Random Scams Won't Take Down Google
from the nice-try,-though dept
Three years ago, reporter Tom Foremski tossed out his idea for how Microsoft could kill Google in an underhanded way: offer $100 million to whoever clicked on a random Google ad. The trick would be that no one (other than the person administering the prize at Microsoft) would know what the ad is. Foremski's theory was that this would lead to massive clickfraud and anger from Google advertisers. Of course, there are a lot of assumptions in there that likely wouldn't hold up in a real world test (with the biggest being that the whole deal would stop working the second someone "won"). However, now we've got Mark Cuban tossing out a suggestion for how to take down Google that seems to come from the same "wishful thinking" playbook. Cuban's idea is that Microsoft (with Yahoo) should offer to pay the top 100,000 sites in Google to get them to remove themselves from Google, and agree to be "exclusively" in the Yahoo/Microsoft listing. The idea is that the money would serve to pay for the lost traffic from Google -- but that's highly speculative.If Microsoft actually tried this, it would be quite difficult for the Justice Department not to call an antitrust foul, first of all. But, at a more practical level, it just wouldn't work. It's based on the false premise that those top 100k sites are really the only sites that matter. If they all disappeared from Google's index, another 100k would quickly fill in to replace them. In fact, it would get more and more difficult to convince sites to leave Google's index, since the competition for clicks would get easier and easier as others did leave. On top of that, if this actually did happen, my guess is Google would continue to index those sites anyway forcing some sort of court battle over whether or not a site can actually block a search engine from spidering it entirely. These sorts of ideas are fun to think about, but once you think past the basic idea, it's not hard to recognize why the scams would never work. Beating Google is never going to be about a scam.
Now, I should add that I started writing up this post last night. This morning, the news came out that Cuban is included on the board slate that Carl Icahn has put up to try to force Yahoo to sell to Microsoft. The timing, obviously, is no coincidence. Cuban's blog post went up just hours before he was revealed to be a potential board member. However, just because this could, conceivably, put Cuban in a position to actually push Microsoft/Yahoo to implement such a plan, it doesn't make it any more viable. In fact, it makes it that much more questionable.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: advertising, competing, mark cuban, search engines
Companies: google, microsoft, yahoo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
why $100 million?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The other trouble is that no-one would believe there was a prize to be had.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But you could...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let them do it
I know this is a US oriented site, but it has global affects. The EU wouldn't find it difficult at all to punish the bajesus out of Microhoo if they did this. EU already will probabyl have an issue with Microsoft buying Yahoo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fromw hat I've seen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would seriously doubt that anyone would want to be elimited from a google search. And if they did, it would almost seem like they were trying to hide something, not take down Google.
Microsoft seems to be running low on take-over ideas.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Underestimate Cuban
Why a $100 million? Why indeed? They can pay $100 million because they have $100 million.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Content is not a fungible good.
Eventually the content producers are going to wake up and realize that they hold a significant bargaining chip in discussions with search engines...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Exactly how much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Exactly how much?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Exactly how much?
You know, I really wish I had enough faith left in humanity to be totally certain they actually won't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What motivates businesses to change?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark Cuban
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cuban had better shut up
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HAHA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]