Google: The four trick pony

Google: The four trick pony

Summary: Hitwise just ran some numbers on the Google's traffic composition in the U.S.

SHARE:

Hitwise just ran some numbers on the Google's traffic composition in the U.S. Only four properties have significant market share of Google traffic, according to Hitwise, but it's enough to generate a very profitable $16 plus billion in revenue. There are a lot of wide open spaces beyond search, and it's apparent that a Microsoft-Yahoo union could cramp Google outside of search on the outside chance that Microsoft can effectively absorb and leverage Yahoo's assets.

hitwise.jpg

Topics: Google, Banking, Enterprise Software, Social Enterprise

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

7 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Interesting but Meaningless Numbers

    These numbers are meaningless in the competitive context. The fact that Google Blogger gets 1/20th the traffic of Google Search is not relevant. What is relevant is that Google Blogger gets 90% (or 9%) or 3%) of all blogging traffic.

    Its like analyzing my diet and saying since 5% of my calories come from bananas, I am fatter than the guy than Jim. What matters is (a) total calories [total traffic] and (b) %-age marketshare.
    anshu_sharma
  • RE: Google: The four trick pony

    Nonsense. The data adds up to 100%. No point in knowing the share of each Google service compared to Google.

    Try instead to compare each service to the market share in its space. What share is Gmail of the whole email industry?

    That would be interesting.
    calimoromturk
  • RE: Google: The four trick pony

    Agreed with the first comment. Besides, the only stat
    that really matters is Google's share of search. The
    other markets are only worth what their lockin to
    search value equals. Therefore only things that
    threaten Google search matters in an absolute sense. It
    is that simple. On that front Yahoo and MSFT are much
    of a worry, even if you combine them. Instead the only
    thing that could dent them would be a new startup. I
    like <a
    href="http://www.managedq.com/">ManagedQ</a>
    as a new alternative to Google.
    sophialovestheusa
  • RE: Google: The four trick pony

    It is a well known fact that Google without search is bankrupt! Just imagine if the search quality goes down, people will go elsewhere and their stock will be worthless!

    Most the other new projects are for publicity stunts to bring more people to do more searches! I think this blog should explain why Microsoft should not be worried about Google taking them over, they should worry about their search algorithm!
    president9
    • um, Duh?

      Your entire comment was like saying McDonald's would be bankrupt without hamburgers, or Microsoft would be bankrupt without windows. So what?

      On the other side, these numbers are absolutely worthless. I have to agree with the first commenter. Besides, all this is saying is that the majority of Google users either don't know about the other aspects or don't care. And if we're going by traffic, sure, I use Google search 10x more than I use gmail or even iGoogle. So what?
      HunterShoptaw
  • alternative reading

    Unlike what your comment and apparently other people's ones I'd say these data have an interesting meaning. It depends which side you own. Like MacDonald with hamburgers it is obvious that without latters no business but if one places himself on Google's side this might be interpreted differently.
    It is obvious that Google, like all kind of business is trying to diversify, in this regard these data may have different meaning:
    - Buying Youtube was a good move (comparison to be made with Google Video).
    - These data, in time (something that lacks here), may tell that on the contrary things have evolved in the right direction (understand here diversification)... or not.
    le_lapin
  • Almost meaningless

    While I agree with everyone else the numbers are somewhat meaningless since it compares Google with itself rather than with it's competitors, there is some value. First let's be blunt: this means close to nothing, as Google's real income is ad revenue and it's main resource is search. Looking at the traffic report, the numbers make sense. While it would be nice to see other properties with larger numbers, those numbers would obviously come mainly from search, since this is a percentage of hits wile not really showing how many hits it actually is.

    Like everyone says, the truth is when comparing hits to competitors. What percentage is Gmail compared to Hotmail, AIM Mail, and Yahoo! Mail (I imagine the 500 others wouldn't matter much)? What about Orkut compared to MySpace, Facebook, Bebo, and others? Picasa Web is still fairly new, but it should be compaired to Flickr and the other alternatives. I also didn't see Google Docs in the mix, as that could also be an important measure, especially when compared to Microsoft's Office Live initiative.

    The only thing I get is from this chart is people look at images more than maps, Checkout has a long way to replace PayPal and a few other alternatives, and they may want to merge Google Video and YouTube into a single entity.
    jheine