Tom Foremski: IMHO

Tom Foremski

Build a better search engine then what?

By Tom Foremski | June 14, 2008, 5:36pm PDT

If you could build a better search engine than Google what would happen to Google?

Nothing.

GOOG can monetize search better than anybody else. That’s what the recent YHOO/GOOG deal is about.

Google has the best monetization platform for search not because it has the technology, it’s because it has the infrastructure: people and offices. It’s about sales and relationships not about ad servers. That’s what MSFT needs to realize.

And that’s what makes Google tremendously difficult to challenge.

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

More from “Tom Foremski: IMHO”

GOOG CEO says "Don't Be evil" is misunderstood

Can Silicon Valley's San Jose find its way?

Topics

Monetization, Google Inc., Search Engine, Search, Tom Foremski

Tom Foremski reports on the business and culture of Silicon Valley at the intersection of technology and media.

Full Bio
Disclosure
Contact

Vendor HotSpot

The 360° Conversation around Cloud Computing

TECH VISUALIZER brings the social conversation to life... powered by Brocade

Learn More »

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?

Ask a Question Start a Discussion

Comments

Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Follow via:: RSS; Email Alert

Just In

"Then what?"

Third of Five 18th Jun 2008

I think he was going for "then what" as in "Okay, you've built a better search engine... what's the next part of your plan to overtake Google?" or something to that effect.

It might have been more clear if he'd put "Build a better search engine--then what?"

View in thread

Please Select
Please Select

0 Votes

+ -

Monetization is still based on technology

stanyao 15th Jun 2008

Drawing more traffic, creating higher conversion rate, and so on are still the fundamental that makes better monetization. If sales and relationship is the major problem, I can't imagine Microsoft is weak on that aspect. Instead it is a leader on that aspect. At the end of the day ads customers still decide which platform to go with by looking at the return of investment, conversion rate, and so on.

Reply
Flag

0 Votes

+ -

Why does MS even need to get in on search?

fr0thy2 Updated - 15th Jun 2008

They make their money from pre-installing their wares on most machines sold, and of course the silly games that go on in their closed source world (binary only).

They don't deserve to even be able to have a search engine. Until they can sort their siht out and be a normal competitive company, they should not be in a position to extend their sick culture to any other market segments.

Search is doing just fine with Google as its master. If MS had hold of search, well OS's AND search would all become complete junkware.

MS won't sort itself out for 5-10 years. The sick control, aggression and marketing over substance culture there is too embedded.

They're not the brand name they wanted to be. Just about the only people that *lurve* Microsoft are technology me-too's and some young boys playing with their X-Boxes.

It must be that Google kicks MS's arse in software, NOT MS's kicks Googles as in search. MS is the cancer in these parts, and cancer should be cut out before it takes hold.