Is Google Too Dominant?

[Dale King]

There's no question Google has changed the internet - though some would argue not necessarily for the better. Critics point to Google's dominance in search and pay-per-click advertising - just to name two areas of dominance and pray that another major player comes along to level the playing field - to challenge Google to provide better service.

What do you think? Would you like to see a serious Google competitor emerge? Or are you totally happy with Google and everything it brings to the table?

What are your thoughts?

Dale King

[St0n3y]

Google has series competitors, but unfortunately they can't seem to make a dent. It would be difficult for any upstart to be able to out Google Google. Our hope is in a Yahoo/MSN merger.

[Dale King]

Originally Posted by St0n3y

Google has series competitors, but unfortunately they can't seem to make a dent.

That's exactly my point. If they can't seem to make a dent, then are they really serious competitors? For example, the media likes to hype Phil Mickelson as Tiger's chief rival. But Phil can't seem to make a dent in Tiger's dominance. Conversely, Tiger keeps on cruising along as golf's dominant force - winning majors - even with a broken leg.

The point is despite the best efforts of Yahoo and MSN, Google keeps on cruising along as the internet's dominant force.

Dale King

[jpolito830]

I agree...the only chance any competitor may have is the Yahoo merger. We will have to wait and see what happens.

[Logan]

I do not agree that a Yahoo/Microsoft merger will give competition a chance. Here is why.

1) Consider that Google makes considerable money off of both Yahoo and Microsoft users when they search and receive results with Google Adsense on the page. Because of this ...

1a) Google makes money, via Adsense when some Yahoo users search

1b) Google makes money, via Adsense when some Microsoft users search

1c) Neither Yahoo or Microsoft make money from Google users

1d) Yahoo has even started distributing Google ads on it's own search results so it can make more money. Another way google makes money off the competitors you propose merging would be able to compete.

2) I believe Google has set a payout level/margin to Adsense publishers that prevent others from entering the market. Basically, they pay as much as possible so for a publisher to leave their program they will need to accept less money. Related to publisher payout, is the advertiser pool. Google's is superior - see the example in 1D with Yahoo. A true competitive advantage is Google's advertiser pool and network of publishers others haven't, or can't overcome.

I am not concerned with Google's dominance, but at the same time I don't buy the conventional wisdom that a Yahoo/Microsoft merger will put these two companies in a position to compete "better" against Google.

[Dale King]

Originally Posted by jpolito830

I agree...the only chance any competitor may have is the Yahoo merger. We will have to wait and see what happens.

I disagree. There's little evidence to suggest that any of the rumored mergers would have any significant impact on Google's dominance. Google's management team seems to be smarter, more creative, more nimble and one step ahead of everyone else.

Dale King

[corte1]

I'll tell one thing about Google - they really seem to have their act together. Every once in a while, I'll try a different search engine against Google and Google gives me more relevant results every single time - although I typically don't use their image search.

One type of search engine I have't used much are these so called Meta search engines like Dogpile. Has anyone compared these Meta-type engines with Google? Theoretically, they should be able to produce better results but I have no idea if that's the case.

[Dale King]

Originally Posted by corte1

One type of search engine I have't used much are these so called Meta search engines like Dogpile. Has anyone compared these Meta-type engines with Google? Theoretically, they should be able to produce better results but I have no idea if that's the case.

Theory is one thing, reality quite another. I personally don't see a heckuva lot of difference between so-called meta-search and regular search. Hey Corte, have you tried Yahoo's search lately? I actually like their seach results better than Google's.

Dale King

[Sporkman]

Interesting development: Yahoo is opening up its search resources to outsiders to build their own search engines, via the "BOSS" program:

Our goal with BOSS (Build your Own Search Service) is simple -- foster innovation in the search landscape. As anyone who follows the search industry knows, the barriers to successfully building a high quality, web-scale search engine are incredibly high. Doing so requires hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in engineering, sciences and core infrastructure -- from crawling and indexing technology to relevancy and machine learning algorithms, to stuff as mundane as data centers, servers and power. Because competing successfully in web search requires an investment of this scale, new players have effectively been prohibited from delivering credible alternatives to Yahoo! and Google. We believe the BOSS platform will begin to change that....

http://www.ysearchblog.com/archives/000599.html

[lovetiffany]

i think baidu also can do this , if they can face to wold wide.