Mahalo: More Spin on Search and Money
June 3, 2009
Peter Kafka’s “Jason Calacanis Tries Turning Mahalo into a Wikipedia that Pays” here provides some insight into how an entrepreneur thinks about search and content. The Mahalo search engine was a notable social approach to building an information resource. The idea, like Wikipedia before it, was to rely on humans to provide links and content. For whatever reason, that model does not seem to have the traction needed to keep traffic soaring. Mr. Kafka summarizes the two changes Mahalo has made in its approach. One tweak is for young eyes only; that is, more info on each screen. The second is to implement a Mahalo “bucks” plan. I don’t grasp the notion because I am used to paying people for their services and then doing my thing with the content. As Mr. Kafka explains the Mahalo idea, I sighed. Mr. Kafka wrote:
But now he’s hoping to get Mahalo users to do the work, Wikipedia-style, with a twist–he’ll pay them. The pitch: Calacanis will offer users the chance to “own” a results page, and split any advertising revenue the page generates, primarily via Google (GOOG) AdSense. He’ll be paying users with “Mahalo bucks,” which cash out at 75 cents on the dollar, so users are really keeping 37.5 percent of each dollar their page generates. Calacanis says some of his pages are generating up to $10,000 a year, but most will make far less. Will that be enough to encourage people to build and maintain Web pages on a piecework basis?
I will be releasing a free compilation of my series “Mysteries of Online”, information that originally was developed for talks at various venues. I have a couple of sections about monetization of online information in that 34 page PDF, which becomes available on July 1, 2009. The bottom-line is that unless an information service generates what I call a “clean stream” of revenue, the costs of marketing and administering online services can suck the life out of a useful online service. Paying for content works if the information is “must have” stuff. Examples include certain chemical information, actionable intelligence for financial services firms, and “keep us out of jail” info for a legal matter. Once that high value info is captured, then the marketing and administrative costs kick in. The editorial costs never go away. Lower value info fall prey to the cost of keeping info fresh (hence long update times for certain info) and keeping pace with new info (hence the urgent need to monetize real time info).
I am not sure where Mahalo falls on the spectrum of “must have to nice to have to everyone has”. Perhaps the approach with create lots of eyeballs which can be monetized courtesy of ad outfits. In my opinion, the new improved Mahalo has quite a few moving parts. I like the “clean stream” approach. With the Bingster and the GOOG improving their ad supported results, Mahalo may face a long, hot summer without money for lemonade.
Stephen Arnold, June 3, 2009
Criticizing GOOG and MSFT with Angel Feathers
June 3, 2009
ComputerWorld lives on advertising and happy tech companies. However, throwing praise at Microsoft’s Bing Kumo and Google’s Wave does little to set the publication’s “voice” apart. An article that finds fault with Bing and Wave is just what is needed. But there’s a problem. Get too critical and ad dollars and hot tips may go elsewhere. Even more chilling is a letter from Bing Kumo’s or Google’s legal eagles. The result is what I call “angel feather” analysis. A downside is identified but presented in a very upbeat, chipper way. After all, who wants hassles if you are trying to make a go of a publishing business today.
Check out “Bashing Bing, Whacking Wave” here. The weakness of Bing Kumo is that it makes decisions for a user. Too many decisions leave the user in the dark about what’s included and excluded. The flaw in Wave is that it arrives with Google’s legacy and a new fondness for bloat.
Both of these are important points, but ComputerWorld stops short of spelling out what the business implications are of these increasingly similar companies’ approach to online information.
I am going to follow in ComputerWorld’s footprints. I think both services are just swell. The addled goose does not want to know how results are shaped. Furthermore, the need to arm wrestle complicated systems as Google sucks metadata from the human interactions with data is super cool.
Love both services to death.
Stephen Arnold, June 2, 2009
Twitter and Facebook Go Army
June 3, 2009
“US Military Jumps on the Twitter Bandwagon” appeared in the New Zealand 3News.co.nz online publication. You can read the story here. I don’t know how accurate the details are, but I wanted to document the write up. According to 3New.co.nz:
The US military in Afghanistan is launching a Facebook page, a YouTube site and feeds on Twitter as part of a new communications effort to reach readers who get their information on the internet rather than in newspapers, officials said Monday. The effort, which officials described as a way to counter Taliban propaganda, represents a sea change in how the military can communicate its message to foreign and American audiences.
I stumbled upon an interesting Web log several years ago called Company Command. I have lost track of that. I am not sure about the work flow required to get content on these services. Company Command offered some gems and then became a less interesting read. I wonder if the posting process will smooth.
Stephen Arnold, June 5, 2009
Microsoft Fast ESP Revealed
June 3, 2009
Need an enterprise search system? Have four months? Microsoft Fast Enterprise 360 is for you. You can read a case study of a lightning fast (no pun intended) search implementation in a new Microsoft Fast white paper called “Enterprise Search 360: Achieving a Single Search Platform across the Enterprise”. I had a bit of trouble locating the document but I am an addled goose and your, if my Web log usage analysis system is working, are a 40 something, proud, confident, and an expert in search. If you have a user name and password for ZDAsia, you can download it here. If you get a 404, shave the url, register, and search for “enterprise 360”. If you are persistent, you can snag this one page write up. Here are some keepers from this remarkable “white paper”:
- “National Instruments was quickly attracted to the FAST platform’s versatility, flexibility, and capability to expand. Inside four months the FAST Enterprise Search Platform solution was fully implemented by National Instruments’ team without the assistance and added cost of professional services personnel for the installation.” My thought, “Wow.”
- “FAST’s impact was apparent from the get-go.” My thought, “Wow again.”
- “When customers do seek out customer support, the FAST-supported online support request functionality gives application engineers vital information about the customers and their needs before the support conversation even begins.” My thought, “ESP. Extra sensory perception. I knew the meaning of the acronym and thought it meant enterprise search platform.“
I downloaded this document. Much food for thought and analysis.
Stephen Arnold, June 1, 2009
More Bing with 4.5 Cherries
June 3, 2009
I was trepedatious when I saw the headline “Microsoft Bing” with a link to PCMag.com. I used to labor in the Ziff vineyards, and I find the present Web only approach to the PC Magazine franchise somewhat unsettling. But I am an addled goose, and I put away my concerns and dived into a Bing review here garnished with 4.5 spheres. I rate by geese, but spheres with red ink are okay even though these look like bing cherries.
The full review includes a useful slide show. The writer summarizes some queries and then offered what I found a useful comment:
Bing’s most effective tool for bringing you info directly from the results page is its rollover page preview. Hovering the cursor to the right edge of any Web result brings up a small window containing text from the linked page. It can even find relevant deep links within that page. It’s great for getting a peek at pages that are relevant, and for helping avoid clicking through to pages that aren’t. When your mouse is anywhere on top of a result, a vertical rule shows up at its right edge to visually clue you that this preview is available. It’s one of those features that you quickly get used to and come to expect. I now find myself missing it on Google search results pages.
The review is a long one and covers interface, travel, maps, images, and some miscellaneous features such as news. I thought news was pretty important, but that’s my age interfering with my understanding.
Bottomline: the reviewer finds Bing useful. If you want a thorough walk through of the Microsoft system, this is the place to start.
My tests of features surfaced some annoyances which are not included in this write up. Perhaps I will jot them down, but I am not too wired into the Web search scene. I do know that Google enjoys a 60 to 70 percent market share. Microsoft has a more modest share. If PCMag.com’s view set fire to its readership, Bing might narrow the gap a bit.
Stephen Arnold, June 3, 2009
Socrata: Mash Up and Analytical Wonderland
June 2, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who alerted me to the June 2, 2009, announcement about Socrata’s “social” public data sets. The company behind this collection of data sets is Socrata (formerly Blist), based in Seattle. You can read the company’s news release here. The news release said, “[Socrata is] a social network that aggregates public data from around the world in a single destination.” The news release stated:
Socrata.com enables anyone with a Web browser to find understandable and sortable datasets on a myriad of topics including healthcare, energy, retirement, education or the environment, just to name a few. Users can create customized views and filters of the data based on any criteria in the dataset such as state, zip code or income. Most importantly, these personalized views can then be saved and socialized through an entire social network, whether it be business colleagues, families or others supporting the same cause. As in other social networks, users can create profiles, post comments, rate content, and establish groups for sharing information privately.
When I looked at the service, I thought about Wolfram Alpha and a series of documents I read by Ramanathan Guha, now at Google. I will explore the service in more depth because it looks interesting. I wonder what vendors of data sets think about the sudden interest in this type of information.
Stephen Arnold, June 3, 2009
AOL 1.1, Not 2.0 Yet
June 2, 2009
CBSNews.com ran “AOL 2.0: Is There a Future as a Solo Act?” here. The headline carried the same type of numbering problem I noted with a Yahoo 2.0 article. The “new” AOL, like the “new” Yahoo, is not too far from its 1.0 roots in my opinion. Christopher Lochhead begged to differ, insisting on the 2.0 designation. He wrote:
AOL should become more than a portal or search engine. It needs to aggregate everything you and I use on the Web into one central place. The truth is that the Web is still too hard to use and it takes too long. If they were able to become a personalized, uber-portal that manages everything we do on the Web in one simple front-end, new users would flock to them. It appears that Google may be taking a stab at this with its new Wave communication offering. Creating a new user experience needs to be done in the context of the social computing revolution. AOL must find a way to combine social networking, user-generated content, email/messaging and traditional media content so that we are compelled to use their services.
There are other remarkable assertions in this CBS story. You can wade through them, but let me cut to the end of the chase when the fox is panting and ready for the taxidermist: AOL after changes will still be AOL. The addled goose believes that a remarkable turn of events will be needed. Technology, people, luck, money, and innovation must come together. Then I will agree to an AOL 1.5 designation.
Stephen Arnold, June 3, 2009
Google and Good Search Engine Optimization
June 2, 2009
I loathe search engine optimization wonks. I am on the fence about Google’s “Straight from Google: What You Need to Know” here. The title is ambiguous but the content is not. Think SEO the Google way. If you want to pump up your PageRank or goose (no pun intended) your site in a Google results list, this slide show is for you. After scanning the deck, I concluded that Google in a semi official way is trying to put some white lines on the information superhighway.
Stephen Arnold, June 1, 2009
Business Embraces Twitter. Shock and Awe
June 2, 2009
ReadWriteWeb.com posted a surprising bit of information on May 29, 2009. You will want to navigate here and read “Business People Say Twitter More Important than LinkedIn”. The addled goose found the information interesting. Mr. Kirkpatrick wrote:
A month-long poll conducted on business social network LinkedIn has uncovered some fascinating numbers concerning social media platforms and brand presence. The biggest surprise was that Twitter was deemed more important to brands than LinkedIn, and the poll was performed on LinkedIn.
The addled goose gets it. When this post is published, it’s Tweeted. The addled goose studiously ignores blandishments of LinkedIn. Too much malarkey and not enough thick, chunky substance.
Stephen Arnold, May 31, 2009
Free of AOL, Time Identifies the Future of Online
June 2, 2009
When you own an online loser, it’s tough for the organization to make bold statements about the future of online. Cast off the boat anchor and the writers are liberated. Check out this essay / report from Time here. The write up is called “10 Ways Twitter Will Change American Business” by 24/7 Wall Street but it’s Time for this addled goose. The idea was to get a bright journalist to identify the ways in which Twitter.com would affect an American business. The fact that Twitter.com has a fail whale deters not essay Douglas McIntyre. The ten examples are not that surprising, and I will leave it to you to analyze them. What struck me is that if Twitter.com was the future and had such compelling applications, why didn’t America Online jump into this new search sector with both feet. It’s easier to write about the future than deliver it in my opinion. One thing is clear to me. Finding the ten items is an exercise in patience. Start here.
Stephen Arnold, June 1, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
