LookingConfident's  Instablog

It's a great article. Blunt. But I feel that it won't be Facebook that will 'take down the web'- - the web will achieve this so easily from those within - and as a result of "Collective GREED", me thinks!!

The Facebook Fallacy - Technology Review
www.technologyreview.com
For all its valuation, the social network is just another ad-supported site. Without an earth-changing idea, it will collapse and take down the Web.
********************************************************

A litany of LIES and what seems to me to be a combination of both greed and many an 'over-blown' ego appears to be getting in the way of any chance of moving forward.

I've always felt that 'engineers' won't ever win the day-as it takes a marketer's mind to then drive the engineers, that they (themselves) may yet get to accept, one day.- I do sincerely hope that this realisation comes along much sooner than later.

Then there's Google. - Google Do no EVIL?

So it appears that Google's own spokesperson simply got it all wrong. As there's no mention whatsoever on/of "a variety of search engines", this time around.- HMmm? Story: http://bit.ly/JrGjaR

Maybe Google have now (selfishly) gone off on their own road? As John Rampton asks the question in an article [Google Tests "Ads Related to" Notation Above PPC Ads] over @ SEW, today:

"Were these ads working for anyone? I noticed that they fell out of the search results soon after we reported about them. Is Google trying to revive something that possibly got better results? - Did anyone get better click-through rates with these types of ads?" [Incidentally, Google are still running them over here in Australia.]

I tend to feel that there's more to this, than meets the eye. And that Google's spokesperson was simply, 'talking out of line'.

That what we are seeing is what's 'in store' on a CPA/CPV basis-as will then (ultimately) get to be shown above similar result pages on the same "variety of search engines" who are those, now providing Looksmart with that all important "search intent" data. In displaying the top three bidders on a CPA/CPV basis, possibly?

Besides seeing that over-all 'winning bid' advert-then being shown to a (the initial query) 'user' -- who may land anywhere on any publisher's page within or, across the overall LOOK marketplace, including Facebook?

All in Together, This Fine Weather?

Always, only an opinion.

LOOK: (Nasdaq) $0.7102 -0.0498 -6.55%

Link: Google's Australia "Ads Related to" - bit.ly/KE3CP5

LC

ps; Re: GREED (Not Facebook) Will Bring Down The Web

Disclosure: Long LOOK

.

I've had to now change my above header to this (yesterday's) instablog post - for reasons as are explained below, in my comment to this post.

It appears that I may well have put someone's nose out of joint?

As it was:

"Google Testing Ads Served Off Search Query Impression, Not Clicks"

Swanson1 has had more final 'curtain calls' than Dame Nellie Melba ever dreamed of having when returning to make further comments on the Vince Martin instapost, "LookSmart Is As Good As Finished."

My reply to him, is as follows:

Swanson1 .... Back on March 30th, you posted the following:

"I just can't see a CPV model work for an aggregator like Looksmart unless they have their own network, and if they did why would you not sell CPC or CPA if it was quality?"

I can only answer, that this was likely....

Because it is NOT (or, was not) generally available through-out the period of testing. I have mentioned that you were dealing with just one part of Looksmart's business, ok? Being, it's own ad network.

I've since pointed you to where Looksmart's Benoit Vatere not only explains that "we own the network" but that, "we follow users showing search intent"..... He also tells all that [From search] "Google & Yahoo are looking for bigger margins" and (of Looksmart) receiving data from them ......"we have about 3 billion queries per day".

seekingalpha.com/instablog/36191-looking...

I'd like to (now) draw your attention to what a Google spokesperson has said in an adweek.com article out just today..Do note the initial mention of "a variety of search engines" and with experiments dating back as far as Feb. 2010.

....."These are two ongoing experiments that we described in February 2010 (the use of search referral clicks from a variety of search engines to improve ad relevance) & October 2011 (the customization of search ads based on recent visits)."

.."Here's how it would work: a user might search for "prada shoes" but not actually click on a search result or search ad.

Later in the day (within seven hours) that user might visit any site within the Google Display Network and come across an ad from, say, Prada or Saks Fifth Avenue. At its core Search Companion would provide search ads outside of the search results page, explained a source."

< Scott Jones, general manager of display for Responsys (which is not participating in the beta), said that search data is valuable signal for targeting display ads, categorizing it among first-party signals like a brand's CRM data. ..."It's all about intent, and from our perspective there are a lot of signals that represent "intent"-one of them is what term were you looking for or, what content were you specifically looking for", he said. >

www.adweek.com/news/technology/sources-g...

Now whatever way you want to allow this confusing article (to further 'twist' you own acceptance of what I've been claiming, all along), you need to understand that need for an independent operator to 'collate' those 'terms that users were you looking for' and accept that they are coming to Looksmart from "a variety of search engines".

I will remind you (perhaps you are learning of this for a 1st time?) that Looksmart's appointment of a Scientist (and, the foremost analytical 'genius'), in Vincent Granville (I feel), is about providing the very best of analytics (consistent and equal to all who buy and sell in Looksmart's global CPA/CPV advertising marketplace) and from within or, across the total platform.

And, it was ....

.. Back in March 2011 when I'd noted (in an article that he had written on his own site: tiny.cc/sgbv8) where the Looksmart Chief Scientist Dr. Vincent Granville, had said, he was:

."Currently working on a Google keyword price/volume forecaster with Dr. Jean-Yves Dexmier, CEO of Looksmart [and who's also] a member of the prestigious French group of mathematicians, known as Bourbaki. [In the article he says that -- - together they were now] developing scoring algorithms that are 200 times faster than algorithms available in the marketplace. (Without using cloud)."

Success Story: (Dr. Vincent Granville - Read, Success Stories on his website) - www.analyticbridge.com/group/successstories

."I've finished creating the list of all top commercial keywords that account for 85% of Google pay-per-click advertising revenue."

Note: www.linkedin.com/groups/Success-story-te...

**********

Vincent

I've finished creating the list of all top commercial keywords that account for 85% of Google pay-per-click advertising revenue. I've also identified all top…

March 6, 2011
**********

(Yes."the Creation of a list of about 100,000 keywords representing 85% of the keyword pay-per-click commercial universe, in terms of Google advertising revenue.")

seekingalpha.com/instablog/36191-looking...

Here's hoping you (and others) get to understand a little more of just where I am coming from. Should you happen to do so, you may just decide to make your-self some dollars along the way.

Always, only an opinion.

LOOK: On May 22: $ 0.76 0.03 (+4.11%)

LC

Disclosure: Long LOOK

.

.

"Behavioral economics is the new "psychology of denial." Yes, it's like falling in love. You can't hear, can't see the warning signs. Till after.

......After months of hype building up to this IPO, you're convinced Facebook is your soul mate, that not getting shares in that IPO would leave you devastated, rejected by your true love. And nothing anyone says about the risks will change your mind.......That's the "psychology of denial."

Overnight: http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=FB

How Facebook could destroy the U.S. economy Paul B. Farrell
www.marketwatch.com

Global economy-killer? Yes, Facebook joins my list of global macroeconomic triggers (deadly unpredictable Black Swans like the dot-coms in 2000, subprimes in 2008) that the denial system driving the collective brain of American investors will simply tune out, till it's too late.

It's a great article by Paul B. Farrell well worth your consideration.

It's probably fair to also say (I feel) that this talked of 'denial system driving the collective brain of American investors' is likely a same 'denial' as what will ultimately be judged in history - the 'story' of this period of time, that we are in.

Only an opinion.

LC

.