More random observations on Web 2.0 developments over the last week or two:
- I think Google has perhaps gotten too cute with Adwords. I tried publishing some ads there recently for some keywords where nobody was advertising. My ads never saw the light of day because Google wanted $5/click… for ad space with tons of inventory and no bidders. Back in the day, if nobody was bidding on a keyword, you could get it for a nickel. I can't decide whether or not I think this maximizes their revenue or keeps them from making millions by scraping nickels off the sidewalk.
- I know there haven't been any tech IPOs in a long time, but I wonder if that trend won't change over the next 12-24 months. These things are cyclical… and I think people are now regrouping after the triple whammy of the tech bust/Sarbanes-Oxley/investor focus on real estate. All the while, a number of prominent Web 2.0 companies are continuing to grow stronger every day, especially the social networks.
- I can't tell you how many derogatory comments I get from Microsoft people about clouds built by Google & Amazon. All the while, Microsoft is building its own cloud. Hysterical.
- I get blog searching now more than ever. I've spent a lot of time looking around the blogosphere for specific things lately… and a really good blog search with a lot of useful filters would really have come in handy.
- Finally, I love Balsamiq… a prototyping tool put together by a single developer down in Silicon Valley. Although I'd love a few more options for programming the prototype & tying screens together, it is nonetheless fantastic.
But perhaps the most interesting thing about Balsamiq is how I found out about it… I received a tweet. The developer programmed a Twitter search where anyone mentioned the word prototype… then he sent each person a tweet asking them to try out the product. Insane. Not to mention, the best internet marketing tactic I've heard of this year. Just brilliant. Check out the Balsamiq blog here for other great internet marketing tips they've used.
It's always refreshing to be reminded that great things can be done by a single person or two.
$5 clicks are a penalty for a low quality score and can sometimes be as high as $10.
http://mikal.org/conclusions/2008/07/google-its-not-all-smiles-and-sunshine.html
If “nobody was advertising” on these keywords, I wonder how relevant your ads or target acutally were. Anyone can run ads for generic keywords like “.com” and get crazy traffic… for about 30 minutes - the point when your quality score drops off the map.
Nice assumption you’re making there… but the quality of my ad was no different than ads I’ve run on & off for almost 7 years. And it was *immediately* disregarded… i.e. the ad didn’t run for a single minute.
I have a different theory re: Adwords. I think GOOG has gotten more aggressive with so-called “quality issues” because they are currently the only game in town. There is simply more revenue available when charging a significantly higher minimum for certain keywords. And what will their customers do? Many of them will just pay.
I think it’s a dangerous game for them.
Chris