April 6th, 2008

Google to launch BigTable this week?

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 1:42 pm

Categories: Google, Google APIs, Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Amazon.com Inc., BigTable, Pricing, Storage, Marketing Research, Marketing, Hardware, Garett Rogers

It sounds like the press is being briefed on a new service Google is about to release to developers — possibly as early as this week. The service is called BigTable, and it has been proving itself for quite a while as the storage engine behind many Google services.

BigTable is based on the Google File System (GFS) and designed for distribution across thousands of commodity servers that collectively store petabytes of data. Services that rely on it include Google Search, Google Earth and Maps, Google Finance, Google Print, Orkut, YouTube, and Blogger.

People are saying they expect BigTable to be direct competition for Amazon SimpleDB — and I’d have to agree. The only thing I’m wondering about is the pricing strategy. A post from March 29th hinted that it could actually be free, compared to the pay-per-use pricing model for Amazon’s equivalent service.

SimpleDB from Amazon has the following costs assocated with it:

• $0.14 per machine hour
• $0.10 per GB inbound data transfer
• $0.13-$0.18 per GB outbound data transfer
• $1.50 GB/mo data storage

If you think about it, those prices are very reasonable — but Google has the guts to do even better. Potentially much better. If Google opened this up as a free service, imagine the impact that would have. I’m not one hundred percent sure how Google could monetize a service like this if they did make it free though — some people think it could be a way for them to save money on acquisitions. Imagine how much time and effort could be saved if a company purchased by Google already uses Google’s technology?

What do you think? Will Google make BigTable free, or will it be competitively priced with the Amazon equivalent?

April 3rd, 2008

Google to lay off around 25% of Double Click employees

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 9:09 am

Categories: Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Search Engine, Search Engine Marketing, DoubleClick Inc., Search, Marketing Research, Marketing, Garett Rogers

It sounds like Google is splitting up DoubleClick into two separate divisions, and selling off Performics. The reason Google is doing this is because Performics deals with search engine marketing (SEM), and that is a direct conflict of interest. SEM is the term used to describe optimizing your webpage to get better ranking on search engines like Google. This is a smart move — it would look really bad if Google owned and operated their own SEM company.

In addition to selling off half of the company, New York Times reports Google is also firing 300 additional employees, or about 25% of the company. It’s unclear what type of employees make up these 300, but it sounds like the lay offs may have to do with overlapping responsibilities.

Since our acquisition of DoubleClick closed on March 11, we have been working to match and align DoubleClick employees in the U.S. with our organizational plan for the business. As with many mergers, this review has resulted in a reduction in headcount at the acquired company.

[via Google Blogoscoped, Search Engine Land]

March 13th, 2008

Google releases Ad Manager after DoubleClick approval

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 11:23 am

Categories: Google AdWords, Google AdSense, Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Advertisement, DoubleClick Inc., Service, Google Ad Manager, Garett Rogers

After winning approval for the DoubleClick acquisition from regulators, Google wasted no time introducing a new free service called “Ad Manager” that gives companies a powerful way to manage their ad inventory.

Google Ad Manager is a free, hosted ad and inventory management tool that can help publishers sell, schedule, deliver and measure their directly-sold and network-based ad inventory. It offers an intuitive and simple user experience with Google speed and a tagging process so publishers can spend more time working with their advertisers and less time on their ad management solution. And by providing detailed inventory forecasts and tracking at a very granular level, Ad Manager helps publishers maximize their inventory sell-through rates.

This is different from simply putting AdSense on a website — it lets companies with a real ad sales team sell and maintain their own ad inventory on their website. Google says they look forward to integrating DART (the platform behind DoubleClick) into this new service.

We’re excited to add DART for Publishers to our suite of products, and we’re committed to the continued development and enhancement of DoubleClick’s offerings.

The service is still only available as an invitation-only beta — though if you are interested, you can sign up for an invitation here.

February 22nd, 2008

Sergey Brin nervous about Microsoft’s bid for Yahoo

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 6:17 am

Categories: Acquisition, Microsoft, Yahoo, Microsoft-Yahoo

Tags: Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp., Sergey Brin, Internet, Mergers & Acquisitions, Investment, Finance, Garett Rogers

While speaking at an event for the Lunar X-Prize, Brin said that Microsoft’s bid for Yahoo is “unnerving” — though I doubt Google really has anything to worry about in the short term. Many people think this is a simple case of the pot calling the kettle black.

“The Internet has evolved from open standards, having a diversity of companies, and when you start to have companies that control the operating system, control the browsers, they really tie up the top Web sites, and can be used to manipulate stuff in various ways. I think that’s unnerving.” — Sergey Brin

On Google’s official blog, David Drummond went on record opposing the merger with strong words shortly after Microsoft made the announcement.

“Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC? While the Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies — and then leverage its dominance into new, adjacent markets.” — David Drummond

I suspect these worries will not prevent the deal from going ahead — but it might be enough to plant seeds of doubt in regulators minds. If successful, this could really slow down the inevitable acquisition process.

February 9th, 2008

Yahoo won’t settle for less than $56 billion

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 1:14 pm

Categories: Acquisition, Microsoft, Yahoo, Microsoft-Yahoo

Tags: Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp., Corporate Governance, Business Operations, Corporate Law, Garett Rogers

It sounds like it’s official, Yahoo will be rejecting Microsoft’s bid to take over Yahoo for $44.6 billion in cash and stock. Yahoo’s board of directors is hoping that Microsoft won’t “go hostile” and just steal the company anyway. If Microsoft does goes against their wishes, it’s likely the partnership would ultimately be a failure.

Yahoo’s board appears to be betting that Microsoft doesn’t want to “go hostile” and try to acquire the company against the wishes of management and the board. Such a course could cause deep resentment among the rank-and-file engineers whose cooperation is crucial to the company’s success. — WSJ

A person familiar with the situation says that Yahoo will not consider an offer below $40 per share, which equals something in the neighborhood of $56 billion. Considering Microsoft must borrow to satisfy their original offer, throwing in an extra $12 billion won’t be an easy decision for Ballmer to make.

So there are three options Microsoft has:

• Take Yahoo for $44.6 billion and risk making it a failure before it even has a chance
• Borrow $12 billion more to secure the deal and have a better chance of the deal working out favorably
• Run away with their tail between their legs

Personally, the last option is the only one that makes sense to me. If Microsoft goes through with the deal, even after Yahoo’s rejection, it will be interesting to see outcome.

February 8th, 2008

Did Google buy Plaxo?

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 6:33 am

Categories: Acquisition

Tags: Plaxo Inc., Google Inc., Social Networking, Asset Management, Telecommunications, Online Communications, Marketing, Advertising & Promotion, Operational Planning, Business Operations

Rumor has it that Google agreed to purchase Plaxo for just under $200 million — honestly though, I don’t know why. If the deal actually happened, some people think it was probably to keep Plaxo assets from finding a new home at Facebook. I don’t think that would have any real affect on Google though, so I’m not totally sold on this reasoning.

Plaxo was originally a way to manage contacts, but has recently re-positioned itself as a social network with the introduction of “Pulse”. This service has already been integrating their with Google for quite a while now — from Open Social to the brand new Social Graph API. According to the Plaxo blog, they were the first service to use Google’s Social Graph API.

Greg Sterling at Search Engine Land offers up a couple ideas as to where Plaxo technology could be used inside Google:

Google would likely integrate Plaxo functionality into its Docs suite of applications aimed at enterprise users. By contrast, Pulse could be joined with Orkut or become the backbone of a new, expanded Google Profiles.

Do you think Google purchased Plaxo? If so, why?

February 4th, 2008

Google pokes Microsoft in the eye and offers Yahoo a helping hand

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 6:31 am

Categories: Google, Acquisition, Microsoft, Yahoo

Tags: Google Inc., Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp., Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Law, Investment, Finance, Business Operations, Garett Rogers

Google’s official statement on the hostile Microsoft/Yahoo! acquisition attempt is an angry one — Google is upset that Microsoft is doing this, and they are positioning it as a “monopolist at work” type of deal.

The obvious result of a tie-up would mean a stronger competitor for Google on the search and ads front, but something I never thought about was the combination of MSN/Yahoo! Instant Messenger and Hotmail/Yahoo! Mail. The thought of these services together could be enough to delay the deal.

David Drummond, Chief Legal Officer at Google, calls for regulators to take a careful look at the acquisition — but, in my opinion, there isn’t much chance of them blocking the deal as it stands. Many people are thinking that this is simply Google’s way to get back at Microsoft for slowing down their own DoubleClick acquisition, but could it be a carefully thought out tactic?

This long drawn out process gives Yahoo! plenty of time to thwart Microsoft’s hostile bid — and it could not be more poetic than a deal with Google. Eric Schmidt called up Jerry Yang (CEO of Yahoo!) to offer him a deal. There are no details on what was discussed, but some think that Google may entice other companies to submit competing bids by offering guaranteed revenue if Yahoo! agrees to use Google’s ads on Yahoo! Search.

Whatever happens, this is quickly becoming a very interesting story that I’m sure will have many twists and turns in the weeks and months ahead.

February 1st, 2008

Microsoft and Yahoo: Is it a threat to Google?

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 3:37 pm

Categories: Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Yahoo! Inc., Microsoft Corp., Mergers & Acquisitions, Networking, Investment, Finance, Garett Rogers

Microsoft is offering Yahoo $44.6bn for the company, and by the sounds of it, they will get it — even if it has to be done the hard way. But will the new company have any impact on Google’s domination of the search/search ad market?

The short and dirty answer is no. At least in the short term, people who use Google will continue to using it because they simply won’t change overnight. All Microsoft has done is possibly made Google more aggressive. Together, Microsft and Yahoo are still way behind Google in search market share (32.7% compared to Google’s 58.4%). At best, it will still take several great years for Microsoft to catch up.

But what about Yahoo’s advertising network — isn’t that what Microsoft is actually interested in? Yes, that’s the big one, but without market share in the search world, the number of companies willing to advertise on their network will naturally always be smaller than Google.

It’s good that Google has serious competitors though — without competition, nothing gets better (am I sounding like Google yet?). This new company will likely only spur new development and aggressive tactics from Google to make sure they remain on top.

Techmeme was jam packed with articles about the proposed acquisition today — it’s been a long long time since I’ve seen Microsoft generate this much buzz. It certainly overshadowed Google’s Social Graph API announcement — something that could have easily filled up the front page on an average day.

December 20th, 2007

FTC says cautiously approves of DoubleClick merger

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 5:44 pm

Categories: Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Merger, DoubleClick Inc., FTC, Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Law, Investment, Finance, Business Operations, Garett Rogers

Today the FTC announced they had no problem with Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick as proposed — but there is a catch. If Google ever does anything to abuse their position in the online ad space, the FTC will act swiftly to diffuse the situation.

Because the evidence did not support the theories of potential competitive harm, there was no basis on which to seek to impose conditions on this merger. We want to be clear, however, that we will closely watch these markets and, should Google engage in unlawful tying or other anticompetitive conduct, the Commission intends to act quickly.” — FTC press release

Today’s majority vote (Pamela Jones Harbour voted against[pdf]) in favour of the acquisition is great news, but there is still the European Union that could rain on Google’s parade. I don’t know what the chances of it happening are, but if the EU denies approval, Google is out of luck. Their decision is expected before April 4th next year.

October 19th, 2007

Google playing angles to make Facebook deal?

Posted by Garett Rogers @ 4:46 pm

Categories: Acquisition

Tags: Google Inc., Facebook, Social Networking, Investment, Online Communications, Marketing, Advertising & Promotion, Finance, Garett Rogers

Sergey Brin was spotted having dinner with an associate from Greylock that is said to be involved in that company’s Facebook investment. The meeting seemed to be important and rushed enough to hold just hours before Google’s Q3 earnings conference call yesterday.

Rumors of a hot deal-making session were quickly dissolved by people who were actually at the dinner table, but it is still interesting to see that particular mix of people together — even if it turns out to be a false alarm. Would a Facebook acquisition actually make sense for Google though?

A $15 billion investment (even for Google) is a giant lump of cash, but if they want to corner the North American social network market like they have with Orkut in Brazil, they need to spend cash. The question is, are social networks that valuable? Take the price tag divided by the number of users on Facebook (over 48 million according to Facebook) and you will see that an investment of $15 billion translates into $312 per registered user.

That is a lot of money — can it be justified? If you had $200 billion in cash, would you be willing to drop 15 of that on Facebook?