Google in Hungary and search as such

How is SEM developing in Hungary?

How is Google generating revenue on YouTube?

Posted by Annplugged on January 26, 2007

Marissa Mayer’s answer is ‘we don’t know, we are still experimenting.’ (Digital, Life, Design conference, Munich: DLD07)

On Jan 25 2006 the first step towards actually integrating YouTube into Google’s products was taken: if you make a search query on Google Video, you’ll see loads of YouTube shots.

Liz Gannes on NewTeeVee is asking why is it worth running two video sites? (“why take a sidetrip to a search engine when you’ll end up on YouTube anyway?”)

In my opinion, that’s why:

As for running two sites (one for YouTube and one for Google video search): I think it is totally reasonable and profitable.

  • Reason 1: they have different profiles, roles, images as defined by Google (as Salar Kamangar put it, one for content the other for search – the options in AdWords)
  • Reason 2: with two brands you have more scope for experimenting
  • Reason 3: the combination of the above two

From the user’s point of view:

On YouTube you accidentally ‘stumble upon’ and interact

On Google video search you purposefully search and spend no time on socializing

From the media point of view:

YouTube functions as a content site of Google’s content network with a distinct community and with more scope for applying, testing various ad formats. And these tests, mind you, will be less affecting Google brand, as YouTube is separate. So video shots interrupted by an ad on YouTube will not clash with Google’s aim to ‘enhance user experience,’ because it is not Google. Being intrusive on YouTube while ‘finding out how to reduce being intrusive to the minimum’ works on the YouTube brand better and safer.

How they are carrying out video ads is absolutely an exciting question. When Marissa Mayer was asked about it at Digital Life Design conference (DLD07) in Munich, she said they are experimenting and gathering data, feedback, etc. on what works best. See: http://videos.dld-conference.com/ (day: Jan 23, The Billion Dollar Bubble). “There are lots of different business models… Maybe it means the user needs pay directly for the service, maybe it means advertisers will pay more…advertisers are good at valuing those eyeballs.” i.e. Advertisers will say how much it is worth them (even bidding?)

It is baffling though why haven’t they improved the searches (awful results pages, no need to describe them). Also, why haven’t they tried to experiment with dividing YouTube into two main columns as they do on Google search results pages: one column for organic video search and one for sponsored videos with bid management – based on similar principles to search algorithm.

But maybe this division is coming on Google video search – which, as a separate site, is of course worth being kept, if it works as an aggregator, and it will work as an aggregator indexing all sources they can/ are allowed to – with no social networking features, focusing on search, and potentially, with a differentiated method of generating ad revenue. One thing is sure, however, based on Google’s policy, I think it is out of question that Google could afford to be a biased video search engine – users’ trust is their biggest asset (besides lava lamps). So there is no way that they could push YouTube videos ahead of videos hosted on other sites.

 

Advertisements

3 Responses to “How is Google generating revenue on YouTube?”

  1. Liz Gannes said

    Hi Anna,

    Thanks for the thoughtful response. I want to clarify one thing, though. My question about taking a sidetrip to a search engine was not so much a criticism of Google maintaining two sites. After all, Google and YouTube are now one and the same company. My point was more that the high proportion of video on YouTube/Google makes the concept of video search less interesting.

    Google Video is now, as another NTV commenter points out, search as applied to a controlled index, rather than search that results from crawling all the content out there. I would assume Google will start crawling for video, but today it’s pretty productive to just look through the two sites it owns.

    Liz

  2. Liz, thanks for your clarification, but I still do not get it. 🙂

    “the high proportion of video on YouTube/Google makes the concept of video search less interesting.” Quite on the contrary. Lots of stuff (video) makes the concept of (video) search crucial/competitive advantage. Especially in growing competition.

    If YouTube was cloned, and equipped with an excellent search algorithm, it would take away those millions of eyeballs in the long run from the present YouTube. In a better site’ e.g. I could
    a, see the best quality Colbert report,
    b, of the exact date I am looking for,
    c, in a mobile version,
    d, and in the original version (not a home video response),
    e, in black and white (if at all) etc.
    to mention but a few problems Google needs to deal with.

    On Google Video and YouTube: check these keywords:
    colbert, -report, -stephen, -steven
    I still get results with Stephen Colbert, although I pretended to search for ‘any other colbert but the guy from s.c. report’ because the system is not good enough. The negative search was only able to filter what the accompanying text is, and not the video. It is still not 100% performance, not clever enough. It did not recognize a cultural product of ‘s.c. report’ – yet (!).

    And yes, Google will start crawling for video. No assumption: explicitly stated intention by Google VP Product Management, Salar Kamangar. Should have done so a lot earlier, in fact.

    And it is also true in a way that G and Yt are ‘one company’, but maybe it’s more precise to say that G has decided to launch two kinds of video services: G Video (self developed) and Yt (buy-up), and they will be both in competition for users’ eyeballs, and in complementary relationship regarding users’ intentions and advertiser’s preferences.

    (I don’t know if we are still talking at cross purposes. 🙂 Help me to understand better what you mean.)

  3. Good blog! I really love how it is easy on my eyes and
    the data are well written. I’m wondering how I might
    be notified whenever a new post has been made. I have subscribed
    to your feed which must do the trick! Have a nice
    day!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: