has hardly demonstrated a support of choice in the way it demands of Microsoft.
Google's Double Standard from Yahoo's Jeremy Zawodny, again looking at Google's failure to support choice.
Google cries foul, but for what? from Ed Bott provides nice screenshots on how changing providers in IE7 is about the same as changing in Firefox with one exception - MSN Search is NOT an option in Firefox while Google IS an option in IE7. How about Google putting some pressure on Firefox to let Microsoft in the door. It is one of the web's major search engines. It ought to be on that list.
Google and choice from Nick Carr has the interesting suggestion that if Google's for choice, shouldn't the Google home page -- which gets far more users than any browser toolbar -- let users make a search choice? The idea gave me a chuckle, but I wouldn't agree. If you go to Google, you wanted Google. I don't buy into the idea you went there because you thought Google was just a synonym for search.
Microsoft and Google Set to Wage Arms Race from the New York Times follows on yesterday's article to look at the idea that in the war between Google and Microsoft (and Yahoo, but they don't get a mention), Google's hardly a scrappy underdog. In fact, it has people worried about it perhaps being a monopoly or too powerful. That's something that's been going on since 2002, as my Google: Can The Marcia Brady Of Search Stay Sweet? article from back then covers in more depth.

Want to comment or discuss? Visit our Search Engine Watch Forums thread, Google Objects To Microsoft's IE7 Search Default Plans.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:09 AM | Permalink

May 1, 2006

Alexa & A9 Drop Google for Windows Live Search

Garrett French reports that both Alexa Amazon's A9 have switched from being powered by Google Search to Microsoft's Windows Live Search. When did this exactly happen? We are not sure. But it must have been recent. Why has there not been a lot of press on this? Again, I am not sure.

Want to comment or discuss? Visit our SEW Forums thread, Amazon Ditches Google For Microsoft.

Postscript: See also our follow-up post: More On Amazon Dumping Google & Missing Paid Listings.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 8:44 AM | Permalink

April 21, 2006

eBay Wants To Team Up With Yahoo And/Or Microsoft To Compete Against Google?

A Wall Street Journal article reports that eBay is in talks with both Yahoo and Microsoft to see which one (or possibly both) is a "worthy ally" to compete against the all-mighty Google. Currently eBay spends a ton on Google AdWords, pretty much any search you do on Google, you get an ad for eBay in the sponsored results. Google also is a heavy indexer of eBay content in the organic results. This all leads to tons of referrals to eBay's content from Google. The issue is, Google is now competing with eBay on several fronts, including a PayPal alternative, online auction service and Google's other services such as Froogle and Base together lead to a huge competing e-commerce portal. Hence the need for eBay to make some changes in the future. The article at the WSJ has a nice write up with the details here.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 8:52 AM | Permalink

March 21, 2006

Moneyextra.com Partners With MSN Search

Netimperative reports that MSN Search has been expanding its search partner base by adding the MSN Search box to MoneyExtra.com. This partnership is to help MSN increase their search volume and quotas, to compete with Google and Yahoo for the search pie. The MSN Search box will be present on MoneyExtra.com for three-months, at that time, they will review the relationship and re-negotiate.

Posted by Barry Schwartz at 9:28 AM | Permalink

January 30, 2006

Kanoodle Gets MSN Spaces Contextual Deal

Kanoodle has announced it will be providing contextual ads to the MSN Spaces service. What's odd about this is that MSN has their own contextual ads program apparently in the works (see here and here at JenSense). Then again, it could be that Kanoodle will serve as a stop-gap for MSN until it has its own program online, when Kanoodle might then shift to being backfill.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:52 AM | Permalink

January 13, 2006

Google-MSN Fight In Internet Explorer 7; Yahoo Pokes At Google In Firefox

Nacho points out in What? No Google on Vista? Google Strikes Back on IE 7! at Search Engine Roundtable a screenshot showing how Google is not among the recommended search engines on a guide for those wanting to customize IE7. OK, the page is under construction, but it's hard to believe it's an oversight. Below this, he's got a screenshot showing how Google is prompting in IE7 for users to make it the default search engine. I seem to recall seeing something similar like this from Yahoo, but I can't track that down. It's all kind of an aside to me. I'm not leaving Firefox!

Postscript: Just remembered the Yahoo thing. It's how they try to promote you searching from Yahoo rather than Google in Firefox's built-in toolbar:

Click To Enlarge Screenshot

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:22 AM | Permalink

January 12, 2006

MSN & SuperPages.com In Local Ads Agreement

SuperPages.com local advertisers now appear in MSN local search results. Type in a query, such as deli, New York or dentist, Dallas and superpages ads are displayed at the top of the page, above local search result listings.

Backfill ads appear to be generic—for example, a search for books in Seattle displays ads for Overstock.com, Simply Audio and discount magazine subscriptions.

Posted by Chris Sherman at 4:25 PM | Permalink

December 16, 2005

Sorry Bill and Steve, WSJ Reports Google Near $1 Billion Deal With AOL

If Gates and Ballmer wanted a deal with AOL (Time Warner) as a Christmas gift, it appears that they're not going to get it. The MSFT vs. GOOG game of the "Price is Right" appears to be ending according to this just posted story from the Wall Street Journal: AOL Nears Deal With Google (sub req).

Here are a few key facts and passages from the article by Julia Angwin, Kevin J. Delaney and Dennis K. Berman:

+ AOL and Google are now in "exclusive negotiations." Microsoft has been "shut out" of the negotiations at this point.

+ Google will pay $1 billion for a 5% stake in AOL.

+ "AOL would be able to sell advertising among the search results provided by Google on AOL Web properties." At the moment, sponsored links come from Google...AOL's sales staff would also sell display ads across Google's network of Web publishers."

+ "Google will promote AOL's Web properties among the sponsored links in its search results, and will include AOL's collection of online videos among its search results. Google's arrangement to provide search technology for AOL, which was set to expire at the end of next year, would be extended for five years."

+ Don't look for a deal and/or an announcement until next week after a Time-Warner board meeting.

With multimedia search being one of the hot topics of 2005, I find it interesting that AOL Video, which we've been talking about a lot this year both in terms of content and UI, will be visible in Google results in one form or another. It's obvious that video and video search have been a high priority to the company over the past year and they've done some impressive work. AOL has easy access to lots of video content from Time-Warner, deals with other providers, and also its own multimedia crawler with SingingFish. It will be interesting to see (no pun) if any exclusive video that Google has would/will begin appearing on AOL? Also would future deals that both companies make for video content be made so the material would be accessible on both services? Will the AOL Video database of crawled video content continue to use SingingFish technology or will Google begin to using the SingingFish crawler?

Btw, don't forget that AOL is currently testing (it works great for me) the delivery of high-quality videos while your computer is quiet.

I'm also wondering about future issues with Google and AOL in the instant messaging space. AOL is the leader. Will Google Talk become interoperable with AIM, so the two systems and their users can chat or talk to each other? Earlier this year, MSN and Yahoo announced a deal that will allow users of either service to chat with each other. Would the AIM and Google Talk tech be merged? I could go on with VoIP, broadband, wi-fi, cable tv, and all sorts of other stuff but let's not get way ahead of ourselves.

From the SEW Archives: + Overture & Inktomi Out, Google In At AOL (May 1, 2002) + AOL Moves Fully To Google (August 5, 2002) + AOL Renews With Google (October 8, 2003)

Want to discuss? Check this thread in the SEW Forums.

Postscript: Reuters has now published a story on the still yet to be announced deal. The Google-AOL talks would expand on a relationship which analysts estimate account for 2 percent to 4 percent of Google's revenue on a net basis. AOL uses Google's search engine

Postscript 2: Perhaps the most interesting part of all of this is found (via Searchblog ) in this coverage from the NY Times that says that Google will give AOL preferred placement on the Google site.

Here's the passage: Google, which prides itself on the purity of its search results, agreed to give favored placement to content from AOL throughout its site, something it has never done before.

Does this mean "favored placement" of ads or of organic results? I think before starting to speculate we need to know more on just what Google is thinking here. If Google would start giving "favored placement" for organic results then it would sure be a "wow" moment/change of direction in Google's history. From an advertising standpoint it would be interesting to see how the SEM community would respond. Battelle uses the expression "jump the shark" to describe the NYT passage in his post but adds that it also just might be a "trial balloon."

Of course, it's very unlikely we hear anything official about any of this until next week.

Postscript 3 (Saturday): David Vise's article from the Washington Post on the possible deal. From the article: + AOL also will get the exclusive right to sell online banner ads for Google. AOL will keep about 20 percent of the proceeds from those ad sales, while Google will get about 80 percent.

+ "AOL is a valued partner," Google spokeswoman Lynn Fox said yesterday. "We look forward to continuing to work with them."

+ AOL has provided Google with more than $400 million in ad revenue so far this year, according to public filings.

+ The existing arrangement -- under which Google provides text-based ads and free search results on AOL -- will continue, with AOL keeping 80 percent of those ad proceeds and Google taking 20 percent.

+ One source said AOL will also have the right to buy graphic ads that appear alongside the text-based ads Google traditionally has displayed to the right of its free search results.

+ Google's search results, based on equations that rank them according to relevancy, will not be changed as a result of the new partnership with AOL, sources said.

Postscript 4: See AOL's Choice of Google Leaves Microsoft as the Outsider has more details on AOL having concerns over MSN's new ad network and arguing that its own ad serving software was beter.

Posted by Gary Price at 12:44 PM | Permalink

December 7, 2005

Google and Microsoft Play "The Price is Right" with AOL

According to a Reuters story (via News.com): Microsoft, Google still vying for AOL: that proposals from both Microsoft and Google have been submitted to AOL to "strike an internet advertising partnership" with the company.

Julia Angwin And Kevin J. Delaney in the WSJ (sub required) write: People familiar with the matter said that under the proposal being discussed, AOL, whose current ad partner is Google, would switch to using Microsoft's search engine, and the two companies would set up a joint venture to sell online advertising across both AOL and Microsoft's MSN portal. The services would remain under control of their respective owners, but their ads would reach many more online customers than they do now, these people said.

But Google remained in its own partnership talks with Time Warner late yesterday and still could emerge on top, these people cautioned. A sticking point so far has been its reluctance to guarantee Time Warner a minimum amount of revenue, which Microsoft has done, said one person familiar with the talks.

Reuters reports that at least another round of negotiations are likely and we might learn of a final decision by Christmas.

In other talks, Comcast Corp., which sources said was considering a joint deal with Google, is now also seeking a separate arrangement with AOL, regardless of the outcome. The top U.S. cable operator is discussing how it can market its high-speed Internet service to AOL's dwindling but still large dialup customer base, among other topics.

Micrsoft CEO, Steve Ballmer, while in DC remained quiet on any sort of deal but said:

Online advertising is of keen interest to us, and I have absolutely nothing to say about the AOL deal or (any) deal whatever," Ballmer said. "If you ask, particularly our consumer-facing businesses, what will be the most rapidly growing revenue stream at Microsoft, it's absolutely going to be advertising.

Posted by Gary Price at 1:34 PM | Permalink

November 21, 2005

MSN Powers UK's Times Online; Ask UK Scales Back Ads

Two brief items from the UK search scene today.

+ Revolution Magazine reports that MSN Search (MSN.co.uk) will power web search on the Times of London web site.

The six-figure deal will mean the Times Online Search the Web toolbar will be MSN branded, and will drive Times Online users to the MSN Search homepage. The placement will be fully integrated into the Times Online site and will run until June 2006.

+ The Netipmerative article: Ask scales back UK paid search ads, reports that Ask UK has done what we saw Jeeves.com do a few months ago and cut back on the number of ads on web results pages.

According to the company, Ask.co.uk will remove Branded Response and Answerlink ad products from the site as of December 31st.

The article also notes that Ask.co.uk has postponed its plans to offer their Ask Jeeves Sponsored Listings in the UK.

Finally, Ask.co.uk is planning a "phased reduction" of their UK sales force between now and the end of the year.

Posted by Gary Price at 2:15 PM | Permalink

November 7, 2005

Microsoft Said Leading The Race For Part Of AOL

Many Suitors, and Pitfalls, as AOL Seeks a Partner from the New York Times says Microsoft is now the "front runner" in a potential sale of a stake in AOL.

The article highlights comments from Microsoft chair Bill Gates last week saying that interest is more about having a "greater role" in the future of advertising, suggesting as we and others have said before, that this may be more about landing increased distribution for Microsoft's new paid search program but outing AOL's current partner, Google.

The article also says the AOL-Google deal is up for renewal each year. If so, that's news to me. AOL has never said how long the last deal it signed with Google would last, but it was very, very clear when I talked to them about the deal when renewed in October 2003 that it was a multiyear agreement.

My best estimate has been that the deal would be up for renewal in October of this year, since past deals have typically lasted about two years.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 7:02 PM | Permalink

September 23, 2005

New Watson Sidebar for MSN Search

Watson, a "proactive" search utility that watches what you do and automatically provides related search results from the web, is now available as a plug-in for the MSN Desktop/Toolbar suite.

From the press release: Watsons sidebar display is continuously updated with real-time information that is relevant to the work being done at any given moment. This gives users an instant snapshot of information thats pertinent to their work. The security and identity of each Watson and Windows Desktop Search user is never compromised, since Watson does not store or transmit any personal data.

I'll be taking a closer look at Watson and its capabilities in an upcoming SearchDay. Meanwhile, the free 30-day trial of Watson 2.0 and the Add-in is available to download at http://addins.msn.com.

Posted by Chris Sherman at 10:57 AM | Permalink

September 15, 2005

Microsoft Talks To Time Warner About Acquiring a Piece of AOL

Via a post in our forums, we learn of a NY Post article: AOL's Time May Be Up, about Microsoft talking with Time Warner about about acquiring a piece of AOL.

Under the plan being considered, Microsoft would pay some money to Time Warner for the AOL stake, leaving the two companies approximately equal partners in the venture.

The article also says that AOL has also talked with Google and Yahoo about acquiring part of the service.

Of course, a partnership between MS and TW/AOL would likely have implications for Google. Why? Google ads are visible on AOL Search results pages. Google could/would loose eyeballs if AOL begins showing advertising from MSN's soon to launch AdCenter service. For site owners, an implication is also that AOL's Google-powered results would be replaced by MSN's own crawler results.

Posted by Gary Price at 1:17 PM | Permalink

June 14, 2005

MSN Shopping Partners With PriceGrabber

We wrote in March about MSN beta testing a new shopping search engine. That public beta has since closed. When the improved service relaunches later this year, it looks like it will be at least partially powered by shopping search engine PriceGrabber. MSN and PriceGrabber has just signed a deal to put PriceGrabber listings on MSN by the fourth quarter this year. More details from MediaPost in MSN Shopping To Add PriceGrabber Listings.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 9:12 AM | Permalink

April 18, 2005

MSN Results Coming to InfoSpace Sites

InfoSpace is announcing that they've just inked a two-year deal with Microsoft to add MSN web search results to both their branded metasearch sites (Dogpile, Metacrawler) and their private label search offerings. I just ran a few searches with both engines and it looks like MSN results haven't been added to the mix yet. InfoSpace also has deals in place with Google, Yahoo, and Ask Jeeves.

We've also learned that a new version of Dogpile will be going live at the beginning of May.

Posted by Gary Price at 12:25 PM | Permalink

March 8, 2005

Yahoo Execs Talk About the Possible End of Ad Relationship with MSN

Last week I blogged an item about Yahoo CEO Terry Semel predicting that Yahoo's advertising deal with MSN will end when Microsoft launches their own ad network. A new AdWeek article: Yahoo! Sees End To Its Deal With MSN, includes a comment from Ted Meisel, Yahoo senior vice president and head of its Overture Services (aka Yahoo Search Marketing Solution) division.

"The right thing for us to do, as a business, is assume one day that MSN will develop its own ad network," Meisel said. "I don't know when that day is or if it will come. Until then, we're going to continue to serve them well."

The article points out that the current Yahoo/MSN advertising contract runs through June 2006.

Posted by Gary Price at 10:49 AM | Permalink

January 25, 2005

Google CEO Schmidt To Speak At MSN Advertiser Summit

Last year, some jaws were dropping over MSN inviting competitor Yahoo's CEO Terry Semel to speak to its major advertisers. Time for some more jaws to hit the floor. This year, Google CEO Eric Schmidt will be giving a talk.

Inviting Semel last year really wasn't that odd, given that Yahoo is also a major MSN partner, providing it with the bulk of its ads. Bringing in Schmidt? It certainly makes it seem like MSN's not playing favorites. Yahoo will also be back, in the form of Yahoo-owned Overture president Ted Meisel.

The event is the annual MSN Strategic Account Summit, running from March 15-17. Schmidt and Meisel are taking part on the second day. Didn't get an invite? Then you'd better spend a lot more money with MSN, because that's who this is for -- top advertisers spending the big bucks.

Search marketers, on offer will be the MSN Search Insights session, described as: "We will discuss case studies on the best use of search engine marketing and most recent updates on MSN Search."

I'd expect this mainly a look at how paid search works on MSN, through Overture purchases and its own programs. And perhaps this may be when some advertisers will learn of any expansions to that program, which have been rumored.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 8:24 AM | Permalink

January 6, 2005

Convergence: Yahoo! and Microsoft Announce Relationship

Yahoo! has announced in this news release that:

+ The "Best of Yahoo" (including My Yahoo! and Yahoo! Premium Video) will be available to consumers through Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005.

Yahoo! today announced an agreement with Microsoft to extend Yahoo! services to Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005, Microsoft's version of the Windows operating system designed to provide all-in-one, digital entertainment experiences. Under the agreement, consumers will be able to access Yahoo! services optimized especially for the digital home environment. Yahoo! expects to deliver a variety of services and content over the course of the coming year via Microsoft Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005, with the first offerings being made available in the coming weeks.

Very interesting to see two of the "big guys" partnering on something. Also, worth noting the MS use of My Yahoo! versus the personalization that MSN currently offers.

+ The launch of the Yahoo! Digital Home Developer Program

The Yahoo! Digital Home Developer Program will allow consumer electronics companies and other software integrators to make Yahoo! content and services accessible to their Internet-enabled stereos, televisions and other home electronic devices.

Posted by Gary Price at 8:29 AM | Permalink

November 1, 2004

Microsoft Help Promotes Google Web Search

Doing some news catch up and came across this interesting item from InfoWorld last week: Google helps promote Windows XP.

It's about how Microsoft's Partner Pack For Windows is promoting the Google Deskbar. That's Google DeskBAR, which lets you search the web from any application rather than the recently released Google DeskTOP, which lets you search your computer for information.

Google and Microsoft are both locked in a pretty heated battle to win the hearts and minds of searchers, of course. So seeing Microsoft help Google on one of the fronts of the search wars -- web search -- is odd to say the least.

Microsoft plans to release its own web search technology by the end of this year. Search Engine Watch also reported back in August that Microsoft's new desktop search would be out by the end of this year, something Microsoft reiterated during a recent earnings call. Google naturally has existing products of its own in both areas.

Still, this is the internet, and it appears coopetition survives. Folks who compete will still partner, where it makes sense. In this case, as the InfoWorld article explains, the fact Google's Deskbar tool makes use of Microsoft's .NET framework seems to trump to potential web search defections.

Posted by Danny Sullivan at 2:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

See More Posts From:

This Week | This Month

Legal Notices, Licensing, Reprints & Permissions

Privacy Policy
Affiliates

var gaJsHost = (("https:" == document.location.protocol) ? "https://ssl." : "http://www."); document.write(unescape("%3Cscript src='" + gaJsHost + "google-analytics.com/ga.js' type='text/javascript'%3E%3C/script%3E")); var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-564586-7"); pageTracker._setDomainName(".searchenginewatch.com"); pageTracker._trackPageview(); window.collarity_appid = "incmedia"; //> //>

Top Jobs

Director of Digital Media
KPHO-TV Phoenix, United States
Senior Sales Executive (Online Advertising)
iMediaRecruiters.Com Chicago, United States New York, United States Los Angeles, United States Dallas, United States
Contract Editor
Boston, United States New York, United States Los Angeles, United States
Senior Marketing Manager
iMediaRecruiters (Confidential) Houston, United States
Search Marketing Coordinator
Zappos.com Henderson, United States

More Jobs