American Online Tries a Jarring HR Play
November 20, 2009
I try not to think much about America Online, aka AOL. I have not been thrilled with the company’s use of the Relegence.com technology, which I quite like. I heard that at one time AOL used the Fast Search & Transfer SA system, so I did not need to waddle my goose tail down that well worn path. I am really tired of Fast ESP and I think that unless I missed something, the Fast ESP technology was not the main event at the Microsoft developers’ conference or at the Microsoft shareholders meeting. If I overlooked an announcement, please, send me the links. What blipped my radar this afternoon at the BWI airport was this story: “We Need to Fire 2,500 Volunteers”. My goodness. Airplanes cannot be controlled. There’s crazy talk about President Obama from a taxi driver who earned $11 in seven hours on the job. The dollar is not exactly the currency of choice in some * big * countries. Against these warps, the woof from AOL that the company wants volunteers to be terminated. The notion is disturbing. Just call it straight:
Stephen Arnold, November 20, 2009
I want to report to the National Park Service that AOL did not pay me to write this opinion. In fact, a confused antelope would not have have paid me any attention for this story.
Internet for the Data Archaeologist
November 19, 2009
SixRevisions published “The History of the Internet in a Nutshell.” When i write certain documents, I find myself wanting to trot out an old chestnut. This write up is useful because it provides some basic facts and includes a number of useful images. I have downloaded the document. You may want to be like an info squirrel too.
Stephen Arnold, September 19, 2009
I disclose to the Department of Fish & Wildlife that I was not paid in walnuts, chestnuts, or any other type of fungible for this pithy write up.
Yahoo and Panic
November 19, 2009
ZDNet’s “Yahoo’s Dwindling Search Share: Time to Panic?” is a blend of business analysis and technology. Toss in Yahoo and there is an element of the carnival because Yahoo has put on quite a show for advertisers, customers, and stakeholders. ZDNet said:
Yahoo is in a dangerous limbo here. Yahoo’s search team is more likely to be focused on sending resumes than advancing the ball. Advertisers are holding out for the deal to close before picking sides and they’re likely to go to the alpha male in the Microhoo deal—Microsoft. And the biggest problem: Google isn’t standing still.
Spot on. I wonder if this analysis is coming too late for Yahoo? Let me answer my own question. “Yes.” Yahoo will be a case study in many MBA classes. “One day Terry Semel sat in his office and dreamed of making Yahoo into a media company…” You know how this business case unfolds. Business case studies are not news; they are in the rear view mirror of some folks.
Stephen Arnold, November 19, 2009
I disclose the the Securities and Exchange Commission that no one paid me to offer this comment. I may get a free lunch from another company today, but that outfit is mostly indifferent to the drama that is Yahoo.
Less Traffic, Less Revenue: A Google Lesson
November 14, 2009
The confidence of some people is remarkable. There are some high profile rich people who think that Web site traffic is easy to get. Most pipe dreams begin with an assumption that users will visit a Web site. The reality is that getting and keeping Web traffic is tough, even for outfits with a big name brand.
A good example of the “no traffic, no revenue” challenge appears in “AOL’s Google Revenue Is Crashing”. The point of the article is that AOL’s Google revenue is declining. The reason for the decline is irrelevant. Focus on this passage:
Why the decline in Google revenue? Almost half of the decline last quarter is because of lower search query volume — in part because of the decline of AOL’s access business, which drives people to AOL search by default — and the rest of the blame goes to lower revenues per search query, AOL says in its filing. AOL’s Google deal runs through December 19, 2010, so there is some time to figure out what’s next. But as Google (and Microsoft, another potential search partner) see how much leverage they have over AOL in these arrangements, it’s hard to see AOL’s next search deal working out even as favorably as the current one.
With some organizations confident their content and name recognition will generate cash, I wonder if the AOL situation will make much of an impression?
Stephen Arnold, November 14, 2009
I want to report to the Employment Standards Administration that I am unemployed; therefore, this article is a freebie. Disclosure is so satisfying.
SEO the AP Way
November 14, 2009
I thought another addled goose wrote “AP to Ask Google for a Better Search Ranking.” I blinked and reread the article. Sure looked legitimate to me, but in this era of instant disinformation, one cannot be too sure. Read the story yourself and make up your own mind. Two or three years ago, I rolled out my mantra for some AP folks. I gave a talk and concluded, “Surf on Google.” The idea I have been suggesting since mid 2006 is that Google had the same potential energy as a big boulder perched on the edge of a cliff overlooking a narrow defile. The guy with the lever at the top of the cliff need exert a tiny force to launch the rock on the folks in the defile. Worked when Alexander was getting cute thousands of years ago, and the tactic will work today.
Google dominates Web search. The company has several options in my opinion.
First, Google can do nothing different. In effect, Google will not answer the AP’s phone calls. Time is on Google’s side. Litigation is time consuming, which favors the Google.
Second, Google can cut a deal with the AP. In the spirit of compromise, Google takes a baby step. The AP seems okay with the Great Compromiser’s approach. The AP continues to move forward in a very different world from the one that gave birth to the AP many years ago.
Third, Google just buys up the AP content. With one bold dump truck of cash, Google neuters Bing.com in terms of AP content and makes the constant grouching irrelevant.
Are there other options? Sure, but this is a free marketing oriented Web log. The interesting point in this news story is that AP is dealing with the problem of traffic. Most outfits hire search engine optimization wizards like Tess (pictured on the splash page of this blog) and hope for the best. The AP wants to get traffic, jump into social content (maybe non journalists who post stuff on the Web), and monetize its information services. Great idea, but I don’t think it will work.
The AP has monetized its content by selling it back to those who formed the outfit in the first place. Other markets have been interested but not willing to deliver piles of cash to the AP. Even the US government is watching its information pennies these days. At some point in time, the triple dipping of licensing the same content to multiple government agencies will run into trouble. Google has been monetizing its big Googzilla heart since it was inspired by the Overture model. The AP did not act then, and now it may be too late.
Will Google be indifferent? Will Google cut a deal? Will Google just write a check? I bet the AP would like to get a big fat check from Google and be number one with a bullet in the Google results lists. I am good for a nickel. Any takers?
Interesting days ahead in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 14, 2009
I am in an independent living facility. I had to pay to use the computer to write this essay. I had to pay for an orange juice. I don’t think I need to alert the Illinois State Police that this is a freebie. Maybe to be on the safe side of the Illinois law? Nah. Not necessary. Illinois has its legal and financial hands full. I might have to pay to report.
Search Business Called into Question
November 13, 2009
I noted an article on the 247WallSt.com Web site. “Maybe the Search Engine Business Isn’t So Great” raises some interesting questions. Keep in mind that search and retrieval have been around in digital form for decades, but I suppose it is never too late for a canny analyst to revisit ancient history.
The article begins by revisiting the history of Microsoft’s efforts in search. Short take: Microsoft has spent lots of money and lags behind Google in Web search.
For me, the most interesting comment in the article by Douglas A. McIntryre was:
Microsoft says that search is a “strategic” business, a weapon of sorts against Google and other competitors. It is not entirely clear why that is true. Perhaps it is because Google has something that Microsoft does not, but the Google’s leverage from that, beyond making a lot of money, is not clear. Search does not appear to be critical to Oracle (NASDAQ:ORCL) or SAP (NYSE:SAP), the two largest enterprise software companies in the world. Microsoft must be a special situation, but it has not necessarily made a powerful case of why.
Ouch!
Stephen Arnold, November 13, 2009
No one paid me for this insight, ouch. I want to alert the Housing and Urban Development Department that this intellectual real estate involved neither cash nor loan, deflated or subsidized, in any negotiable paper in the United States of America. Wow, I am glad I am transparent. I feel better.
Guardian Searches Beyond Google
November 13, 2009
I love that “beyond” phrasing. The Guardian, an outfit facing some rough financial seas when it comes to online revenue, published “Why I’m Searching Beyond Google” on November 11, 2009. I think the Guardian is showing that some of its editors are somewhat obsessive about electronic information. Victor Keegan wrote:
Google’s power is no longer as a good search engine but as a brand and an increasingly pervasive one. Google hasn’t been my default search for ages but I am irresistibly drawn to it because it is embedded on virtually every page I go to and, as a big user of other Google services (documents, videos, Reader, maps), I don’t navigate to Google search, it navigates to me.
I am confused. Mr. Keegan no longer makes Google his first choice in search yet he is drawn to it. I wonder if there is a bit of conflict involved when one resists, yet is “irresistibly drawn” to something. In Harrods Creek, I know some folks who have this type of personality. Let me tell you that I find that push-pull quite interesting.
He provided useful links to lists of the top Web sites. He said,
If you want to test other websites try http://bit.ly/vicsearch3 for the top 25 niche engines or http://bit.ly/vicsearch4 for the top 100. Even though Google’s brand dominance doesn’t yet look under threat, competition not only provides choice for ourselves but will keep Google and the others on their toes.
My opinion is that Google has an 80 to 85 percent share of the Web search market. Microsoft and Yahoo make up most of the remaining share. These other systems have a challenging trail to hike. I don’t know if users or the stakeholders in most of the Web search engines have what it takes to continue the journey over a long period of time. Google’s “market share” has been 11 years in the making. Train has left the station in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 13, 2009
A public service posting for the publishing industry. I will report the no-fee nature of this article to Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation in honor of the “buck stops here” president.
Writing about Online Revenue Is Easier than Generating Revenue from Online
November 12, 2009
The Guardian’s new media group took a kick in the kidney. Navigate to “Guardian News & Media to Cut More Than 100 Jobs”. Note these phrases, please:
- revenues have fallen by a worse-than-anticipated £33m
- the Guardian’s Thursday Technology print section will cease publication we cannot offer clarity about who is leaving and who is redeploying
- If we do the right things now, which I believe we are doing
- the organization should “not be paralyzed by change, but galvanized by change”
- December 9
Yep, easier to write about online than make it generate revenue. Happy run up to Christmas?
Stephen Arnold, November 12, 2009
I got my change back fro Stuart Schram who took $5, paid for lunch, and gave me a bottle of Rooibee Red Tea. I must write the Prospect Police and inform them of this financial transaction as I wrote this blog post.
SharePoint 2010 and the Four Gigabyte Gotcha
November 9, 2009
The goslings and I have been trying to figure out some of the implications of migrating from an “old” SharePoint to the whizzy new SharePoint 2010. We ran into a four gigabyte barrier and began the all-too-familiar practice of hunting for explanations, work arounds, and explanations. We found “A Couple of Worrying Changes in SP 2010 Products Compared to the v3 Equivalents” interesting. You will want to read this write up from Mindsharp and then check out the comments to write up.
First, there four gigabyte database size limit is still an issue. Mindsharp point out that “the only slightly bright spot is that it was also confirmed that SPD 2010 and SPD 2007 can be run together on the same client machine. So you don’t need two machines just to be able to work with v3 and v4 sites.”
With regards to this point, Mindsharp reported:
That problem area however fades rapidly into insignificance if you are a WSS 3.0 user using Windows Internal Database. As such you have a free database system which unlike the standard SQL Server 2005 Express it is based on does not have a 4GB database size limit. Well it looks as if people who are running this and have exceeded this figure (non-limit!) or about to do so will have serious problems if they want to upgrade their system to SharePoint Foundation 2010. I don’t have any other explanation that in yesterdays massive batch of over twenty KB articles on the “Pre-Upgrade Checker for WSS 3.0 SP2” two of them are about the Windows Internal Database and both of them are about warnings that you get if you exceed 4GB in the size of a database “The large size of a database can prevent it from being upgraded”.
Second, the comment that caught my attention was:
The second one is not a problem
Within reasonable limits, the second issue is not a problem. Take a look at the following article on Technet: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee663471%28office.14%29.aspx. Databases larger than 4GB (again, within reasonable limits) will be migrated to SQL Server Express with Remote Blob Storage during the upgrade process. BLOBs stored on the file system don’t count against the 4GB limit of SQL Express. Mike’s comment: Setting up Remote Blog Storage is probably beyond the possibilities of many people who today install the Basic Installation version of WSS 3.0. (Anyway Search databases still have a 4GB limit as they can’t use RBS). But my main objection is that having moved to an unlimited database size in one version, MS take it away in the next. Providing a workaround for some cases mitigates that very poor and unfair decision but doesn’t imo justify it.
We downloaded the Microsoft documents. Lots to think about when upgrading SharePoint. Great for billing clients too. Simplicity not. Hard database limits are very 1980 in my opinion.
Stephen Arnold, November 9, 2009
No compensation, not even a wink from a Certified Partner. Too busy billing I assume.
Google Developer Video Now Available
November 9, 2009
The third video of the six-video series called “How to Make Money with Google” premiered today at http://www.arnoldit.com/video. This video, released by Arnold Information Technology, http://www.arnoldit.com, focuses on developing program interfaces using Google resources and leveraging those applications for business use.
The purpose of this short video series–watching all six videos takes about 30 minutes–is to give clear, factual information on four specific ways an enterprising individual, a services company, or a diversified company can use the Google platform to produce revenue while meeting the needs of their customers and prospects. The videos are available for personal and educational use with no fee.
This newest video highlights how using and developing Google APIs–application programming interfaces–can be a big money-maker for your online business. It also describes Google’s certification program which is beginning to take shape. Arnold characterizes how a third party developer can put technical skills to use to build a large business around Google.
Keep in mind that Google is a moving target. The company is evolving and changing policies and procedures very rapidly,” Stephen E. Arnold, president of Arnold Information Technology, said. Arnold has published three Google monographs and these videos are based on the information compiled for The Google Legacy, Google Version 2.0, and Google: The Digital Gutenberg. The monographs are available from Infonortics Ltd., in Tetbury, Glos., at http://www.infonortics.com.
Other videos include an overview of money-making opportunities, including why the Google opportunity is similar to the opportunity Microsoft created with its MS DOS software in the early 1980s; using Google’s AdSense advertising module; search engine optimization consulting and services; the Google partner and reseller program; and a video titled “Google Creates Opportunity,” which emphasizes the opportunity to grow with Google as the company strives for $100 billion in revenue.
“I wanted to provide some basic, factual information about what I see as the Google revenue opportunity. Information about Google is everywhere, but the upside of Google as an opportunity is not widely known,” Arnold said. “The increase in ‘get rich quick’ with Google e-mails I was receiving convinced me that a more measured discussion of the opportunities was needed. I will make these videos available without charge in the hopes that the Google revenue opportunities get broader dissemination.”
The series will be posted at http://www.arnoldit.com/video. Videos will be released on a seven- to 10-day cycle from today to Nov. 20. ArnoldIT.com has no relationship with Google. The information presented in the video represents the views and findings of ArnoldIT.com’s analyses of Google. The videos were directed by Chris Forrester, Perceality Productions, at http://twitter.com/perceality. The samba music is courtesy Sounddogs.com. For information about other uses of the videos, contact ArnoldIT.com at seaky2000 [at] yahoo dot com
The company’s Web site is http://arnoldit.com, and the Beyond Search blog is at http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/.
Jessica Bratcher, November 9, 2009
Jessica was paid to write this marketing write up. Yep, filthy lucre.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
