Posted on Leave a comment

Q&A With Jimmy Wales On Search Wikia(wikiasari)

Ever since the Times of London first reported Jimmy Wales intention to start a search engine, the blogosphere has been ablaze with speculation and misinformation about the concept (which is much earlier stage than first reported).

While considerable questions remain, Danny Sullivan over at Search Engine Land did a good job getting some clarification from Jimmy and then giving his opinions as only Danny can.

I think the thing that everyone overlooks here is that Mr. Wales says in response to Danny about ads, “There are no immediate plan to sell ads, so for now we’re not too focused on that. If we don’t build something useful, selling ads on it is sort of a moot point.”

In my opinion, what the search industry should be most worried about is if Mr. Wales built a “good” search engine which was not at all focused on monetization. Now that could be actually quite disruptive if searchers were to migrate to it under some purest movement of some sort. I think the odds of that are considerably more significant than a great search engine killer emerging here.

Posted on Leave a comment

Switching Search Engines is Easy…

“Google’s monopoly power is less threatening than Microsoft’s because changing operating systems is hard, while changing search engines is easy…” – Blake Ross, co-founder of Firefox in his post Tip: Trust is hard to gain, easy to lose.

Interesting read.

(Update – 7/21 /2009 – updated to Internet Archive – http://www.blakeross.com/2006/12/25/google-tips/ no longer is live.)

Posted on

Google Indent Glitch?

Google appears to have a glitch in the search results for #1 Google Indent rating groupings. Frequently, an item in the first grouping is showing up as the number two search result as well! Hopefully, Matt Cutts, Adam Lasnik and the team will find the glitch in short order, they are typically on top of things like this once brought to their attention.

Examples include: Harvard Business School (pictured), Stanford GSB, MIT Sloan, Dartmouth Tuck, NYU Stern, Yale, UNC – Chapell-Hill, Chicago GSB – that should be enough of a sample size to debug the issue…

Posted on 3 Comments

Andy McKee Featured on Youtube Front Page!

I first met Andy McKee at an acoustic music festival in Kansas in 2003. He is among several awesome fingerstyle guitar players including Tommy Emmanuel (see my Tommy Emmanuel interview), Neil Jacobs, Brian Henke, Peppino D’Agostino and others that don’t get mass media exposure. For several years these great players have labored with little or no media love. Yet when they play – some people will drive hundreds of miles to witness the art. It is a strange contradiction indeed.

One of Andy’s videos “Drifting” made it onto the front page of Youtube this week and has now received over 700,000 views! While it’s great that this occurred, it’s a sad reminder of a broken music industry that categorizes people much the same limiting way online recruiting does, not being seen by all of the people who might be interested in the competencies and skill set that a person offers! It’s great when you start to see these barriers and limiting beliefs starting to be broken, hopefully 2007 will be the year we see this happen in not only music, but also recruiting as well. If you like this video be sure to check out his remake of Toto’s “Africa”.

Posted on Leave a comment

Google’s Mobile Ad Guidelines Page

I recently noticed that Google started a Mobile Ads guideline page. The following is of great interest to me:

“Follow proper grammar conventions.

You may use common text message abbreviations.”

I’d like to see some more detail about what is meant exactly by “You may use common text message abbreviations.”

The #1 result for “text message abbreviations” in Google currently has this web page. In a world where relevance is critical to click through and conversion rates, is an ad that has abbreviations that a viewer doesn’t understand certainly doesn’t meet the relevancy requirement as that viewer certainly won’t take action on an ad that he or she can not interpret. My preliminary thought is that this should allow the user to self select the type of mobile search marketing ad style that they are most comfortable with and this likely will have a strong correlation with the age of the user/ad viewer. But it also means that eventually you might need more than one style of mobile text ad, one with abbreviations and one without abbreviations. This is certainly an interesting area that I’m will likely see new standards and metrices over time.

What do you think the standards should be? I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts and discussion of this issue.

Posted on Leave a comment

Google Changing Monetization Strategy?

Robert Scoble had an interesting post on this issue. I’ve got to ask one question though Robert! In Naked Conversations, Robert talks about how you should point to your competitors and even talking positively about them.  How is a likely non-relevant ad on a map on your web site more of a threat than you saying “company x does well with blah-blah”? I don’t get the logic here, am I missing something?