Saturday, June 14, 2008

Andy Beal's Marketing Pilgrim

Andy Beal's Marketing Pilgrim

Look at What Yahoo Could Have Won

Posted: 13 Jun 2008 05:56 PM CDT

Growing up in England, I always enjoyed watching the darts game show Bullseye. Host Jim Bowen took great delight in showing losing contestants the prize they just missed out on. "Look at what you could have won" was just one of his many catchphrases.

Why am I telling you this? It was the first thing that came to mind after reading Microsoft’s Kevin Johnson’s email to employees highlighting the much better offer Yahoo turned down, in favor of Google.

Here’s what Microsoft offered…

  1. Microsoft would have invested $8 billion in Yahoo! at $35/share;
  2. Microsoft would have purchased Yahoo!'s search assets for $1 billion, and assumed the operations and R&D expense while returning data back to Yahoo! for use in their advertising business; and
  3. Microsoft and Yahoo! would have entered into a long-term search partnership, where Microsoft would have provided favorable economics to Yahoo! search, including a three-year guarantee of higher monetization than Yahoo!'s Panama paid search system currently provides.

Johnson argues the following benefits Yahoo would have realized…

—New Transfer of Cash to Yahoo! Shareholders. This proposal would have transferred $9 billion from Microsoft to Yahoo!, which could have been used by Yahoo! to reward their shareholders.

—A More Profitable Ongoing Business. This proposal would have resulted in higher operating income on an annual basis for Yahoo!, with our projections more than doubling Yahoo!'s operating income in the first year of operation, and increasing it by more than $1 billion above its current operating income level.

—A More Compelling Search Offering. The combination of the search platforms would have unlocked new R&D innovation, eliminated redundant engineering efforts and allowed for greater scale in serving our customers.

Even with the obvious Microsoft spin, it seems Yahoo took an "anyone but Microsoft" path.

Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com - Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!

Why FightTheSmears.com is Barack Obama’s Smartest Move Yet

Posted: 13 Jun 2008 03:39 PM CDT

There’s no doubt that democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama knows how to use the web to improve his chances of being elected this November. His campaign has used the internet to raise millions in funds and our own research has proven that Obama’s efforts have created a very positive online reputation.

However, his smartest move to date could be the launch of the FightTheSmears.com web site. The site–actually it redirects to a page on the my.barackobama.com web site–is Obama’s initiative to address the many rumors that circulate the internet about him.

Here’s an example:

So why could this be his smartest online move yet? As we explain in Radically Transparent, in the absence of an official response, stakeholders–in this case voters–will fill the gaping void with rumor and speculation.

In other words, if Obama continued to let these rumors spread and grow, they would become facts in the eyes of the voting public. While some may say that you should not shine your own spotlight on a negative rumor, my advice is always to address it head-on. Just because you ignore a slanderous remark, doesn’t mean it will go away.

There’s another huge benefit Barack Obama will get from the launch of Fight The Smears. He’s now hosting the conversation.

Hosting the conversation is at the top of my list of recommendations, for anyone facing a reputation attack. Trying to respond to rumors on individual blogs and forums is akin to playing a game of whack-a-mole–the moment you respond to one rumor, another appears. Instead, by creating your own platform for response, you’re inviting everyone to come to you. It will be much easier for Obama’s campaign to respond to rumors, if the media and voting public know where to find the official response. In fact, the site goes one step further by inviting you to email the “truth” to your friends.

A few months ago, it would have been trite to say that Barack Obama would win the Presidential election because of his online campaigning. With Fight The Smears, Obama is demonstrating he really is the candidate that is not afraid to change the rules.

Pilgrim’s Partners: Is a blogger attacking your company without you knowing? Monitor your online reputation with Andy Beal’s Trackur–try it for free!

Linky Goodness, June 13

Posted: 13 Jun 2008 03:31 PM CDT

Yeah, it’s still Friday the 13th, and our linky goodness roundup looks at people with bad luck:

Now, good luck!

Yahoo and Google: Wise Move or Beginning of the End?

Posted: 13 Jun 2008 03:18 PM CDT

It’s time for another edition of Good Idea/Bad Idea!

Good idea: Making more money.
Bad idea: Making more by admitting that you suck and your competition is so good at this that you’ll let them make the money for you.

Actually, other than the “admitting you suck and your competition is so good,” that doesn’t sound like an entirely bad idea, does it? I mean, using the competition to increase your profits could potentially be a good thing.

Potentially. For the most part, however, Yahoo’s decision on a non-exclusive search advertising deal has met with pretty much universal scorn. A sampling of headlines:

Not overly enthused, eh, blogosphere?

The universal sentiment is probably best expressed in TC’s headline: rather than preserving value to shareholders, as Yahoo has long claimed to try to do, this only reemphasizes how short they’ve fallen to Google.

But at least one prominent tech blogger doesn’t think it’s a bad thing: Henry Blodget. With the headline “All Right, Yahoo Bashers, Put a Sock In It: This Is a Good Deal,” he pretty much lays out his own argument. But because I like you, I’ll tell you the rest of it (abridging liberally, emphasis added):

In this deal, Yahoo gets:

  • $250-$450 of additional free cash flow in Year 1.
  • More cash flow in years 2-4, as the deal ramps and Yahoo’s search-query share remains meaningful
  • The ability to maintain or phase out Panama as it sees fit.
  • The ability to strike a death-blow to the one other player in the search market with any kind of meaningful share—Microsoft.
  • The freedom to focus on display advertising and AMP, Yahoo’s new display serving platform.

When you look at it that way, it really doesn’t sound quite as awful. But, Blodget acknowledges, the deal “won’t save Yahoo.” Yahoo’s days in the search business are numbered, “But . . . Yahoo can now focus almost all of its efforts on revitalizing its properties and display business, which is where its future lies.”

So what do you think: Good idea or bad idea?