That man is a sheep amongst sheep
|
|
|
Yahoo blames Google Instant for its decrease in market share
RARELY DO COMPANIES respond to market share reports but Yahoo felt compelled to line up excuses for its poor showing on Comscore's latest report.
The report claimed that Yahoo had suffered a marginal drop in market share in September but that Google managed to garner a relatively larger slice of the pie. In truth, the figures had put Google so far ahead that it seems pretty futile to argue over the 0.7 per cent gain that Yahoo is claiming was due to the firm releasing its Google Instant software. But that didn't stop Yahoo from rubbishing Comscore's methodology.
Yahoo's SVP of search and marketplaces, Shashi Seth decided to take his frustration out on Google Instant, the technology that displays search results as you type. Google brought out the software last month and according to Seth every time Google Instant throws up a result Comscore would count it as a complete search. So even if you are just two or three characters into your search query, Google will have chalked up a search, according to Seth.
The problem for Yahoo is that even if Comscore counts these intermediary searches, it still doesn't explain why the firm suffered a drop in market share, albeit of just 0.1 percent, and the fact that Yahoo actually served up 200 million fewer queries in September than August. Google Instant does in theory help that company increase the number of adverts it shows, though advertisers might start to question whether it is worth paying so much for adverts that are displayed for less than a second in the midst of typing out a search query.
Although Seth mainly points the finger of blame at Comscore and other search metrics firms, you don't need meticulous accounting to realise that Google has had the desktop search market all but sewn up for most of the past decade. While Yahoo decides to quibble over 0.1 percent gains or losses in market share, Google is already off trying to find the next big thing, whether it be operating systems or autonomous cars.
What Seth is really trying to do is tell potential advertisers that the firm really isn't doing as badly as everyone is reporting and if you trust him, then Yahoo is doing "extremely well". The only problem for Seth and the rest of the Yahoos is that most advertisers tend to go by their own metrics or those being reported by firms such as Comscore, so saying "trust me, I'm a marketeer" isn't really going cut the mustard.
Yahoo might have arrested its steady decline in market share by saddling up with Microsoft, but it needs to show real growth and not resort to excuses and finger pointing, especially over small shifts in market share numbers that are really indistinguishable from statistical noise, if it wants to make a real go of challenging Google. µ
Tags: Google
Share this:
Share
Ive used Yahoo for years. I prefered the user friendly pages right there no guess work.
In the past year it has become a deep disapointment,seemingly incompatable changes,upgrades,
crapy additions substituted for user friendly & low maintanance. I dont care for google's non straight forward home page. The Icons i have to spend hours figuring out.
How ever the apps and add ons (once figured out) are compatible to key daily uses for my social, home-office business,and classes on line.
Yahoo can clearly stop whinning about who did what and blame game as to why they lost so many.
Get your stuff cleaned out -research compatibility with out having to piggy back -adding crap that interfers with daily tasks ,allowing risks.
Wasting time I share with family, work, school, domestics and community.
Get it togather ! I'd comeback.
Maintain-
Reliablity ,stop blaming and shifting.
Change is good ,but with the world admins rolling it down hill population is tired of waiting to see what one ends up with. Make the changes or we will.
OMG Dirks' In Darby & Needs Few Bucks. Heres Story:
Dirk Meyer changed the company's tone on tablets slightly after reporting a $118 million net loss (on $1.62 billion in revenue) in a Q3 2010 earnings call this afternoon @11:53PM
Shouldn't #2 at Least Have Fat Red Coat'd Bell Riinger At Intels Front Door. AMD At $7/sh, So People Have Faith, Yet Come On Bulldozer, Come On Magny. Magny Beat Nahalem EX in Scores,So Wheres Prob. BUY AMD, Good Value Company.
On Yahoo, Being from Stanford, Unlikely Yahoo Will Lose Front Page, Lycos Is Example of Very Back Row, if even in business, So What.
Of Course, Google Has Edge Sharp As Gets, yet poor in Managements intent. Not Hard to Believe Google Will Be Soaring. Yahoo Alway Been Sleeper, Like msn, once nbc walked away.
Just Don't Blame Ati.
One Other Comment, IE9 Now Fails to Open Commentos on theINQ, while IE8 Works Fine. Hummmm.Blame, A, Ultee'. in fact Blame homas.
vondrashek AMD Lover....
PS Verizon iPad rate is $15 4 200 mb, $25 for 2 Gb, on up to $50, Can We Telephone? Blame Postal Service. In Fact, Blame US Treasury.
I don't know why that would be the case. Google Instant is terrible. It's bad enough I have to go through a two-step process to just disable that garbage and restore my 100-result settings because of BUGSs in that stupid system. If that stupid Instant and its malignant side-effects become permanent I may just have to jump ship.
Yahoo made a deal with Microsoft to use their Bing Results. Sad to say but as soon as they changed to those Bing listings I couldn't find a damned thing.
Yahoo shot themselves in the foot and continue to do so. They shut down more and more of their site. They closed down one of their potential money makers Geocities.
Yahoo needs to get some new management tactics and actually compete again.
Just to clarify that comment about advertisers paying so much for adverts that are displayed for less than a second: the advertiser only pays when someone clicks on an ad, so that's not a problem here. In fact, the ad has not officially been shown at all unless it's been on screen for at least 3 seconds - I think they've had to do this, as otherwise everyone's click-through rates would have suddenly plummeted.
What is all this rubbish about if an ad appears for a second? That's MORE exposure.
Don't you only pay per CLICK? Advertisers don't pay to extra to have their ad viewed more times...
yes, i can imagine how that would seriously influence google's sense of invincibility - you'd really scare them - they might forget entirely about the other 100 million advertisers pouring funds into their (google's) worldwide collection of bank accounts
I hadn't thought of Google's instant search racking up tons of false search metrics, but Yahoo has a perfectly valid point. If each REAL Google search pumps out 10 or so page refreshes, we're talking 10 times more hits than reality. Not only does Yahoo have a valid point, I think it's far more significant than they're making it out to be. On my next ad campaign with Google, I'm going to have a chat with them before I give them my money. I'm not paying for ads that are only visible for a blink. Until they can guarantee and prove otherwise, Yahoo will be getting my advertising dollars.
Anyone who has worked with ComScore on a large scale site knows that their data is absolute rubbish. Albeit a sample that might tell a picture, but nothing for anyone to make concrete business decisions off of.
Understood your point on Yahoo's searches decrease month over month, but I feel their ComScore pain.