While Google is under the spotlight and scrutinized about all its moves, all the smaller playeres get away with much less fuss about privacy.

Concerning technology, I would go even further: not only they are probably at the same level of existing players in all field, but they will also propose better tools, notably to monitor real time ROI on TV ads which is not the case yet with traditional networks. A better explanation here

The challenge is indeed synergies, but that is why they are acquiring companies that already have talents from those respective field, so that at least from that side they are somewhat covered. Technology is certainly an issue, but it’s not like they are entirely new in the field of audio (Google talk and Goog-411), video, text, or images.

At the same time, more and more off-line stuff is becoming digital, meaning that it can be scanned for content and provide with suitable ads.

All this of course assumes that Google is already doing a good job in the online world… which if you look at some of the more ridiculous adsense-content out there, they are not. But I suppose revenue is what really matters…

I mean, how can they “googlify” or “adsense” offline advertising? What’s their unique offering?

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/05/pictures-worth-thousand-clicks.html

On the digital plane, they seem to have it pretty closed off. The biggest growth-markets seem to me to be the video-arena and in-games/virtual worlds-advertising.

So far they are mostly a infrastructure-provider for other companies to advertise. They could also move into the creative side, though I seem to remember reading that Google is not in the content-creation business.

There must be something!

While, I’m all for taking over the world one acquisition at a time, doesn’t this type of strategy also risk antitrust-regulation in a big way?

But the contrary would be possible if there is a real particularity of a market which justifies a specific focus: for example, they have started mobile ad tests in Japan first.

They also buy global companies with a strong European activity: it is the case of Doubleclick, which gives them access to advertisers and understanding of a specific market.

What I find interesting, is the small differences between US and Europe. I mean, I always thought Google was more popular in US… Then again, Yahoo!’s front page is rather US-centric, while Google is quite neutral. Another thing that might explain this could be better penetration of Firefox, but this is just a guess.

Anyway, what I wanted to ask, what do you think is Google’s plan for Europe? I believe the ad-market (as usual) is more scattered here than in the US, so do you think that Google will start to acquire companies also here?

And apparently you don’t even sleep either! But I will go sleep as I don’t have the courage to add a graphic vision now, even if I take your comment into consideration! I will try to do it tomorrow.

Despite that, I think that seeing such a long list of advertising segments is pretty amazing, I really admire Google’s rapidity in positionning on so many ad markets.

I love provocative comments.

Thanks for the blog & the book (will purchase on eBay).

But..Fidji, don’t you ever sleep?

The blog on eBay strategies is: http://ebaystrategies.blogs.com/ebay_strategies/

I also advise you the book written by its author (eBay strategies), it is definitely really good (and so is his book on shopping comparators, you know I love this market)

Silverlight? (Rich Media framework by MS allowing graphic designers to build innovative websites & software developers to move on to the web) I believe Silverlight open s new horizons in the eCommerce industry

Zorgloob (in French)? an excellent blog dedicated to Google

What’s the address of the blog dedicated to eBay’s strategy again?

I think it is not only the fact that Google dominates its markets which prevents it from a downturn, but also the diversification of the portfolio in all ad markets. Even if the ad market experiences a downturn as a whole, some formats will keep on booming without a doubt (rich media / video).

In terms on pricing, you are perfectly right (it is also called Cost per Action to include all non transactional models ) as CPA allows advertisers to manage perfectly their ROI, which is not at all the case with CPC. It is particularly right in shopping comparison advertising: Twenga (new big entrant in price comparison) is grasping market shares by proposing CPA to merchants (while most of other leaders stick to CPC).

Just 2 small remarks though:

1) that’s right, Google does a great job at covering all aspects of on- and off-line advertising and I agree with you on the fact that Google has managed to execute one strategy using many different channels.

2) Google hasn’t suffered since it started monetizing its search capabilities any economic downturn (introduction of AdWords = 2001; bubble burst in 2001 as well – so crisis corresponds to testing the new model really). It would be interesting to see how the business model faces tough economic times. I think Google dominates so much its markets that a crisis wouldn’t have such a big impact. What do you think?

PS: in terms of pricing, it looks to me as if Cost per Transaction is the new model on the blocks. But I might be wrong on this.