Untitled Document
Home Contact us Sitemap
Home Contact Sitemap
 
Website ZoOm
 
YOU HAVE A WEBSITE, WE HAVE A DESIGN
Web Designing Company > About us Web Designing India SEO Services India Contact Web Design Company
 
 

The Google Parasites

I have to confess a certain fondness for Google, an admiration that has grown out of frequent innovation and creativity. And its frequent luck in the form of success.

Then again, my livelihood doesn't overwhelmingly depend on the whims of Google, so the idiosyncrasies of its search and other services is professionally interesting and not much more.

But to a growing legion of small and midsize e-commerce players today, Google's evolving rules and exact methodologies can devastate—or make wildly successful—and these are matters where those small players have virtually no say.

Despite efforts by Yahoo and others in recent months, no one has come close to touching Google's overwhelming marketshare for Web search. In the olden days, this was called "cornering the market" and it was a good thing, to be congratulated in the nearest wood-paneled corporate watering hole.

But there are few parallels to Google's success in the history of American commerce. In its heyday, Detroit's big three auto makers were king makers for tons of auto supply and car component firms, but their clout only impacted one vertical—automotive—and it was split among three manufacturers.

In Google's case, succcess is consolidated with one company and yet impacts any e-commerce anywhere around the globe, selling absolutely anything, from car doors to cream cheese to karate lessons.

If the latest Google rules smile on you, you'll have a very different day than if it changed their processes and you didn’t discover it until an hour after your competition did.

Source: eweek.com

Comments

Posted by  
on July 14, 2007, 8:23 am
The differences between Google and many of the examples from the past that people tend to cite are pretty large, so i am often suprised that people tend not to notice them. In the case of auto part makers, an incredible amount of capital is needed to purchase machinery, land for factories, paying workers, and so on. Google was really founded with good ideas and the rest grew from that. Sure, money helps, and Google is a household name now, but any kid with a good enough idea can do the same. The other example people use is that Google is begining to monopolize (and i agree they will do more so in the future, who wouldnt?) But the reason Anti Trust laws should not apply (though people will try) is that AT laws were designed to protect the governments investments. When they give land to railroad companies to build train lines, or rights to oil companies, or land for hundreds of miles of phone poles, the government knows a growing country needs that infrastructure, but no one could buy it all. So they help someone build it. Then they need to make sure those people dont take advantage of it. But calculate what the federal government gave Google in terms of start up advantages, and its probably a whole lot of nothing.
Posted by  
on July 14, 2007, 12:06 pm
Speaking of Google, perhaps it's time to admit that the emperor is buck naked? Google is no longer an asset to small business. It's digressed into a black box designed to extract as much money as possible from small business while giving back as little value as possible. This piece explains why Adwords is something to be skeptical about: "Why Google Adwords is Not Helpful to Small Business" http://smartstartup.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/07/a-fable-doing-b.html


 
Name

Email

URL


Remember me?

Comments


Verification code
Verification code