Yahoogle – It’s Here

Well folks, it’s official! On Thursday, Yahoo officially stated that under a new pact with Google it will display “some” ads sold by its rival. The deal is expected to generate an additional $800 million in annual revenue for Yahoo, through what the Wall Street Journal describes as improved monetization of certain types of searches.

On top of it all, both companies also stated that they are looking for ways to now expand what is considered to be a limited partnership, possibly into the realm of display advertising. Now this would be interesting, as display is one area where Yahoo does hold a commanding lead over Google.

While all of the specifics of this deal have not been definitively worked out, the understanding is that Yahoo will control how Google’s ads are displayed along side its own advertising. Although it has not been 100% defined, my guess here is that Yahoo will most likely give priority to ads purchased directly through its own site, but then populate excess inventory with ads from Google.

Therefore, it appears that Yahoo is entering in a pact to become part of Google’s “Expanded Search Network”. This means that while you will still be able to buy everything you would like directly via Yahoo, whenever there is a case of excess inventory on Yahoo, Google’s ads will now be displayed. It appears to be a similar arrangement that Google has with sites such as Business.com, from which you can purchase ads directly from or go through Google to do so, as Business.com is part of Google’s expanded search network.

Assuming I am correct, and while this great news for the shareholders of Yahoo, there are few things that we as search engine marketers must now consider.

If you did not already know, when you buy advertising from Google, you have a few options. You can go with Google Search, which means you advertise to people just searching on Google; Expanded Search, which means adverting on Google and all of its search partners (AOL, Earthlink, etc.); and then of course there are programs such as Google Content. In my experience, most people opt to go with Google’s expanded search network as they not only get access to the audience on Google, but also those on AOL, Earthlink and more. However, unlike Yahoo’s expanded search network, with Google, it’s an all or nothing proposition. This means that with Google, you can not select which search partners you advertise with and which you do not. Additionally, Google does not disclose what percentage of your searches or budget are actually being spent with their partners, versus them directly. This leads most people to believe that when they advertise with Google all traffic and clicks are coming from people directly on Google, but this is not necessarily the case at all.

Why this is important is that if Yahoo does join Google’s Expanded Search Network, you could end up spending a good portion of your budget directly with Yahoo unknowingly via Google. Because Yahoo does command upwards of 20% of the Search Marketplace, they still have a very good sized audience and therefore you could soon find your Google programs spending much faster that you had previous realized, as you now have your ads being put in front of Yahoo’s still very sizeable audience. As a result, if you were previously reaping the benefits of Google’s Expanded Search Network, whether you knew it or not, with Yahoo in the fold you may have to start spending a lot more to continue to do so.

Additionally, seeing that Google does not let you see the specifics behind what is happening on their Expanded Search Network, you will loose the ability to plan your budget accordingly for Yahoo. I see this as important as both Google & Yahoo perform differently under certain circumstances and therefore you want to be able to structure your campaign on many levels such as Keyword, bidding and budget to take advantage of different audience dynamics. However, under this pact you will be relegated to spending some of your budget with Yahoo, but planning based on your insights from Google. Now, you might say that with Google’s Expanded Search Network you’ve already had to do this for AOL, Earthlink, Business.com, etc., but the difference here is that none of these engines offer an audience the size of Yahoo’s and really have the potential to shift things one way or the other. Now of course you can still advertise with Yahoo directly and plan accordingly, but previously you had the advantage of knowing that you had a Google budget and a Yahoo budget. But now under this new pact you will have a Yahoogle budget and a Yahoo budget, if in fact you decide to advertise directly with Yahoo at all.

This leads me to my last point, what does this mean for Yahoo in the future? In my experience, a lot of organizations like the fact that they can go through one provider and get their ads displayed on multiple engines. In the end you basically get the same result, without the headache of having to manage multiple programs and campaigns. In short, life is simpler. So, does this mean that over time, we will see more people just turning to Google to leverage the fact that they can go there and use them as a one stop shop? I guess the answer to this question relies on the definition of “some”, in terms of what the Google/Yahoo pact means when they say it means that Yahoo will display “some” ads displayed/sold by Google. Ultimately the word “some” is very ambiguous, and leaves a lot of room for this partnership to grow and expand. However, while you can at times get better cost efficiencies of going straight to the source, versus going through a partner, the challenges of managing multiple programs sometimes outweighs the cost benefits gained. Therefore, while I do believe that Yahoo will always have direct presence, I feel that the number of advertisers who opt run programs directly with them will shrink as they realize they can go to Google and manage everything from one single interface. This will be particularly true for those businesses that don’t have the ability to have a dedicated search marketing staff, but previously felt they had to run on both engines in order to access both audiences.

One thing that is for sure is that by making a bid for Yahoo, Microsoft has certainly shaken-up the search marketing landscape. Who would have thought that the net result of trying to acquire Yahoo, would have the unintended effect of making Yahoo run directly in to the arms of the rival that Microsoft as trying to fend off via their intended acquisition strategy. If you think this is strange; based on the precedent set here, I can only imagine what's going to happen next.

Labels: Google, Industry, Online Media, Paid Search, POV, Strategy, Yahoo

posted by Ty Velde @ Saturday, June 14, 2008 - 7:30 AM

One Stop Search Shopping

Yahoo! India recently launched Glue Pages Beta, a new search experience that collates and integrates information from across the Web onto one enhanced visual results page. Glue Pages run across searches for select terms in categories such as health, sports, entertainment, travel, technology, and finance. Glue Pages Beta works well when searching for topics that have broad search results.

For example, if you search for “yoga,” the classic paid and natural search results will show up, but the page is also complimented with a Wikipedia definition for yoga, Google Blog Search results, as well as links from HowStuffWorks, YouTube videos on yoga and information from Y! India Answers.

“Searching on Glue Pages Beta will result in an experience that promises more than just web links. Users will receive more relevant, visually appealing search results from across the Web in one topical page. The new Glue Pages Beta feature for Yahoo! India Search supports our strategy to make Yahoo! the leading starting point on the Internet and demonstrates our commitment to provide a compelling online search experience,” said Gopal Krishna, Head of Audience, Yahoo! India.

To try out Yahoo! India Glue Pages Beta, click here

Labels: Paid Search, Search, SEO, Yahoo

posted by Barb @ Monday, May 12, 2008 - 9:35 AM

DIY Online Display Advertising - Expanding the Playing Field for Online Media

The online advertising marketing is growing. We’ve all seen the stats. We’ve all see the projections. Yes, advertisers did spend $21.4 Billion in 2007, and by 2011 this number is expected to grow to $42 Billion. (Source: eMarketer)

So, what is fueling this growth? The most common explanation seems to always be the shift of traditional media dollars into online. This is certainly logical when you look at the sky rocking projections for online growth and the flat line projections for traditional media. However, other explanations include a general increase in overall cost of doing business; I mean prices are certainly going to rise over time. Additionally, as the online advertising market evolves and proves to be more and more effective, whether or not advertisers cut their budget in other mediums, they are going to surely commit more and more dollars to online as it becomes more and more central to all advertising strategies.

However, there is another key factor fueling this growth that I feel is often overlooked - The small business advertiser.

The fact is, online advertising spending has for years been fueled by big advertisers, with big budgets. This is particularly true in the case of Online Display advertising, which accounted for $4.7 Billion in spending in 2007 and is expected to rise to $8.2 Billion in 2011. (Source: eMarketer)

The rise of the Small Business advertiser was first noticed with the advent of paid search, which enabled advertisers from all walks of business, with varying degrees of budget, to easily go online and reach consumers. Paid Search took off as it was “easy to get” in that there are essentially three major channels (Google, Yahoo, MSN) and all ad units are standardized. Therefore, launching a campaign was essentially deemed “easy” and small businesses readily jumped into the game.

However, when it came to Online Display, the second largest online advertising medium by dollars spent, small businesses have been essentially locked out. Launching a campaign is deemed intimidating. There are 15 standard ad sizes that need to be built, eye catching creative to be designed and a universe of placement opportunities that is seemingly endless. The fact is, until now, small businesses, which don’t have the resources or finances to hire an agency or even someone dedicated to marketing, have been locked out of the Online Display landscape.

Until Now? What do I mean by this?

Well, there are now three relatively new companies that are in the process of changing the face of Online Display advertising. These companies are making it easy and cost-effective to develop display creative, buy media and even launch video ads… which will surely play a role in fueling the growth of this category. So who are these companies and what are they doing?

AdReady - http://www.adready.com/
AdReady is an advertising technology company focused on making Online Display advertising accessible and effective for advertisers. Through AdReady's data-rich library of proven creative, real-time ad customization tools and intuitive web-based interface, AdReady makes it easy to for those who don’t have the resources to develop their own creative and messaging to build and run effective Online Display ads.

Now the plus of AdReady is that it does make it easy to develop display ads and they do offer a lot of choices that suit a variety of verticals. However, for companies concerned with branding and having original creative, this could prove to be problematic, as AdReady’s creative solutions are not something you have developed exclusively.

AdBrite - http://www.adbrite.com/
AdBrite bills themselves as the Internet's Ad Marketplace. It helps advertisers of all sizes plan a media buy that is based on targeting everything from Geography, Age, Gender, Income and more. In short, the company makes it easy to buy advertising online, giving advertisers transparency and control. With banner and text ads, as well as innovative formats like BritePic, InVideo and Full Page Ad, AdBrite has created an effective advertising marketplace for advertisers. AdBrite helps advertisers tap into highly targeted demographics across 50,000+ premium and trusted sites, reaching over 79 million unique users every month. AdBrite serves ads on over one billion pages a day.

Now the plus of AdBrite is that it makes it easy to navigate the complex world of online media and deploy a targeted buy. However, at the same time, you are limited to the sites on their network and while you can target via a number of demographic options, you do not get to definitively select your sites. However, it’s a good place to start.

AditAll - http://www.aditall.com/
AditAll is a video advertising community where users can quickly, simply and inexpensively create, produce and distribute video ads.

AditAll brings low-cost, high-quality ad production capabilities to anyone. Their patent pending platform lets advertisers choose a "Pre-Packaged" ad from an inventory created by their producer community and quickly customize it. Advertisers can also select video and music clips and combine them into a unique ad using the"Start from Scratch" feature. Additionally, advertisers can post ad requests for specific ideas that producers can develop into video ads meeting these requirements.

Talk about something that is sure to boost the market for Video Ads! Very cool. This is one area where not only small businesses, but many medium-sized and large businesses, have had virtually no creative representation. The fact is, unless your company has had some kind of broadcast focus in the past, this is very likely an untapped advertising medium. However, AdItAll really seems poised to change this.

Additionally, if your company is hesitant to produce its own video advertising, you might want to consider using AdItAll to test the medium and show that it works. By demonstrating to the skeptics that this is in fact an effective medium, maybe your company will be more willing to commit the budget to produce its own exclusive video advertising.

Ultimately, by leveling the playing field for Online Display, everyone is going to benefit. Now some may view applications and technologies such as AditAll, AdBrite and AdReady as threatening to agencies; but this should not be the case. The fact is, organizations that make a significant marketing investment will continue to hire agencies as their strategic partners and to guide this process. This is not about the Death of the Agency, but rather the Birth of Small Business.

What I mean by this is that the DIY platforms will enable those that were not previously part of the Online Display landscape to now be part of it. This is a good thing for everyone, as it will fuel continued growth. The fact is, as more and more businesses recognize the power of online advertising, everyone who is involved in the space will benefit and it will ensure that predictions of future growth will not just be predictions, but more importantly - the reality.

Labels: Google, local business marketing, Online Media, Paid Search, POV, small business marketing, Video, Yahoo

posted by Ty Velde @ Sunday, May 11, 2008 - 9:10 AM

Paid and Natural Search - Complimentary Mediums

I was recently asked the following question by a client: "If we are appearing in the Natural Search Engine Results, why should we we also be paying to appear in the Paid Search results for the same term?" In short, if they're getting the clicks for free, why should they be paying for them as well?

However, I don't think the answer is really that simple, as a truly effective search engine marketing campaign is not about Paid vs. Natural, rather its about understanding what makes each medium strong thereby playing to and understanding those strengths.

However for the sake of the issue at hand, my task was to explain the value of maintaining a paid search presence in the wake of appearing naturally as well. So below, is what I believe is strong case for why you should continue to go with a Paid Presence for terms that you also may be appearing naturally for.

Message Control
With Paid Search, you have the ability to definitively control the message that is being communicated to the searcher on the Search Engine Results Page (SERP). What I mean by this is that the message and copy that accompanies a Natural Result can be pulled from your meta data or page content. However, unless you have taken time to carefully craft you meta data, very often the message that is displayed is not a very solid marketing statement.

Therefore, one must remember that even natural results have a click-through rate and while you might have a great position, if the accompanying description does not make sense, a user may look over it. Therefore, this is where a Paid Search result can supplement this problem, as you can easily craft a tight and cohesive message that says what you, NOT the search engine, want it to say.
Destination Control
With Paid Search, you also have the ability to decide where you want to direct the user. However, the destination for a Natural Result for the same term is determined by the Search Engine’s algorithm, and while the engines are pretty smart when it comes to determining relevancy, their vision does not always match-up with yours.

Therefore, with paid search you can decide exactly where the user will go and what they will see. Of course it must be relevant, but YOU have the ability to determine this.

Change Control
With paid search, you also have the ability to change both your messaging and your destination, whenever you want to. Therefore, if you want change how your site is associated with a certain term; you can do this on both a Messaging and Destination level… all at a moment’s notice.

However, with Natural SEO, your associated message and destination is pretty much fixed and does not necessarily change all that often. While you can update the description, you must wait until the page in question gets re-indexed and you are still relegated to the same destination, as that page is where the search engine has determined the most relevant content resides.

Dominating Page Real Estate
Having both a paid and natural presence also enables you to maintain a more dominant presence on the Search Engine Result Page, which ensures that you will get maximum traction.

Below is a heat map, which shows how and where people look at search results. As you will see there is huge amount of traction with both the paid and natural results. Therefore, if you are not in the paid results you are not necessarily garnering all of the available opportunity on the Search Engine Result Page.

Please do note that while it may sound like I am trying to discount the natural results, that is not the case at all. Natural results most always drive more traffic and getting top positions is the true benchmark of success when it comes to any SEO program. However, what I am trying to illustrate is the value that Paid Search results do have, even when you are also appearing naturally for the same term, as paid search offers a level of flexibility and control that you cannot get from Natural SEO.

In the end, this is not a case of one versus the other, but about illustrating how having a fully integrated SEM and SEO program can ensure that you can take advantage of all that is being afforded to you in the search environment and driving the optimal user experience for all facets of the page.

Labels: Google, Industry, Landing Pages, Paid Search, POV, Search, SEO, Strategy, Yahoo

posted by Ty Velde @ Monday, May 5, 2008 - 6:47 PM

Yahoogle! –

A New Way to Define the Online Marketing Landscape…according to Microsoft.

Yahoogle (Ya-hoo-gle) n.
1. An arrangement between Google and Yahoo! that would involve or lead to the outsourcing to Google of key paid Internet search terms offered by Yahoo! 2. A world, according to Microsoft, in which talent flees, prices increase, the Feds come after you and most of all Google becomes an Evil Price Fixing Baron.

Labels: Google, Industry, Paid Search, SEO, Yahoo

posted by Ty Velde @ - 10:53 AM

Look Out - Here Comes Yahoogle!

Well folks, if you have not already heard the news, Microsoft has withdrawn its offer to acquire Yahoo!. Despite having raised its offer by $5 Billion, from $29/Share to $33/Share, Yahoo! still walked away from the deal unless Microsoft would pony-up an additional $5 Billion ($37/Share).

However, what I find makes the collapse of this deal really interesting is that when you read the letter that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer sent to Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang on Saturday, May 3rd while price was certainly deciding factor, the straw that broke the camels back appears to be Yahoo’s decision to further expand their “partnership” with Google. In short, it’s the prospect of having to acquire “Yahoogle!”, not Yahoo! that has really made Microsoft stop its pursuit and not go hostile.

In a letter to Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer stated that “We regard with particular concern your apparent planning to respond to a “hostile” bid by pursuing a new arrangement that would involve or lead to the outsourcing to Google of key paid Internet search terms offered by Yahoo! today. In our view, such an arrangement with the dominant search provider would make an acquisition of Yahoo! undesirable to us for a number of reasons.”

So what would the world according to Yahoogle! look like? Well according to Mr. Ballmer, its one that’s pretty dark in which talent flees, prices increase, the Feds come after you (Microsoft certainly knows about this) and most of all Google becomes an Evil Price Fixing Baron.

But who am I to tell you about Yahoogle!, let Mr. Ballmer be your guide! The following is a summary of why Mr. Ballmer feels that Yahoogle! would make Yahoo! undesirable acquisition for Microsoft:

1. No More Panama
First, Microsoft claims Yahoogle! would fundamentally undermine Yahoo!’s own strategy and long-term viability by encouraging advertisers to use Google as opposed to your Panama paid search system. This would also fragment their search advertising and display advertising strategies and the ecosystem surrounding them. This would undermine the reliance on Yahoo’s display advertising business to fuel future growth.

2. Talent Will Flee
Given this, Yahoogle! would impair Yahoo’s ability to retain the talented engineers working on advertising systems that are important to Microsoft’s interest in a combination of the two companies.

3. Here Come The Feds
In addition, Microsoft claims Yahoogle! would raise a host of regulatory and legal problems that no acquirer, including Microsoft, would want to inherit. Among other things, this would consolidate market share with the already-dominant paid search provider in a manner that would reduce competition and choice in the marketplace.

4. Google Now Sets Every Price
Yahoogle! would also effectively enable Google to set the prices for key search terms on both their own and Yahoo’s search platforms and, in the process, raise prices charged to advertisers on Yahoo. In addition to whatever resulting legal problems, Microsoft feels that this is unwise from a business perspective unless in fact one simply wishes to use this as a vehicle to exit the paid search business in favor of Google.

5. Minimal Prospects for Dating and/or Marriage
Yahoogle! could foreclose any chance of a combination with any other search provider that is not already relying on Google’s search services.

So what do you think? Is Yahoogle! good or bad? Whether you agree with Microsoft or not, the paid search and online advertising landscape is quickly changing and Yahoogle! is certainly going to play role in paving the way.

To read the full text of the letter that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer sent to Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang on Saturday, May 3rd in which they formally withdrew their offer to acquire Yahoo, please click on the on the following URL -
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-03letter.mspx

Labels: Google, Industry, Online Media, Paid Search, SEO, Yahoo

posted by Ty Velde @ - 10:33 AM

Microsoft Offers To Buy Yahoo For $44.6 Billion

Ok, pretty big news right! Technically I do not predict big changes for online advertisers and search marketers in the short term as I am sure Microsoft will not want to rock the revenue boat. It will be in interesting to see how competition between MSN and Yahoo! plays out though.

Microsoft said it had offered to buy Yahoo for $31 per share, which it said represented a 62 percent premium above the company's closing stock price on Nasdaq on Thursday. Microsoft said Yahoo holders would be able to trade each of their shares for $ 31 in cash or 0.9509 of a Microsoft share, pro-rated so that no more than half of the overall purchase price is paid in cash. Pre-market trading Friday sent the stock to: 29.34 +10.16 (52.97%) as of Feb 1 8:36am ET.

The deal values Yahoo at 65 times earnings. Currently, it trades at 40 times earnings, according to FactSet Research. Yahoo shares haven't traded at $31 since November.

The companies held talks about partnering or merging in late 2006 and early 2007. Those talks included the potential of a merger proposal, but Yahoo told Microsoft in February it wasn't interest in being acquired.

On another note Google's shares did not do well in pre-market trading:
GOOG: Pre-Market: 526.76 -37.54 (-6.65%) Feb 1 8:51am ET

This announcement and yesterday's earnings news from Google really hit them hard:

"NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Google reported earnings and sales for the fourth quarter that missed Wall Street estimates, sending the stock tumbling after hours."

Labels: Google, Industry, Yahoo

posted by Harry Gold @ Friday, February 1, 2008 - 8:56 AM

How I tried to Save the Yahoo! Search Term Suggestion Tool

So if you have a little time to read all of this you may actually find this post to be entertaining. Below is an email chain that resulted from me hearing that the person in charge of the Yahoo! Panama launch, planned to do what I consider to be one of the most wasteful things Yahoo! ever did.

It all started when we attended the Panama road show at the Harvard Club in Boston and this person (to protect his privacy I have replaced his name, contact info and title with XXXXX) announced that Yahoo! would be replacing the current Search Term Suggestion Tool with something that, instead of reporting historical search volume, would predict clicks. (Much like the Google Click Estimator.)

Now this flew right over the head of most of the people in the room but I raised my hand and said, "Wait a second, are you saying that the Search Term Suggestion tool that every search marketer on the planet loves and uses every day is going away?" His answer was, "yes." Could this guy be unaware of how essential that tool was and how cool everyone thought Yahoo! was for proving search marketers with this info?

The strange part was his reaction was as if no body had protested before. So from there a whole little feud let loose between me and this person who admittedly said, "I am the one directly responsible for this decision."

The really funny part was I started making a huge stink about this and when I told Yahoo! reps about it one of two things would happen:
A) They would say "Oh my god – I use that tool all the time in my presentations to show potential clients how much people are searching under their keywords – this is terrible." (My reaction.)
B) They would say, "Oh I heard about you." Clearly my protests had made their way around the company.

Ok, so the real reasons why I think they stopped maintaining the tool are as follows. ( It is certainly not that people were "confused" by it or that what they have given us as a replacement is better.)
A) Most people used the tool as an SEO keyword scoring tool and clearly that was of no benefit to Yahoo!
B) All that usage, data storage and other applications that scraped the results of the tool into their interfaces was probably very taxing on Yahoo! from an IT, storage and load balancing standpoint.
C) It could have shown that search volume on a month by month basis for certain terms was trending down on Yahoo! and that they were losing.

Now to XXXXXX's credit he did have a conference call with me, let me express my opinions and engaged in the lengthy email exchange that I am about to share with you and I give XXXX and the whole Yahoo! team major kudos for that. Also Yahoo! did leave the tool up but it often does not work and now only displays 2007 data. However, it is still a good scoring tool and they should use it as a way to build a search marketing community made up of Yahoo! Search Term Suggestion Tool members. (Basically this is what I say in all the emails.)

So as you read these emails realize that they started right after the event at the Harvard Club. The last email was from me to on of our Yahoo! reps that was facilitating the dialogue between me and XXXXXXXX.

Actually, I must add that we did in fact all survive the Search Term Suggestion Tool effectively going away and all is well. Panama is indeed leaps and bounds above were it was and Yahoo! is very often the top performing property in many of our B2C paid search campaigns from a cost per action and ROI standpoint.

******************* Email # 1 **********************

From: Harry Gold
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:32:44 -0700
To: XXXXXXX XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com
Subject: It was great talking to you!

Hi XXXXXXX,

I just wanted to tell you what a pleasure it was to meet you the other night and talk to you about the coming changes at Yahoo! I also want to thank you for letting me express my views on the importance of the current suggestion tool and for you agreeing to take the time to see how our company uses it in the new business process.

I know you are either on or winding down from the road show so as we discussed I will give you a couple weeks to catch up then I’ll send you some of my pitch materials that use the tool and we can schedule a time to talk though them.

Again thank you so much for this opportunity, I look forward to talking again.

Best regards,
Harry-
___________________________
Harry J. Gold
founder, managing partner
617-254-5000 x 1100 direct
______________________
overdrive
46 Leo M. Birmingham Parkway
First Floor
Boston, MA 02135
http://www.ovrdrv.com/

******************* Email # 2 **********************

From: XXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 6:31 PM
To: Harry Gold
Subject: Re: It was great talking to you!

Harry,

Indeed it was fun meeting you and your team. I love the passion around this industry, and getting out of the “Panama factory” to get in front of actual customers really revs me up.I appreciate the perspective you brought me on how valuable keyword search data is to sell the search tactic to customers. Let’s definitely continue the dialog there.

If you have proposals ready to ship my way, please don’t hesitate, as I’d like to put my thinking cap on around this topic as soon as possible. But if you want to think on it for a bit, just send them along when you’re ready.

Looking forward to the next conversation!

XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX Sr. Director, XXXXXXX ManagementYahoo! Search Marketing searchmarketing.yahoo.comAddress: 3333 Empire Ave. Burbank, CA 91504 USAO: XXXXXXXXXXX F: XXXXXXXXXXX E: XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com

******************* Email # 3 **********************

From: Harry Gold
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:12:17 -0700
To: XXXXXXX XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com
Conversation: It was great talking to you!
Subject: RE: It was great talking to you!

Hello XXXXXXX,

Below is a link to a download page where you will find a portion of our capabilities presentation. In order to see the stats we use from the suggestion tool you will want to view it in Slide Show mode and then click on the live links embedded in the Current Search Situation slides. (Some links may require a user name and password to access the destination pages and they are listed in the presentation.)

I have included three Keyword Usage Analysis Tables from past pitches. What I am basically showing here is that there are millions of searches per year that describe these companies’ products and then illustrate with position reports that they have no presence in those terms responsible for the majority of those searches. I then present paid search as the best and fastest way to capitalize on this channel.

Please do let me know what you think and in the mean time I will try and send you more relevant materials as they arise. I have dozens and dozens of these pitches and these types of analysis slides have been critical parts of the close every time.

I look forward to speaking with you about this further and again thank you so much for this opportunity.

Download Page:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (sorry, cannot post this in the blog)

Talk to you soon,

Harry-

******************* Email # 4 **********************

From: XXXXXXX [mailto:XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 1:48 PM
To: Harry Gold; XXXXXXX
Subject: Re: It was great talking to you!

Harry,

Hope all is well and that you’re enjoying a nice early fall in New England. This is the one time of year where we southern Californians are justifiably jealous of your climate. We’re going gangbusters here to get project Panama ready and out the door. You’re going to like it.

I’ve spent time with some of the Product Managers on my team thinking about the use case around search volumes that we discussed in Boston. We think that the Panama offering actually will allow you to make your pitch in a much more compelling manner. We’d like to get an hour to talk with you (and others from Overdrive if you want them there) to kick the tires on what we’ve been thinking. Can you suggest a couple of times in the latter part of next week or early in the first week in October that might work for you? If you can, I can rally our team here and get a call set up for us to talk.

Thanks,
XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX Sr. Director, XXXXXXX ManagementYahoo! Search Marketing searchmarketing.yahoo.comAddress: 3333 Empire Ave. Burbank, CA 91504 USAO: XXXXXXXXX F: XXXXXXX E: XXXXXXX@yahoo-inc.com

******************* Email # 5 **********************

From: Harry Gold
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:56 PM
To: 'XXXXXXX'; 'XXXXXXX'
Subject: RE: It was great talking to you!Importance: High

Hi XXXXXXX,

Please let me know that you are getting my emails as for some reason our IP is getting blocked here and there. I sent you some dates but have not heard back from you and I am a bit concerned you didn’t get my emails.

I am very excited about seeing your new tool but I still get the feeling from your email (below) that the tool that is at the foundation of everything we do is going to go away. I am still a bit mystified as to why you would want to remove the most valuable search marketing tool on the entire web. One that is used literally several times a day by every search marketer on the planet. Why not simply leave it and offer the other one to?

Also, look at the interface for your current tool:
http://inventory.overture.com/d/searchinventory/suggestion/

If people are confused by it simply put more info on it to tell them what they are looking at. (Tell them specifically they are not looking at click or traffic projections if it is causing confusion.)

I always look at that interface and the lack of promotions and registration requirements you have on it and think it is the biggest lost opportunity for Yahoo! Again, why not leave it and use it to your benefit? You could:

1) Use the interface as a branding, marketing and cross selling page for search marketers
2) Use it to promote the new tool
3) Make search marketers register for access to it – think of the amazing email/direct mail database you guys will be able to create

I can understand closing it to tools that use it to display the info in their environments but if you put a password on it like the bid viewing tool you would stop those kinds of queries. Finally, why even risk upsetting a community that represents a significant customer base and disrupt their research and selling process? (I know I am incredibly stressed about it. Its absence will rock the foundation of my business and force us to change a winning way of doing this that scored many clients for us and you.

Again, I am very excited about the tool you are launching and if it gives the total search volume on Yahoo! for a previous month then I am all for it and we have no issue. If it does not give that data and replaces it with click and position projections based on max bid levels then you are changing the whole way we and thousands of other search marketers pitch our services. It is my sincere hope that you choose to simply leave the tool alone and add the new one. The current tool is the only credible source of the simple info it provides and the whole industry loves Yahoo! for providing it! (See all the links to it below.)

I hope to connect with you soon.

Best regards,
Harry-

The links below are typical of thousands of pages on the web that promote and link to the tool. (According to Yahoo! there are over 4500 links pointing at the tool. According to MSN there are over 5400 links pointing at the tool. Why not capitalize on that presence with my suggestions above?)

(I removed the long list of links for this blog post.)

******************* Email # 6 **********************

This was the one to the Yahoo! sales rep that was trying to appease me – I definitely commend her for her efforts – she was really great about the whole thing.

From: Harry Gold
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 1:31 PM
To: XXXXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Yahoo! Buzz Index Information

Hi XXXXXXXX,

Thank you for this information. After the call with XXXXXX and team I have to confess that I am still as concerned and confused as ever. I am really grateful that he would take the time to talk to me but I think Yahoo! should ask themselves quick question from a sales point of view:

Taking away a tool that is known, loved and used everyday by the search marketing community (see me email from last week below) will a) make search marketers happy or b) upset search marketers?

The reality is that no matter what John says this new system is not going to make my life easier or my sales process better. I am sure the new tool is great but why take the other tool away? Again – the big question is “Why take the other tool away?”

It is like telling a person who has been eating toast everyday for the past 5 years that your are now going to take the toast away and give him a bagel. On top of that you are telling them that they will like the bagel more because you think bagels are better. Why not offer them both and let them decide?

I am sorry to be such a nudge on this but it just makes no sense to me since the forecasted click and cost data that the new tool is going to provide is going to be equally, if not more, inaccurate as the historical date the current search term suggestion tool provides.

Harry-

Ok, in conclusion I may have devoted way to much energy to this but I still believe to this day that the Yahoo! / Overture Search Term Suggestion tool was an amazing resource and I will miss it. I guess I am grateful that it is still up in its current form but I do wish it was more reliable.

Archives