Google vs Murdoch
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
Murdoch madness « BuzzMachine
I’ve had a fair number of press calls on the Murdoch/Bing sillliness and here are the points I’ve been making: Were Bing to pay News Corp. to drop Google, it would be a double-play in Google’s favor: Microsoft would lose money and gain little. News Corp. would lose traffic, shifting away from the search engine with more than 60% penetration in the U.S. and more than 80% in the U.K. to one that has 10 percent here – and that’s just the search engine; it doesn’t account for the disparate popularity of Google and Bing News. See this post : WSJ.com would lose 25% of its inbound web traffic, according to Hitwise, which also says that 15% of the people who come to WSJ.com on the web come from Google immediately prior and 12% come from Google News. Would Google be hurt?Murdoch = GOOG
The True Meaning of MSFT-NEWS - Continuations
There are a lot of posts worth reading about the potential impact or lack thereof of a possible deal between Microsoft and News Corp (and maybe other news sources as well), including Danny Sullivan , Jeff Jarvis , Andrew Parker and others. But one thing that I have missed from everything I have read (and it may well be that it’s there and I missed it) is what this is truly all about: the immense competitive pull of Google’s amazing profits! The big challenge for businesses with network effects is how to split the profits pie between themselves and others. One of the reasons that Craigslist is so hard to attack is that Craig has chosen to the give the bulk of the benefits to the network itself (as “ consumer surplus ”) by operating most of Craigslist for free.
Never let it be said that I don’t admit when I’m wrong. I mean, granted, I don’t particularly like being wrong – and I especially don’t like being wrong in the full glare of the public spotlight. But on the vanishingly small number of occasions when – due to some inexplicable glitch in the universe – I happen to be wrong, never let it be said that I don’t admit it. A case in point… I just stumbled across an excellent post by biographer TJ Stiles, calling me out over my claim that hardback books are a ‘cash cow’ for the publishing industry.”Let’s set the record straight,” said Mr Stiles, “publishers (and authors) make much more money from hardcovers, it’s true. That is one reason why they have always delayed the release of cheaper paperbacks.
NSFW: The Madness of King Rupert – I Admit, I Was Wrong About Mu