Google

I was just on a page on a site that is completely accessible - but only if you know the url. I was using chrome to access this page, which made me wonder: would Google use the data of my page view history to expand its index? Granted, I didn’t select the check box to help Google make Chrome better (or in other words: hand over all my usage data) - but I can imagine some sort of overall web path tracking. If that ever happens, Google would have access to pages that it otherwise would have no way of finding. That’s great for expanding the world of information - but terrible for anyone that has content on the web that is only meant to be accessed directly and not meant to be indexed. Would Google ever do this? I think it’s certainly possible.

I wasn’t using my regular IP address yesterday, so everything that I did yesterday went into my Google analytics data. That’s not a problem - that’s easy enough to fix and the data from one day from me is small enough to lack relevance. The problem was a search query that I did… and the number of times it showed up in my keywords from yesterday. I searched for something once, it showed up four times. All from the network I was on, all seemingly from me. It wasn’t something a standard searcher would query and I imagine it was one of the first times - if not the first - it has been searched for. So… one query, four queries, that’s not a big deal, right? No, not in isolation, but if it does in fact happen on a larger scale, then yes… it is a big deal. If I don’t have accurate data, then many of the decisions I make are based on incorrect beliefs.

So, what’s the moral of this story? Don’t just rely on Google Analytics - which I know many, many people do. Diversify your tracking methods and make sure you have solid data. I’m sure most of you already knew that.

And by the way…
Yesterday was the third birthday of Lopico - for more on the year that was, read this post.

This one comes solely from the high quantity of searches that have been getting people to my site since Facebook Apps launched. The queries in question are things like: “facebook gmail” or “get gmail in Facebook” - as many of these as I see a day, I think it’s fairly clear that people would like to read their email through a Facebook app. I haven’t looked enough at the Facebook platform documentation to know if this is possible, but I can’t really think of why it wouldn’t be - other than it would appear to have a point to it, and I think it may be a requirement for Facebook Apps that they all remain useless.

Thoughts? Is anyone doing this?

Google’s appears headed down the, well, tubes. I think we could see that coming. Well maybe not, but think about it - how long could it last. Ignoring the ‘every giant must fall,’ logic there are a number of reasons I think a Google downturn is in the works.

Purely speculation but… With the success of Google, Web 2.0 was born. A couple of years ago when the whole web2.0 thing was just getting started (and a term I could stand) it lacked credibility. It was just a bunch of guys that were trying to chase the same success that only Google was having with the web. Now that people have realized that this isn’t just another bust and actually has some concepts that have real world application (and we can use them on always-on connections) the mainstream (to a disgusting point) has accepted them. What does this mean for Google? It means it’s not alone. With more success everywhere more advertisers are diversifying their web marketing opportunities. And that makes sense. I can advertise on Google and that’s cool - but people use Google (most people) in a very quick fashion. I go, I look for info, and I leave. Now think about Facebook - people are on their for ever - thus increasing the chance that your ad will actually be noticed. Their is, of course, a substantial difference in cost to advertise, but for larger companies it is worth it. Yes, Google has made its bread and butter on charging small amounts millions of times, but it still hurts to lose the large chunks that come in all at once.

Then, there is the nature of the ads. Quick one liners that are off to the right. Which you are only clicked when the “real” results aren’t good enough. Enter the SEM (search engine marketer). For years they been portrayed as the snake-oil salesmen (and there are some scammers) but they’re doing well. They’re making progress, which is actually making search results better. And not only are the SEMs themselves getting better, but the general knowledge base they contributed to has increased. It’s much easier to learn the basics of SEO and thus make your website more attractive to search engines than it was a few years ago. In general - results are just getting better, which decreases the value of PPC ads. And it’s not just the SEMs, the algorithms are getting better too - making “free” results more relevant and therefore the paid results less.

This just skims the surface of all the potential reasons that Google is down (though still doing very well) - but this is the core of Google’s business and I don’t think it is perpetually sustainable as many think.

Fresh off of naming Techmeme my favorite site of ‘06, I’m switching to a competing service. After a few emails with Megite’s Matthew Chen, I’ve decided to at least give Megite the rest of January. From the looks of things so far, it seems like there is more content, a better design, some interesting features in the way of personalization, and you can license the software. I like Matthew’s proactive style, it’s worth at least a month of my pageviews.

On the topic of switching, I’ve also switched to Google Reader from Bloglines. I’m not sure why, but ever since I upgraded to FF 2.0 I’ve been having a lot of problems with bloglines. Unfortunately this makes me even more of a Google slave, as I now use Google personalized, Gmail, Google Docs, Google Calendar, Google Reader, and I’ve even set up a Google Custom Search. I believe the term is Gbitch.

Lopico turns two-ish today. This is the 2 yr anniversary of my registering of the domain, however the site did not actually come online until December. A lot has changed since then, and more continues to change. In fact since the relaunch of Lopico in July I’ve even changed a handful of things; I added search in some cities, RSS feeds for reviews, mobile bookmarks, and there are two more announcements today which you can read about on the Lopico Blog.

Oh yeah, it’s Google’s birthday too. Happy b-day Google. Lopico relies on a couple google services including one you’ll read about in the Lopico Blog - so I’m happy to share the birthday. I just hope Lopico makes it to year 8.

Way back, before I even had a wordpress blog, I blogged about the Pontiac ad that ends with Google Pontiac to find out more. I thought that it made sense, but…it doesn’t seem to work. Looking at Google trends, it doesn’t appear that the ad has made any impact on the search volume. The fluctuation in search volume seems to be consistent with all prior search data. So, what’s point??

It generated some buzz, but apparently not enough to change customer behavior. As I said in the earlier post, it seems to be more of a recognition of the new norm, rather than a really inspiring move. The problem as I see it, is the Pontiac site. If Googling pontiac took me to some really great site (not the same old car site that every brand has) then the campaign would be exciting. The campaign needs to hit all aspects of web presence, from the initial search to the eventual site interaction, and even interaction on other sites (youtube, myspace, etc) - otherwise don’t expect anything to change.

A large number of College graduates are faced with a common problem right now: which email service should I switch to? Most universities that I know of, don’t allow students to use their .edu account forever. Instead, they ask you to set up a forwarding address within a few months of graduating. This makes sense for them in terms of storage, and it makes sense for the student in terms of no longer appearing to be a college student. Doesn’t this present a great opportunity for an email provider? And since these students are also on Facebook, wouldn’t it make sense to publicize your email solution on Facebook?

From the other side, Facebook has walls and you can leave messages, but having an embedded chat application on the site similar to what gmail offers could give Facebook something that other SNs lack - a live social interaction.

To me it seems obvious for an email provider to work with a compnay that has a large number of users in need of an email solution, but maybe I’m missing something, because I certainly haven’t seen any Gmail or other solicitations when I log in to Facebook.

I’ve been noticing a number of posts lately that seem to have a common theme, “it pays to suck.”  The major premise is that if you have weak content you will make more money on ads, because no one will want to stay on your site very long, and the ads will give them an escape mechanism.

I’ve addressed this before with respect to Google, but didn’t really think of it with respect to publishers of Google Ads.  So, now as I see it there are at least a few Google weaknesses that are very profitable:

1. Weak SERPs leads to clicks on Ads
2. Weak publishers (Google uses open enrollment) lead to more Ad clicks.
3. Preventing new websites from doing well in SERPs leads webmasters to join AdWords

Google is praised (340.74 per share) for being a great innovator, when really all it’s good at is being bad.  That’s a hell of a business to be in, but how long can it really last?  The more dumb moves Google makes (Google Pages, That weird 3d modeling thing, Google Mars) the more people will start to realize Google’s not that great.

Google launched Google Finance today, and it hasn’t exactly received rave reviews. Personally, I like it. I think that it’s actually good for the consumer. Why? Because more corporations will have to start blogging. Google finance puts blog posts about the company on the company details page. Unfortunately it is fueled by Google Blog Search, which is weak at best, but it does bring attention to some blogs, a fact that companies would be foolish to ignore. Smart companies will likely respond by launching their own blogs so that they themselves can dominate the results (as Google does with its page).

By bringing more corporations in to the blogging realm consumers will be aided. First, consumers will have easier access to important information; second, some corporations will realize that they can send out offers to customers through blogs / rss and will be able to reach the consumers that are anxiously awaiting their message; and third consumers will be given a forum to directly interact with some companies.

The site overall may not be better than any other finance site, but it certainly has a chance to bring more corporations into the world of blogging. Granted, the new blogs will be more like the extremely cheesy Official Google Blog, but it’s better than nothing.

One last note, I find it very interesting that GOOG returns no blog results for Google’s most recent lawsuit, yet it is the first result for YHOO.

First we heard about G:Drive, then we found out that G Calendar will be launching very soon. So, all of the 2.0 co.s that were slaving over their versions of calendars and online storage are now seemingly dead.

Worst of all they were banking on either a) being bought or b) developing a large enough fan base that reliance sets in, at which point they can think about having a business model. Sorry, you didn’t have a business model when you had traffic and now you have no possibility of a business. You could have made some money, but instead chose to create a cool cloneable app that created no reliance in your users.

So yes, your run is over, you could fight, but you don’t have anything that they don’t.

It’s the way of 2.0 - no business models anywhere - this is why 90% will fail. The creativity is great, but if you don’t have a business model you don’t have anything.

Pay attention to what Google is and is not doing. If you don’t want to get crushed, look at what they’re not doing. Google is not a content creator - create content. Look at what Jason Calacanis did (is doing) with Weblogs, inc., he built an incredible content network that couldn’t be replicated merely by building an application. And what happened? His company was purchased.

But what do I know? Google is scraping my site and using my information on Google Local, so maybe I’m dead too.

1. Something to talk about, because Google hasn’t done anything remarkable lately
2. A source of wild speculation from people that have no idea
3. A premature viral effect - The idea spreads when it’s a speculative idea, but once the actual thing is out no one cares, and the virus dies (see also: Apple’s recent HiFi product launch).
4. Something that, if it’s like other recent Google releases, will either a) reduce your privacy rights or b) will not be worth writing about a week after it launches (see also: Google Pages - which received more attention when it was called “Trogodor” and no one new what it was).
5. A way for me to increase page views on my blog

tags: google; google lighthouse

Russell Beattie (who has a commentless blog) has a post on the lack of business models in web 2.0. I blame Google for this phenomenon. The essence is this - web 2.0 companies launch with the idea that they are just about tech, they then build up a loyal and reliant base of users, and when the time comes they start monetizing. Just like Google did. The problem (and part of the reason for Google’s success) is that the tech community has an aversion to making money. They want things that they believe are aimed at the user not making money. If they think that it’s just about money the early adopters, won’t adopt. Worse, Google is still doing this, further leading to the follow the leader problem. Google still launches (beta launches) products without ads that become monetized later.

Until the leader stops, the followers won’t.

Interesting theory on BW Blogspotting. I would have to agree, Google does benefit from this, though it may not be their intent. The same can be said for the Google Sandbox (though G denies its existence), sites are not indexed or partially indexed until the site is more developed, which leads companies trying to create an online presence to seek alternatives to organic search - including AdWords.

I kept up with the Googlecities/Googlepages story all day yesterday, and found a few more interesting aspects:

1. Threat to Gmail. Your subdomain on googlepages is your gmail address, so anyone that sees your page also has your gmail address. Gmail has a great spam filter, but why open up your users to this potential privacy problem?
2. Using Google to spam Google. I visited an SEO forum yesterday and found that one thing people are already talking about is using Googlepages for link development and for spam sites. Spammers have been registering gmail accounts such as low.mortgage@gmail.com so that they can have the domain low.mortgage.googlepages.com - which will likely be used solely as a page linking to other sites, or as a page with information taken from Wikipedia but with ads on the page. Since these pages are within the googlepages domain, Google will crawl them within a few hours, which will increase the ability of such sites to spam the index.
3. Advertising. If it’s a Google product just assume it will have ads. The Google model, which sadly has been adopted by too many promising new sites, is to create an ad free product, built up a loyal fan base and then slap ads on it. I guess the thinking is lead your users to believe that this isn’t about money, it’s just because we like you, and then after they’re hooked they won’t care about a few ads.
4. Click Fraud. IF Google does not choose to keep all advertising for itself, but instead offers the option to place AdSense ads on your Googlepage, Google will be increasing rather than decreasing its’ click fraud problem, which it is supposedly trying to get rid of. But, why would Google want to get rid of Click Fraud? Isn’t it sort of windfall for Google? Here’s how I understand it to work:
1. In a non click fraud situation, a publisher gets an AdSense account, and places AdSense ads on its site
2. The ads generate revenue for the publisher and Google (for this example I’ll use 50/50)
3. After the ads have generated $200 google pays the advertiser $100

BUT, suppose the publisher clicked on one of their own ads (violating AdSense TOS) at the time that they had made $10 then:

1. The revenue from the fraudulent click is returned to the advertiser
2. Google continues to display ads on the publishers site, costing them the opportunity of displaying actual revenue earning ads on their site
3. When the revenue from Ads reaches $200 Google tells the publisher - hey you weren’t actually making money for yourself just for us, because you violated the TOS a while back.
4. Google keeps the $200 less the amount from the one bad click, and the publisher gets nothing (actually the publisher looses $100 in opportunity costs)

So if you were Google, would you want to get rid of click fraud? Probably not. Of course Google could just slap ads on Googlepages and never even offer the opportunity for users to make money, but then they would be evil.

I’m sure that there is more, but this is being very well covered, and you don’t need to read my blog to know that.

Googlecities, has now been Dugg 3400+ times. This morning I commented on how, I think it’s pretty lame, apparently I’m in the minority. After reading the comments, and what people are excited over… I still think it’s lame.

If it’s integrated into Blogger it could become useful(ish), in the sense that it could give a blogger a homepage that gives more insight into who the blogger is. Perhaps it is also useful to those, like the guy that Seth Godin linked to yesterday, that would like to create a resume online. And perhaps it is a sign of things to come… that is to say google trying to become the only place you ever need to go online. If I could have my blog, a page about me, a feed reader, and email all in one place, why wouldn’t I? If I only used google services, I’d only be missing a few essential pieces of the web, and with more scrape services coming out every week it won’t be long before I can get everything packaged in a feed.
We’ll see, but I still think it’s lame.

technorati tags: google

With all that is said about the Google idea process how did Google pages (googlecities) ever even get considered for launch? Immediately the thinking of bloggers is that this must be an incomplete product, there must be something else coming - and I’m sure Google would say, hey it’s a beta. But being a beta from Google means something. It means that this project was selected from the hundreds of ideas coming out of Google as a project worthy of Google’s time and money. Google Betas have a higher standard to live up to than other betas, so:

1. Who is this thing for?

• Web Designers do not need this.
• Bloggers can’t use this as a blog.
• It’s lacking too many features to compete with MySpace as a personal homepage.
• It doesn’t have the personalization of MySpace.
• It won’t work for businesses (see #2).
• It doesn’t have the linked in capability of a directory site.
• I can’t really think of who this is for.

2. It won’t work for businesses (even local businesses)

• local businesses are moving to the web, but the majority of them are doing so by having a domain and website that uniquely reflects their business
• even at the low end of the revenue spectrum local businesses want something that is unique, not a template.
• of the 100s of local business websites I’ve seen in the past year and a half, I remember one that used a template, and it used blogger.

3. Is it 1990?

• I said in a post yesterday, that in a few years nearly every place that you can post data to online will have a feed.  Google pages shipped without the ability to interact, and without feeds.
• This reminds me of the member.aol.com page that I set up, and later the geocities and tripod pages that I set up.  This is not where the web is headed, it’s where the web has been, and moved away from.

4. Alienating orginial Googlers

• Google built its reputation by playing up to the tech crowd with a product that lacked all the elements of flashy design and just functioned as a great tech product. This is a complete reverse of what has made google succesful.  Google is now going after a non-tech-savvy crowd, but the tech-savvy crowd is always followed.  Tech fans won’t use it, which means it will never trickle down to the masses.

5. Being Beta - A Google Beta means something more than a regular beta

• Of all the projects at Google this was selected as one of the brightest ideas coming out of Google.
• Private Betas occurred in which people at some point thought that this was a good idea.
• There were versions that were worse than this that we never saw.

So, how did this ever come out?

Maybe I am conflicting myself, because this is obviously something that the mainstream has the technological ability to use (which I’ve said is always something to be considered), but there are so many options out there that allow people to do more that this (without significant overhaul) is doomed from the start.