Subba’s Serendipitous moments

October 11, 2010

If Google’s search speed is not fast enough, try Instant!

Filed under: Business,Innovation,Learning — Subbaraman Iyer @ 4:50 pm
Tags: ,

 

What does a company that powers 70% of the search market, has over $20 billion in sales relating to search believe the speed of search should be?

Google estimates that a search typically takes the following:

  • 9 seconds to enter
  • 0.8 seconds for data transfers between the data centers
  • 0.3 seconds for processing.
  • The users then spend 15 seconds choosing the link that the search results show up.

If anyone believes that this is a slow performance, Google Instant comes your way. It saves the average user 2-5 seconds per search via instant results, enhanced predictive technology and scroll-to-search functionality.

Google Instant will search at the speed of thought. Or at the speed of serendipity.

If every Google user used Instant, it would save 3.5 billion seconds a day. In other words that is 11 hours saved every second.

Now of all the great engineering prowess that Google deploys to make Google Instant, it is the predictive technology aspect that’s intriguing, deeply unsettling and maybe a big game changer. The search attempts to predict exactly what a user wants, showing the results that it thinks he wants in grey text, allowing him to choose. So, even if a user doesn’t know exactly what he’s looking for, the top prediction is shown in grey text in the search box and the user can stop typing as soon as he sees what he needs.

So, a search is a real time stream enabling the user to see more search results.

It essentially could mean that different people would see different search results for the same query. This could be just the beginning. The search results could again vary depending on the device from where the search is initiated or even by location.

This  means the world of search is just not getting faster, but incredibly complex.

Well, all the marketers and SEO gurus have to change. Sites will need to be optimized for letter combinations, not just complete keywords. This also implies that advertisers will have to purchase more keywords in order to optimize performance. More importantly, Google will gain another revenue stream through ad impressions as currently advertisers are not paying for impressions.

I reckon the compelling reason for this development is that Google’s mobile search traffic grew over 50% in first half of 2010 and 1 in 3 queries from smartphones are seeking information about nearby places. Now mobile users would just like to enter a few characters and choose the query from an autosuggestion list. Right now it is difficult to figure out what this engineering feat of Google Instant will mean in terms of revenues.

And I am not sure whether fast is better than good.

Advertisements

July 6, 2010

Google goes vertical to thwart Bing

 

In a very typical low key move Google acquired ITA Software, a 14-year-old company that makes software that organizes flight and pricing information, for $700 million in cash.

The significance of this acquisition is far reaching. With this, Google now becomes the critical intermediary between the provider of flight and pricing information and all their users including all the travel websites, airline websites and travel search engines. With this acquisition, Google now does not want to just send the search to another website, but also want to process the information for you in a meaningful and relevant way by organizing results (by giving flight options, price options etc.) As it goes into the “deeper search” and organizing information, it inevitably marginalizes the value being created by other travel web sites and travel search engines.

From here, Google could pursue 2 clear directions:

  1. It could become a travel portal itself, which is unlikely since it could attract regulatory action because ITA Software is being used by airlines and travel portals. It may not want to be seen as a “Big Bully”.
  2. It could add a new revenue stream to its well known advertising business – moving from cost per click (CPC) to cost per action (CPA) which definitely will be premium priced.

One thing is certain though: Bing (Microsoft’s search engine) which was headed in the area of vertical search will face more competition.

I believe that this acquisition is merely the beginning. Google can easily replicate the vertical search model in many areas including real estate, automobiles and other areas where the current Google search doesn’t give relevant results and where the potential for CPA exists.

April 14, 2010

Is Apple rewriting history?

Filed under: Business,Competition,Model,Perspective,Strategy — Subbaraman Iyer @ 12:27 pm
Tags: ,

 

Recent moves by Apple clearly indicate that Apple seems intent on rewriting history. Time will tell whether this is a brilliant move or a move that is just more than a misstep!

First, the attempted lock in of developers into its walled garden. The garden may be beautiful, but it is walled; not open. So far Apple has defied the odds of making its  walled gardens innovative and “developer friendly”. Now it is offering a mixed bag.

The iPhone and iPad is becoming a closed system which Apple only can control. Its current rift with Adobe is well known. The fight with Adobe is not about Flash but Apple’s fundamental approach to developers . Apple is insisting that all apps be developed using Apple’s proprietary tools with its SDK and discouraging porting of apps developed on other platforms based on its most recent license agreement. It clearly is an affront to all developers alike. It is clearly a move to limit developers from building apps for other platforms (read: Android)

Second, as a sop to developers, than as a new line of business, Apple offered the iAds an advertising platform for developers and offered to share advertising revenues. Advertisers can place ads in apps and when clicked direct users to a web site without leaving the app. Apple would serve up the ads and offered to give developers 60% of the advertising revenue to developers.

Just another way to keep the developers of more than 180,000 apps happy and help them make some money in the process!

As much as the media portrays this as yet another battle between Apple and Google, I do not see this way! The entire market for mobile advertising is less than U.S. $ 500 million accounting for just 2% of the total U.S. online advertising market. The revenue stream for Apple is insignificant. It is clearly a battle for keeping the developers firmly in the Apple fold and trying to deprive Google to build the developer community for the Android platform.

So make no mistake: It is not Apple taking on Google for advertising dollars, it is about developers!

Will the walled garden work or will open systems succeed or will both co-exist? Time will tell!