Insider Chatter by Donna Bogatin

The New Google Risk: Googlers? I headlined almost one year ago, when Googlers were noticably seeking ways to parlay their Google resume into greater fame and/or fortune, outside of the Googleplex. Soon after, I saw Googler In Chief Eric Schmidt tout the superiority of his merry band of “rocket scientists.”

BUT, what are the ex-Googley masters of the Mountain View universe really achieving once they shed the safe, catered haven sheltered behind the Googleplex walls?

If this week’s ex-Googler (not so) fan fare is representative of what the (legions?) of once Google royalty are actually accomplishing in the real, non-primary color world, master Google has nothing to fear about its once “rocket scientists” being realeased into the wild.

What is the greatest claim to fame of all the ex-Googlers? Being ex-Googlers, of course, according to the blogosphere.

As today’s Read/Write/Web headline illustrates, the FriendFeed “contribution” to the “current trend of using feeds in social networks” is a “story” because Bret Taylor and Paul Buchheit are behind the “innovation.” The REAL story though is that the ex-Googlers proudly hail that being Googley is their key differentiator in a crowded, no-need-to monetize cool app “field.”

How about Howcast? How about entering a crowded online market with a not so innovative Webified product inspired directly from the real world of promotional video?

TechCrunch had the “scoop”?:

A New York City startup called Howcast is launching today that wants to be the YouTube of instructional videos. In fact, the three founders—Jason Liebman, Daniel Blackman and Sanjay Raman—are ex-Google employees who worked on Google Video and YouTube before they left eight months ago. They actually are going for a little more polish than YouTube, trying to bring some production values to the world of Web video.

YAY? The ex-Googler trio loved Chad and Hurley’s video site and their own that failed, while being paid by Google, but NOW, they know “how to” do better, on their own?

YouTube is really not all bad, though. After all, “In addition to their own site, they already have a Youtube channel (where they split advertising revenues with their former employer),” Eric Schonfeld “reveals” with not a twinge of irony. Too bad the ex-Googlers didn’t “know how” to get meaningful ad revenues for YouTube while they were still Googlers, however; The HowCast “rev share” with YouTube will not go very far!

And then there is Zillow. The departure of SEO blogosphere best Google friend Vanessa Fox for online real estate play Zillow was lamented by Webmasters worldwide. Where in the world is the Fox now, though? Writing for Danny Sullivan! Perhaps, after five months of “drinking coffee and occasional singing,” Zillow was not getting the “revenue” they hoped for from the Googley product team lead.  

Google IS on the watch for one soon to be unveiled ex-Googler venture, though: Cuill. Ex-Googler Anna Patterson has estimated that there are about 4000 programmers slaving away to hold the next great search engine honors, and SHE IS ONE OF THEM!

Patterson joined Google in 2004 and architected the TeraGoogle search index of 2006. NOW, she is seeking to architect a “new approach to search,” for her own account, as co-founder of Cuill. Watch out Google? Unlikely.

ALSO: Why Silicon Alley VCs Should Do Blogging Due Diligence, Too and
Google Joins Blogosphere in Mocking Wikia Search: Jimmy Wales Defiant and
Rich Skrenta: Blekko ‘Absurd’ Search Startup Disses King Google and
Why Google Worship is a BAD Call in 2008 and
Google Knol: The End of Google.com, NOT Wikipedia and
2008 Social Media Warning: Beware Google AND Facebook and
Sex On Ning: Sponsored By Public Service Google

PLUS: MOBILE Visions? Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL Open Up: NOT Google! OMMA Report

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Publicis CEO Maurice Levy undoubtedly believes he has obtained a competitive coup in obtaining the friendship of Google CEO Eric Schmidt: In typical Googley “partner” fashion, all hail King Google and its beneficence:

Mr. Levy said the goal is to create a “triple-win” — not just a win-win — situation. “Our clients win, the platform Google wins and the ad industry/Publicis wins. We’re bringing Google our knowledge of advertising communications, consumers and client needs. They’re bringing us knowledge of technology and the world of the web.”

BUT, in REAL typical Google fashion, it is actually $200 billion market cap Google that wins the most.

What is the big, bad Google-Publcis “initiative”?  Google shrewdly continues its worldwide mission of putting the burden of selling more Google ads on other more than willing companies!

Yesterday, Spot Runner. SEE my story: Spot Runner Sells For Rival Google: Local SEM Bandwagon Grows

Today, Publicis, which will be “using Google staff and materials for training programs.” What’s more, Google “has established a dedicated global account team for Publicis Groupe.” YAY? More Google ads for Publicis clients!

Publicis will undoubtedly spin Google ad sales to its accounts by touting a singular, competition trumping, exclusive knowledge of Google AdWords. Savvy Publicis clients, however, will know that Google reveals nothing to anyone–not even resellers–about the black box GOOG fuel that is the pride of Wall Street. After all, Google can only promise “no ceiling to monetization,” if it steadfastly maintains its Google-centric, non-transparent, advertisers always bid up their own rate cards for the greater Google good, AdWords blind auction “democracy” sham.

Savvy search engine advertising agency specialists understand all to well that Google NEVER allows for an actual win-win-win SEM game, as Aaron Goldman, VP, Marketing & Strategic Partnerships, Resolution Media of Omnicom Media, discussed yesterday at the Digital Media Measurement conference in New York City.

Goldman echoed what I have been consistently presenting here at Insider Chatter: Google’s win-win-win spiel is but a convenient user-friendly cover for an impenetrable Google pricing scheme that leaves advertisers in a perpetual Google-centric cloud, fretting over Google’s undecipherable ”quality” calculations and Google’s GOOG monetization comes first blind bidding machinations.

I asked Goldman if advertisers will soon wise up and demand that Google not only treat them with the respect which ought to be due from a media platform soliciting business from them, but also call Google’s “transparency” bluff and allocate their ad dollars elsewhere, unless Google ceases to fuel its oversized proifit margins at the expense of marketers’ and agencies’ own shareholders’ backs.

The Google bandwagon is in no apparent immediate danger.

SEE: Yellow Pages Get Reprieve? The Myth of King Google Local Advertising ROI

MORE: Reach Local Advertising? How Google Squeezes SEMs and AdWords Buyers and
Local Ad Sales War: Why Google is a Guaranteed Winner and
Google AdWords Plus Box: Local CPC Bidding War Unleashed! and
Google Apps & Maps: Enterprise and Local Business STILL Missing and
Local Advertising Online: SMEs Hold the Billion Dollar Keys, ILM ANALYSIS and
Google Zeitgeist: $200 University Payola AdWords Scam and
How Google AdSense FAILS Better Business Bureau and
Frugal Google.org: How NOT To Save the World On $159,000 a Day

PLUS: Facebook To Particls: What IS Your Data Portability End Game?

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Spot Runner has acquired GlobeShooter videographers network, continuing to strengthen a portfolio for competing against Google. At the same time, however, Spot Runner is selling up a storm on behalf of arch rival Google.  

Is $200 billion market cap Internet juggernaut Google a direct competitor to startup Spot Runner, a Web-based television advertising production and media buying venture? I asked Nick Grouf, CEO, Spot Runner, just that almost one year ago. Grouf responded with a resounding “You got it.”

I chatted with Grouf on the heels of Google’s public acknowledgement that it is “running a small, early phase trial” of a cable TV ad delivery system last year. The Spot Runner claim to fame is: “the first Internet-based ad agency that makes it easy and affordable for local businesses to advertise on TV.”  Not surprisingly, SpotRunner did not welcome the Google television advertising initiative.

Grouf’s public reaction to the Google announcement of its entry into television advertising was to warn consumers of a nefarious Googleplex:

“Watching people watching TV,” is how Grouf characterized the prospective Google targeted TV advertising platform to me. Google will seek to leverage knowledge of viewership habits, Grouf believes, by using set-top box data collected without explicit consent of subscribers to “target ads according to the viewer.” Google’s end-game? Manipulate viewer data to sell ads at a higher price, Grouf indicated to me.

Interesting then that Grouf’s Spot Runner is now a proud seller of Google products, even as Spot Runner widens its sphere of operations with Google looming ever larger as the key competitor to beat. Spot Runner nevertheless has joined the ever growing ranks of would be Google killers that do their darndest to help Google’s core business grow ever unstoppable!

Spot Runner’s general ambitions are Googley indeed:

Revolutionize the way advertising is created, targeted, bought and sold, focusing on automating many of the more inefficient aspects of the advertising process and creating turnkey ways for busineses of all sizes to access creative and media planning and buying services.

Spot Runner even wants to help with buying Google services! Want a Search Ad with your TV ad?

Let the Spot Runner Search experts focus on the complexities of search advertising so you can focus on running your business.

In other words, let Spot Runner drive more business to Google AdWords! Why not, every one else wants to do it too! SEE: Yellow Pages Get Reprieve? The Myth of King Google Local Advertising ROI

MORE: Reach Local Advertising? How Google Squeezes SEMs and AdWords Buyers and
Local Ad Sales War: Why Google is a Guaranteed Winner and
Google AdWords Plus Box: Local CPC Bidding War Unleashed! and
Google Apps & Maps: Enterprise and Local Business STILL Missing and
Local Advertising Online: SMEs Hold the Billion Dollar Keys, ILM ANALYSIS and
Google Zeitgeist: $200 University Payola AdWords Scam and
How Google AdSense FAILS Better Business Bureau and
Frugal Google.org: How NOT To Save the World On $159,000 a Day

ALSO: Why Zynga, NOT Scrabulous, Has a Lucky Facebook Charm

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

eMarketer discusses “hidden trends of 2008,” while offering proprietary data.

What happens when the self-declared “leading provider of strategic research and analysis, data and competitive metrics on Yellow Pages,” starts the new year by issuing a Press Release hailing “a profound shift” in print Yellow Pages spend without providing data to back up the provocative “prediction”?

Media reaction to the Kelsey Group’s formal announcement of its analysts’ educated guesses for 2008 could be 1) Discussion of anecdotal insights, 2) Dismissal of unsubstantiated projections, 3) Request for Kelsey clarification or 4) Unquestioning acceptance of New Year musings as fact.

Here at Insider Chatter, I proceeded with reaction number three: I immediately asked Kelsey to “explain/expound/backup” its cavalier, unsubstaniated “prediction” of “big increases in local search inventory.”

In typical blogosphere fashion, however, a typical media reaction was to pounce on another opportunity to giddily regurgitate a trendy ”Yellow Pages are toast” meme. So much so, apparently, that Kelsey itself deemed it prudent to issue its version of a Yellow Pages clarification.

I look forward to Kelsey’s “clarification” of its far reaching local search “prediction.”

The questions that I pose in response to Kelsey’s declaration that “big increases in local search inventory” are on the 2008 horizon are: Why “big increases”? How “big increases”? Where “big increases”? Who benefits from the “big increases”? Does any data back up the specific prediction, or is it a gut call?

For now, Kelsey advises it is “in the process of updating its annual revenue and usage forecast for global Yellow Pages and local search, which will project out five years.”

YAY? NO! Kelsey will “release the document” to “TKG clients in mid first quarter,” signaling “at which time our forecast figures will be subject to debate and scrutiny.”

Not really. The local world at large will apparently have to continue to deal with ambiguous Kelsey press releases.

UPDATE: Recession Hits AT&T Online: Kelsey Local Search Advertising Predictions Too? and Yellow Pages Get Reprieve? The Myth of King Google Local Advertising ROI

MORE: Reach Local Advertising? How Google Squeezes SEMs and AdWords Buyers and
Yellow Pages Trash Talking: The SEO Dog in the Google Local Fight and
Google AdWords Plus Box: Local CPC Bidding War Unleashed! and
Google Apps & Maps: Enterprise and Local Business STILL Missing and
Local Advertising Online: SMEs Hold the Billion Dollar Keys, ILM ANALYSIS 
Google Beware: Facebook Takes Local Advertising Gloves Off, ILM REPORT and
Judy’s Book: What’s On Sale? WE ARE! Ten Reasons Why

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Why search? Rich Skrenta asks today to tease his newly seed funded search startup with Google as his bullseye: 

“Simple - the idea that the current state-of-the-art in search is what we’ll all be using, essentially unchanged, in 5 or 10 years, is absurd to me.”

NOT so simple in the Skrenta search world, actually, but decidely absurd! How so? Because exactly one year ago, Skrenta advised, loudly, against doing just what he now says he wants to do!

Skrenta began 2007 by delaring Google the unbeatable “winner take all” and asking all to join him in “hailing the new King Google”:

Google has won both the online search and advertising markets. They hold a considerable technological lead, both with algorithms as well as their astonishing Web-scale computing platform. Beyond this, however, network effects around their industry position and brand will prevent any competitor from capturing market share from them — even if it were possible to match their technology platform.

Skrenta’s conclusion? “Competitors such as Yahoo should quickly move to align themselves with this inevitability” by capitulating to Google, happily. Skrenta hoped ALL would honor “our new insect overlords”,” as he rushed to do:

The net isn’t a directed graph. It’s not a tree. It’s a single point labeled G connected to 10 billion destination pages…

It’s actually not inconceivable that they could eventually own all of the destination page views too. Crazy as it sounds, it’s conceivable that they could actually end up owning the entire net, or most of what counts.

DON’T COMPETE WITH GOOGLE, was Skrenta’s 2007 New Year’s resolution:

Google is not your competition, Google is the environment. Online businesses which struggle against this new reality will pay opportunity costs both in online advertising revenue as well as product success…

Google is the new king of forward market growth in computing and software technology. Major companies will succeed by working within the framework of Google’s industry dominance, and smaller players will operate in niches or in service to the giant.

REALLY? Is the January 1, 2007, Rich Skrenta the same Rich Skrenta that on January 2, 2008, laments:

There is such a fabulous business in search. It’s the highest monetization service on the web, by far. Why does this Coke have no Pepsi?

WHY INDEED? Perhaps because people believed Rich Skrenta one year ago!

How is it that Rich Skrenta did such a Kingly about Google face?

Skrenta’s 2007 Google worship actually faded soon after his absurd New Year’s Google white flag waving, coincinding with his company’s business decision to change its URL. When Skrenta feared “winner take all” Google wouldn’t let Topix win as much any more, Skrenta “scooped” the Wall Street Journal on how poor Topix might lose the free Google traffic it had become accustomed to:

Some companies say their sites have disappeared from top search results for weeks or months after making address switches, due to quirky rules Google and other search engines have adopted.

“Because of this little mechanical issue, it could be a catastrophe for us…This can’t be the process. You’re cast into this amusing, Kafkaesque world to run your business.”

Skrenta then absurdly declared “how to beat Google,” just weeks after having advised Yahoo to stop trying!:

Our entire industry is scared witless by Google’s dominance in search and advertising. Microsoft and Yahoo have been unsuccessful at staunching the bleeding of their search market share. VCs parrot the Google PR FUD machine that you need giant datacenters next to hydroelectric dams to compete. They spout nonsense about how startups should just use Alexa’s crawl and put some ajax on top of it. Ye gods.

Grow a spine people! You have a giant growing market with just one dominant competitor, not even any real #2. You’re going to do clean-tech energy saving software to shut off lightbulbs in high-rises instead? Pfft. Get a stick and try to knock G’s crown off.

Do not fear Google’s vast CapEx. You should wish maintenance of that monster on your worst enemies. Resource constraints are healthy for innovation. You’re building something new and different anyway.

Rich Skrenta has apparently finally “grown a spine.” Perhaps he read my Why Google Worship is a BAD Call in 2008 or Google Knol: The End of Google.com, NOT Wikipedia or Browser Flack: Will Google Ever Escape Microsoft Rule?

Nevertheless, Skrenta on his own absurd Blekko chances (circa 2007):

Competitors who want to dethrone Google need to fight a two-front war. They have to build a killer consumer search service as well as a successful advertising network. Building one of these is difficult, but doing both simultaneously is nearly impossible. Google’s dominance in both of these areas gives them an unfair advantage, and allows them to easily parry any attacks.

You said it, Rich.

MORE: Mahalo: Will Calacanis Win the Billion Dollar Startup Lottery in 2008? 

ALSO: How Google AdSense Fails Better Business Bureau

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Paglo (semi) launches today, in good Web 2.0 startup tradition, i.e, “beta invitations will be sent out shortly, so reserve your spot today,” the company announces. Paglo’s Web 2.0 roots are also on display in its reverence for all things Google, and disdain for solid revenue and business models.

What is Paglo? In the words of CEO Brian de Haaff and CTO Chris Waters, “Think Google for IT.”

Think Google’s YouTube for business model, as well, de Haaff and Waters told me, on the eve of Paglo’s declaration that it will soon be sending out beta invitations for its “free, on-demand service that helps turn IT administrators into heros.” How so?

For the first time, they can discover all their data and get instant answers to their computer, network and security questions. We are fiercly focused on bringing pure and unadulterated search to IT users.

BUT, Paglo is proudly NOT focused on monetization.

de Haaff and Waters have put together an entertaining flash preso of Paglo, demoed via colorful IT cartoon characters. Two questions immediately came to my mind after viewing it: 1) What are the revenue and business models? 2) Is venture capital money supporting the startup?

When I asked de Haaff directly “What is your revenue model?” he told me “free.” In response to my question “What is your business model,” de Haaff indicated, “growth will come through providing businesses value for free,” that is the Paglo “philosophy.”

I asked de Haaf and Waters if Paglo’s financial backers are nevertheless interested in getting a return on their investment; Paglo is financed through self-funding and outside capital. Apparently yes, although de Haaf and Waters underscored monetization is NOT a priority, in good Google and YouTube fashion!

While Paglo may eventualy try and charge a premium subscription fee, if their “valuable” users don’t object, the Paglo modus operandi–business model–is to please the highest number of IT staffers possible without asking a penny from anyone to fund the service.

de Haaff and Waters asked me if I thought Paglo was “interesting.” Interesting, yes, I concurred, while expressing my concerns about the lack of revenue and business models.

In announcing his soon-to-be-available beta today at the Paglo blog, de Haaff seems to riff on my business model required “philosophy”:

The service is on-demand and free. Some say that we are nuts, but we think the you need to prove that something is valuable before you worry about making money from it. So, we are maniacally focused on making Paglo convenient and useful.

Unfortunately for Paglo’s financial backers, however, the IT vendors required to provision Paglo’s free service undoubtedly do not share in de Haaff and Waters Googley, benevolent view of the business world; i.e., Paglo must pay money for all of the infrastructure and services it deploys in its desire to make “heroes” out of everyone else. AND, don’t forget those pesky Paglo staffers’ salaries or the PR firm retainers!

de Haaf confidently hails he is “focusing on driving massive use instead of revenues” with no need to “worry about data-handling costs” because “storage and bandwidth are virtually free.”

The Paglo “business model” is NOT cost-free, though. de Haaf and Waters have put their own good money behind it–gained from the sale of their Network Chemistry’s wireless security business to Aruba Networks–and “smart” capital is funding the ”virtually free” operations of Paglo.

de Haaf and Waters are convinced they have the winning Paglo formula: “Value + FREE = an unbeatable combination.” The Paglo “strategy for success” is to emulate what they deem as “wildly successful consumer-oriented sites,” such as YouTube and Facebook.

In other words, the de Haaf and Waters desired Paglo “business model” may very well be to follow in the “wildly successful” valuation paths of YouTube’s Chad Hurley and Steve Chen and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg in a search for Microsoft and/or Google-sized buyouts.

Unfortunately for Paglo, however, Google has had scant success in achieving a “consumerization of the enterprise.” At the end of the Paglo day, “think Google for IT,” may continue to NOT be very lucrative!  

ALSO:  Business Plans Help the Web 2.0 Kool-Aid Go Down and Microsoft Office Gets BIG Sales Boost in Live Documents

PLUS: MerchantCircle CEO Aims To Disrupt Local Advertising $39 billion Spend: INTERVIEW AND Stepan Pachikov: EverNote Web 2.0 Perfect Mobile Storm To Hit in 2008, INTERVIEW

ALSO: Help Mahalo On LinkedIn? Better Than Helping Landmark On Blog Maverick!

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN