<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>HipMojo.com</title>
	<link>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog</link>
	<description>Covering Online Video, Web, Search, Investing, Technology, Strategy, Investing, M&#038;A, Financing, VCs</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:14:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Google: Yahoo! Deal is Good For You, Them, and Sure, Us Too</title>
		<link>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/06/12/google-yahoo-deal-is-good-for-you-them-and-sure-us-too/</link>
		<comments>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/06/12/google-yahoo-deal-is-good-for-you-them-and-sure-us-too/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:37:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ashkan Karbasfrooshan</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Internet &#038; Web]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Search Wars]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Legal Matters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Yahoo!]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Online Advertising]]></category>
<category>Google</category><category>Internet &amp;#038; Web</category><category>Legal Matters</category><category>Microsoft</category><category>Online Advertising</category><category>Search Wars</category><category>Yahoo!</category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/06/12/google-yahoo-deal-is-good-for-you-them-and-sure-us-too/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My countryman and business architect of Google, Omid Kordestani, pre-emptively answers some of the questions and addresses some of the potential criticism the Google/Yahoo non-exclusive deal might garner.
The scale tipped in Google&#8217;s favor when Yahoo! began to feature Google back in the early 2000s&#8230; it broke today.  It&#8217;s game over&#8230;
My man is right:
This is [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My countryman and business architect of Google, Omid Kordestani, <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/06/our-agreement-to-provide-ad-technology.html" target="_blank">pre-emptively</a> answers some of the questions and addresses some of the potential criticism the Google/Yahoo non-exclusive deal might garner.</p>
<p>The scale tipped in Google&#8217;s favor when Yahoo! <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/04/15/how-often-do-you-get-a-perfect-storm/" target="_blank">began to feature</a> Google back in the early 2000s&#8230; it broke today.  It&#8217;s game over&#8230;</p>
<p>My man is right:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong id="njzc0">This is not a merger. </strong> Rather, we are merely providing access to our advertising technology to Yahoo! through our AdSense program.</p>
<p><strong id="njzc1">This does not remove a competitor from the playing field. </strong>Yahoo! will remain in the business of search and content advertising, which gives the company a continued incentive to keep improving and innovating. Even during this agreement, Yahoo! can use our technology as much or as little as it chooses.</p>
<p><strong id="njzc3">This does not prevent Yahoo! from making similar arrangements with others. </strong>This arrangement is not exclusive, meaning that Yahoo! could enter into similar arrangements with other companies.</p>
<p><strong id="k11g0">This does not increase Google&#8217;s share of search traffic. </strong>Yahoo! will continue to run its own search engine and advertising programs, and the agreement will not increase Google&#8217;s share of search traffic.</p>
<p><strong id="qeq-0">This does not let Google raise prices for advertisers.</strong>  Google <a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/how-auctions-set-ad-prices.html" target="_blank" id="c..s" title="does not set the prices manually for ads">does not set the prices manually for ads</a>; rather, advertisers themselves determine prices through an ongoing competitive auction.</p></blockquote>
<p>But this does not change the fact: <strong>search is <em>officially </em>game over</strong>.  Google is a <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2006/06/03/will-google-be-the-msft-style-monopoly-of-the-21st-century/" target="_blank">monopoly</a> and I agree to some extent with Google&#8217;s official position here: this may not be a bad thing at all, given how horribly Yahoo!, MSN.com, Ask.com and AOL.com have fared in this one-sided beatdown.  Google will probably be able to leverage this deal to find growth and manage to eventually become <a href="http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2006/10/22/google-to-boast-larger-market-capitalization-than-microsoft-in-2010/" target="_blank">more valuable than Microsoft</a>.</p>
<p>Make no mistake about it: every time Google strikes a deal with someone to provide it with its &#8220;ad technology&#8221; they end up getting stronger and the expense of the partner (think AOL, Ask.com).  In a few years, it will suck any remaining mojo out of Yahoo! and no one will want anything to do with Yahoo!, which will be sold off in pieces&#8230;</p>
<p>Of course, you are wondering, can Google buy Yahoo!?  I&#8217;ve addressed it <a href="http://www.watchmojo.com/web/blog/?p=1766" target="_blank">here</a>&#8230; but with this deal, why bother?</p>
<p>Hats off to Google: you won the search game today&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://watchmojo.com/web/blog/index.php/2008/06/12/google-yahoo-deal-is-good-for-you-them-and-sure-us-too/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
