yellowwing
Joined: May 21, 2002
# Posts: 2526
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-06 09:14
Yahoo to drop Google as main search engine -WSJ
Reuters, 01.06.04, 1:36 AM ET
NEW YORK, Jan 6 (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people) is expected to drop Google as the primary search technology on its site within a few months, the Wall Street Journal said on Tuesday.
According to the paper, some marketing firms say they have been told Yahoo will switch from Google to its own technology as early as the first quarter.
Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo was widely expected to dump Google in part because it spent more than $2 billion last year to buy search technology through its acquisitions of Inktomi Corp. and Overture Services Inc.
The expected move comes as Google, the No. 1 Web search service, plans to go public this spring.
Company officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
Copyright 2004, Reuters News Service
|
 |
naz
Joined: Nov 30, 2003
# Posts: 76
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-06 19:30
this will be interesting
|
|
Logan
Joined: Aug 14, 2002
# Posts: 3749
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 16:32
In a move that could dramatically alter the relationship between two of the industry's biggest search players, Yahoo! plans to implement a controversial paid-inclusion strategy, MediaDailyNews has learned.
Yahoo! Adopts Inclusionary Search Strategy, May Exclude Googlehttp://www.mediapost.com/dtls_dsp_news.cfm?newsID=232875
all signs are headed towards this imo
|
|
yellowwing
Joined: May 21, 2002
# Posts: 2526
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 17:12
Good article! I wonder if that means Yahoo will return to it Directory listings first again.
|
|
davaddavad
Joined: Aug 02, 2001
# Posts: 928
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 18:18
It was only a matter of time. They have been holding out to keep the value of the % in google that they own, as high as possible with google going ipo this is the right time. Googles losses incurred in its war on spam and its new changing ranking algo's provided obviously sub-standard results. People I have asked that I didnt know were having problems locating information that had been available for years. Then recently when going back to find said same information, but after florida, were surprised when they couldnt find the websites offering the parts they were looking for. They just didnt know why they couldnt find the old results that provided what they used to find, all they knew is that they couldn't find what they were looking for .
Their directory was good but simply was no match for a robot provided index so a combination of human edited and robot provided would be a short term answer even if expensive and difficult to manage. Having an index that can read and edit like a human is where I think Google is trying to go however they have not gotten there yet. Pagerank worked til it was put under a microscope and dissected it. AppliedSemantics will work for a while until the same thing happens and then the need for a newer fresh technology will again rear its ugly head and back to square 1 again.
Because of spam an index can start to become irrelevant by their own standards. On one side I wish they would put their directory back up with a back fill from inktomi like before. History has a way of repeating itself however it doesnt always look the same .Like under new management but with the same menu. The internet search business is becoming quite profitable for some so either its paid for inclusion or pay for review the future still has the term pay for:something, somewhere in the equation. jmho dave 
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 18:26
Yahoo using PFI seems to be a no brainer since they own Inktomi, AltaVista and FAST... each with their own PFI program. Unless they are talking about a looksmart style of paid inclusion.
|
|
davaddavad
Joined: Aug 02, 2001
# Posts: 928
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 18:44
That certainly supports pay for: something, somewhere for sure. On the brighter side each of those properties listed above still carry a free index with a spidering systems. Free relevant good organic results is showing signs of deterioration not gone yet and not quite forgotten yet. At first free was needed to collect the information. If it all started as pay (to be in it) searchengines wouldnt be the giants they are today. It is one of business models that works well on the net today. Start out free get lots of people to join then charge them. If they retain just 10% of a very large number that pays 10% times a very large number so lossing 90% appears to be a big number loss but sporting the profit from the 10% makes everything allright. In the begining they needed free just to build the databases now they need money to sustain them.
|
|
davaddavad
Joined: Aug 02, 2001
# Posts: 928
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-07 19:00
As for looksmart they lost their contract with msn and perhaps 50% of their revenue. That business model needs a little more balance to be more functional. Right now monies gained from ppc seems to be the cream of the crop. ie adwords - overture. Who talks about banner adverising much anymore the money is being spent elsewhere. jmho
|
|
2create
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 42
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-13 00:53
Logan, I found the article you posted a little inaccurate and it makes me wonder where they got their facts from
http://www.mediapost.com/dtls_dsp_news.cfm?newsID=232875
First of all this paragraph makes no sense....
A paid-inclusion deal between a search engine and its advertisers involves an advertiser paying the search engine each time a user clicks on a paid-inclusion advertiser's listing in the search results page. Paid-inclusion ads appear in exactly the same place as organic search results.
That's not true. I thought a Paid-Inclusion program meant a one-time payment and you're included "indefinitely". It seems they are describing "pay per click"
|
|
unreviewed
Joined: Dec 07, 2000
# Posts: 6776
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-13 04:44
2create, the answer is both, it is also referred to as a trusted feed, where a file is supplied to the search engine. Both pricing models are used, PPC or an annual fee. Regardless both appear mixed within SERP results.
Google doesn't offer this, but all others do.
|
|
Logan
Joined: Aug 14, 2002
# Posts: 3749
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-15 12:56
Another article confirming Yahoo to drop Google
Yahoo, Google primed for search war
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5141328.html
"Yahoo on Wednesday said it will drop search partner Google during the first quarter of 2004 in favor of its own technology, opening a new phase in the battle for Web search dominance. "
|
|
Webmaster-Toolkit.com
Joined: Jul 18, 2002
# Posts: 1098
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-18 10:53
I'm seeing Yahoo showing INK results for the first time here in the UK now
|
|
2create
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 42
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-18 21:55
I'm still seeing Google's results in Dallas, TX. Is anyone else still seeing Google?
|
|
unreviewed
Joined: Dec 07, 2000
# Posts: 6776
|
Posted: 2004-Jan-19 00:08
Google in Canada.
|
|
88sahara
Joined: Feb 17, 2000
# Posts: 617
|
Posted: 2004-Feb-02 16:00
seeing google still.
|
|
Webmaster-Toolkit.com
Joined: Jul 18, 2002
# Posts: 1098
|
Posted: 2004-Feb-02 16:26
Back to Google results here in the UK too.
|
|
Inbox
