5 ms·

the reality is there is no real competition in north america search. google has the market sewn up. team members can move from yahoo to microsoft to powerset to

the reality is there is no real competition in north america search. google has the market sewn up. team members can move from yahoo to microsoft to powerset to whatever...google will still dominate. brand matters. in a test i recall, they took yahoo results and google results and swapped the company banners. people liked the results that had the google logo on them. google has the brand in search, its probably impossible to unseat them unless they do something drastically stupid

mynameishere 18y ago
people liked the results that had the google logo on them To me, that signals serious weakness.
- crabapple 18y ago
  no, its a strength. it means people make a very strong association with google being better at search. they earned this reputation and deserve it.
  - chollida1 18y ago
    Wouldn't that also mean that if the Google brand was suddenly to fall out of favour then they would suddenly lose alot of market share. Seems like a weakness to me. Remember Microsoft at one time was one of the most respected brands around.
- wensing 18y ago
  Why? Explain?
  - jcl 18y ago
    It means the only noticeable difference between Yahoo and Google search results is the brand name, which means Google's lead in search technology is no longer obvious -- that they are no longer innovating faster than the market. Either some third party could discover fantastic new search technology and steal the market, or internet search is solved and brand name is all that matters, so the company with the best PR will win. Either way, it shows that Google has lost its previously unassailable technological advantage.
    - netcan 18y ago
      They probably have. Which may mean that all the free stuff with little or no advertising value is a smart move as a PR campaign. I agree that a brand name advantage seems easier to tackle then a technological one. Especially when switching costs are so low. But then this is a pattern followed by many technological products. A technological advantage, followed by a few years lead followed by equivalence where their product demands a premium, outsell competition, etc. Take Sony (portable radios, portable cassette players) or Canon (bubble jet). Innovation that was quickly equalised followed by a long period of leadership. You could even argue that a long period of technological superiority (say because of patents, trade secrets or even faster innovation) might result in an unbalanced company that cannot survive once superiority is lost.

mynameishere 18y ago

people liked the results that had the google logo on them To me, that signals serious weakness.

crabapple 18y ago
no, its a strength. it means people make a very strong association with google being better at search. they earned this reputation and deserve it.
- chollida1 18y ago
  Wouldn't that also mean that if the Google brand was suddenly to fall out of favour then they would suddenly lose alot of market share. Seems like a weakness to me. Remember Microsoft at one time was one of the most respected brands around.
wensing 18y ago
Why? Explain?
- jcl 18y ago
  It means the only noticeable difference between Yahoo and Google search results is the brand name, which means Google's lead in search technology is no longer obvious -- that they are no longer innovating faster than the market. Either some third party could discover fantastic new search technology and steal the market, or internet search is solved and brand name is all that matters, so the company with the best PR will win. Either way, it shows that Google has lost its previously unassailable technological advantage.
  - netcan 18y ago
    They probably have. Which may mean that all the free stuff with little or no advertising value is a smart move as a PR campaign. I agree that a brand name advantage seems easier to tackle then a technological one. Especially when switching costs are so low. But then this is a pattern followed by many technological products. A technological advantage, followed by a few years lead followed by equivalence where their product demands a premium, outsell competition, etc. Take Sony (portable radios, portable cassette players) or Canon (bubble jet). Innovation that was quickly equalised followed by a long period of leadership. You could even argue that a long period of technological superiority (say because of patents, trade secrets or even faster innovation) might result in an unbalanced company that cannot survive once superiority is lost.