Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 14:58 UTC
In the News It is no secret that Microsoft is doing whatever it can to eat away at Google's immense market share of the search market, with Bing being its most ambitious effort yet. Well, it seems the battle just got a whole lot dirtier, as The Financial Times has uncovered news that Microsoft has approached several news content providers, offering them money if they "de-index" their sites from Google.
Thread beginning with comment 395955
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Buisness in the US
by Cody Evans on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 15:06 UTC
Cody Evans
Member since:
2009-08-14

Thats business in the US for you.
"Why spend money to improve your product when you can spend money to hurt your competitor's product."

Reply Score: 13

RE: Buisness in the US
by linumax on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 15:38 in reply to "Buisness in the US"
linumax Member since:
2007-02-07

The two are not mutually exclusive and I'm sure Microsoft will be able to afford both at the same time.

Hurting your competitor is every day business. Sometimes with commercials (Apple, Verizon, etc.) and sometimes through stealing customers or content providers by providing financial incentives.

I don't see anything out of ordinary here. Microsoft is buying exclusive content, no different from exclusive games on consoles.

Is it all to us, as in end-users' benefit? Well, that is debatable, but generally speaking the more heated the competition the better. I don't like a Google monopoly on search as much as I don't like a Microsoft monopoly on Operating Systems.

Edited 2009-11-23 15:41 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Buisness in the US
by Praxis on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 16:17 in reply to "RE: Buisness in the US"
Praxis Member since:
2009-09-17

While I have no real objection to google somehow loosing marketshare by competition, I do have a problem with the internet becoming less open. I do not want to see sections of the internet becoming walled off behind bing or google or whoever pays the most money. Heck stuff like this is what people made people scared of a search monopoly in the first place, they just never though it wouldn't come from the guy in first. If this deal of goes through I won't be using Bing. Though as aside if this actually happened I don't think I would notice without being told, I don't search for news corp websites in the search engine, I search for current stories and go to the ones that are near the top of the list, whoever they may be, if I wanted a specific site I would have gone to that site first and not bothered with the search engine.

Also I'm wondering how much Microsoft is gonna have to pay these guys, their business model is dying because the ad market has changed, not because of google search or google news (google ad sense on the other hand...) the money Mircosoft hands out is either going to be a drop in the bucket compared to their losses from dropping ad revenue and subscribers, or Microsoft will end up bankrolling the entire news industry, not just for America but for Europe as well since they have been just as mad at 'google' for 'killing' their business.. That could create its own problems with Microsoft having an unreasonable amount of control over the news industry. I am way more worried about all of this than google's search monopoly, they just sell ads and have no financial interest in who tops the search results, with Bing there will be a lot of money changing hands.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Buisness in the US
by tomcat on Tue 24th Nov 2009 00:40 in reply to "Buisness in the US"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Thats business in the US for you. "Why spend money to improve your product when you can spend money to hurt your competitor's product."


I think you've got that backwards. Without content to index, Google's business is ZILCH. Zip. Nada. It doesn't exist. But here's the problem: Google doesn't want to pay NewsCorp -- or practically anyone else -- for the content that makes Google rich. If I were a content provider as vast as NewsCorp, I'd tell Google to scr*w themselves, and try to work an exclusive deal with another search engine -- just like NewsCorp is doing. Believe me: This will get Google's attention. It's going to have to start sharing the revenue stream for premium content, whether it likes it or not.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Buisness in the US
by Johnny on Tue 24th Nov 2009 03:16 in reply to "RE: Buisness in the US"
Johnny Member since:
2009-08-15

I think you've got that backwards. Without content to index, Google's business is ZILCH. Zip. Nada.


Tom,
I think you've got it wrong. Without exposure by google, any website is ZILCH. zip. Nada. The *primary* reference to commercial websites is Google. Google. Google. Without google, any commercial website can expect it's traffic to drop significantly. Google is the dog. Everybody else are the tails. If you want to make money on the net you need to talk to Google. Here's an idea: why not ask Thom how much traffic to osnews.com comes from Google?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Buisness in the US
by l3v1 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 09:07 in reply to "RE: Buisness in the US"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

If I were a content provider as vast as NewsCorp, I'd tell Google to scr*w themselves


A bit peculiar, that argument. If you were a content provider and there would be no Google to deliver your content as results to user queries, then many users wouldn't know about your content. We're well past that age of the Internet where a few dozen sites provided contents that everyone knew about. Yes, you could advertise in printed media, tv, or street ads, but that wouldn't be as effective. Telling your cash cow to screw itself would mean screwing yourself, which I don't think you're really after.

Reply Parent Score: 2