Why the Microsoft and Yahoo merger makes sense for webmasters and web users


Written on April 23, 2008 – 7:08 pm | by admin

Microsoft has been trying for more than a year now to acquire Yahoo without much success. Yahoo executives refuse to sell their online portal to the Gates’ evil empire and the dance continues. Everything about the possibility of merging the two giant companies has been said already by everyone in online and print media. It is not my intention to repeat all that with this post so I will keep it brief and to the point.

What I want to focus on when it comes to the possible merger between Microsoft and Yahoo is the overall impact this will have to the online marketplace. In my opinion, this impact will be mostly positive and it will not lead to another Microsoft monopoly as many believe. The way I see it, currently there is an online monopoly and that is Google.

Google has the best search engine returning the most relevant results for all user queries. There is no doubt that as far as online search engines go, Google takes the cake. And this is after thousands of people spam its Web index in hopes of making easy money. Google’s advertising products including AdSense, AdWords and the recently acquired DoubleClick are definitely the best ones available today. Many webmasters and affiliate marketers make a good living because of Google’s advertising products.

Google being a monopoly is, however, bad news for both those trying to make money online and Web users. Why?

For regular Web users the problem is that little innovation in search engine technology is currently occurring. The fact that Google dominates the market and that they are very large and slow to make changes to their search algorithms means that little happens in improving the underlining search engine. Yahoo and Microsoft have been unable to create a competitive search engine on their own. A merger would make sense in terms of giving users an alternative search engine and at the same time forcing all parties to innovate at a higher pace. One way that Google’s monopoly is hurting the Web is their refusal to support the move towards the Semantic Web.

For webmasters having two large companies competing with each other for displaying ads on their online properties can only be good news. At the moment, everyone knows that if for any reason Google terminates their account, it is next to impossible to properly monetize a low to medium traffic site. Large sites can make money with a second or third tier advertising network and affiliate marketing but this is not the case for the smaller publishers. Google can be very vigilant when it comes to terminating accounts simply because they have a monopoly with AdSense; of course, in many cases it doesn’t help when webmasters violate the program’s TOS just to make a few extra dollars but there are a good number of innocent publishers that are terminated with no good reason. Yahoo and Microsoft have not been able to create advertising programs that are as good as those offered by Google. A merger should create some good competition to Google giving webmasters a good alternative way for monetizing their web sites and at the same time forcing Google to respect publishers more.

There are probably other reasons why a Microsoft-Yahoo merger makes sense. I wrote this article simply to focus on the fact that said merger would create real competition to Google taking away the monopoly the latter have enjoyed in recent years. Both web users and web masters will benefit from such a merger. I just wish Yahoo was not so stubborn!

Tags: , , ,

YouTUBE CPM is really low says the data


Written on April 17, 2008 – 4:16 pm | by admin

Trying to make a living by producing and posting video content on YouTube? It might be a while before the big fat paycheck that you are hoping for comes in the mail. Recent data of Google payouts for YouTube producers show that advertising on the video site cannot manage more than $1 CPM. This CPM is very low compared to text advertising. Essentially, you video has to receive many million views before it actually generates some revenue and even then, the revenue isn’t anything to write home about. Let’s look at one example as reported on Silicon Alley Insider.

Break a Leg’s Yuri Baranovsky said he’d collected $1,600 for more than 2 million views on YouTube. So if that means $800 for a million views (which it doesn’t exactly, but just to get an idea), user partners have been responsible for 1.25 billion paid views so far.

And yes, Break a Leg is a decent quality video involving many actors. Even if over time the video is seen another two million times, it is not likely that it will generate enough revenue to seriously compensate any of the people involved. User generated video content is not easy to monetize. This content has very little value. Silicon Alley Insider further reports on the estimated CPM for video content on YouTube.

As SAI’s Vas Sridharan reports, YouTube proudly reported that it has shelled out…ONE MIIIIIILLLLLLLION DOLLARS…to producer partners in the past four months. The producer of one video, the 2-million-view smash hit “Break a Leg,” got a check for $1,600–which equates to a net $0.80 CPM.

What can we learn from this? First, it is a good thing that Google owns YouTube because the latter will continue to barely pay the bills until a better way to monetize all that user generated content is found. This brings me to my second point. There is lots of room for some entrepreneurs to come up with a way to monetize user generated video content and make it big. Will this person be you?

Lastly, I want to say, don’t give up on your blogs because they still are the best way to make money online from textual user generated content. Of course, there is also affiliate marketing but that is an entirely different revenue stream.

Tags: , ,

Watch out for falling debris


Written on April 5, 2008 – 3:02 pm | by admin

Watch out for falling debris this weekend. We are going to be upgrading our WordPress software to the newest version, i.e., 2.5, and also we will be moving to a new server which hopefully will make the site load faster. In the process, we will be changing the front page to something better that does not use an ancient version of Xoops. I’m also going to be removing the interstitial advertisements because these ads are more of a nuisance than anything else.

Thank you!

Update: We have moved to the new server and upgraded to WP 2.5 (the newest version of the software.) We have also updated the theme to something more modern. The front page is gone and it will be soon replaced with a single link to the blog until we figure out something better to place on it.

Advertiser spying annoys consumers


Written on April 2, 2008 – 2:33 pm | by admin

I am both an online advertiser and a consumer. I know that if I want my online ventures to be successful, i.e., maximize the monetization of my web site audience, I have to carefully monitor their behavior, collect data, and target advertisements accordingly. As a consumer, I know that many advertisers and advertising agencies collect such data and use it to practically force products on me. A new survey conducted by TBS Global on behalf of TRUSTe, i.e., a consumer privacy organization, has revealed that many consumers are aware that there behavior is being carefully watched and they are not happy about it.

Ars Tecnica reports on the people participating in the survey and the main result after analyzing the data,

TNS randomly selected 1,015 nationally representative adults in the US “whose households belong to TNS’s online consumer panel” for its survey. Although only 40 percent of the group was familiar with the term “behavioral targeting,” most users were well aware of the practice. 57 percent reported that they weren’t comfortable their activities tracked for advertising purposes, even if the information couldn’t be tied to their names or real-life identities.

As I said earlier, as a consumer I am also uncomfortable that my online behavior is so carefully monitored and data are collected without my permission. At the same time, as someone who is trying to make a living online, I understand the need for collecting the data. It is next to impossible to make a profit online without carefully analyzing web user data considering how competitive the online marketplace is. I think that some guidelines that the data should be collected in a way that individual people could not be identified. Moreover, user data should be deleted after a certain period of time, i.e., after 6 months. Hopefully, simple strategies such as those I just suggested could help online marketers to earn the trust of consumers and remove some of their online privacy concerns. The hardest part would be to enforce such guidelines if they are ever agreed upon.

Read more: Web surfers know advertisers are watching—and don’t like it.

Revision3 commits click fraud and gets away with it!


Written on March 21, 2008 – 1:33 am | by admin

Yes, you read the title correctly. Revision3 is currently committing click fraud and gets aways with it for no other reason that they are a big publisher and when you are big you can get away with murder. While many webmasters lose their accounts for not following Google’s Terms of Service to the letter, the premium publishers cheat advertisers out of their money and Google looks the other way. How do I know that Revision3 is committing click fraud? Well, keep reading.

Google loves Revision3

On March 6th, 2008, Revision3 CEO Jim Louderback wrote on their public blog announcing “Revision3 hops in bed with Google.” His post explains that the company is in the business of making money and so they have decided to sell advertising on their videos via Google’s new AdSense for Video program. AdSense for Video displays PPC ads as pop-ups in the video while it is playing; similarly, PPC ads are also shown at the end of the video. So far so good. There is nothing wrong with announcing a monetization model for content that they produce in house and is not free. The problem is that in the very next paragraph, CEO Louderback explains to readers how to help make this a profitable venture for Revision3, namely committing click fraud,

Feel free to click liberally on both the bottom-based and those end-of-video ads – you’ll be supporting Revision3 with every click!

What? Are you serious? If I wrote anything close to that on my blog asking people to click on the ads, I would have my account banned for life because this is in direct violation of the program’s TOS. Yet, the Revision3 guys can get away with it. Last I checked, Google still displayed ads in their videos.

Sadly, their viewers find no problem with clicking liberally on these ads since as one of them explains in a comment,

I do click stuff on digg.com just cuz i know it helps, so i don’t mind doing that here. So even if you download and don’t stream stop by and click a couple. Maybe we can start get Martin some ram for his state of the art built tough computer.

Funny thing, the one person who pointed out in a comment that the CEO was asking users to commit click fraud had his/her comment deleted. The whole thing is disgusting to say the least.