NY Times as Yahoo Armchair CEO for Jerry Yang

The New York Times columnist Joe Nocera gives Jerry Yang a good talking down to in this week's "Talking Business" column titled, "Oh Jerry, It’s No Longer Your Baby". Lots of smug armchair CEO pretend-you-know-best blather here. Nocera may believe he understands search - but his expertise is corporate business affairs.

While it may seem like a sort of fun exercise in word play which treats a major CEO as a poor dumb shortsighted child, it is far more powerful when published in an International publication like the New York Times.Yang could be ousted by the board Monday morning because Nocera has verbally abused him (and therefore Yahoo) on that very big stage. So while Jerry can take his billions and retire comfortably as suggested in the column - Nocera can grin and gloat that he spoke his mind.

Yahoo search may be brought to it's knees if they have yet another leadership change before they can get down to business accomplishing all the things initiated under Yang in the past year since he took over for Terry Semel. I've liked what I've seen since Yang took over (despite the massive distraction of fending off Microsoft for 5 months). Give the man some time to implement those ideas and prove the value of his new initiatives.

I've said here on several occasions that I believe the new Yahoo Open Strategy (YOS) will have a hugely positive effect on the company and strongly believe that the new "Social" Yahoo is promising beyond all previous initiatives there.

Now that Ballmer and company have stopped, we can only hope that the proxy fight promised by Icahn will be dropped and if smug columnists who would run a major corporation remotely from their office 3000 miles away would back off and stay out of the mix - perhaps Jerry could do his job.

I see YOS as the best hope for massive success for Yahoo and not one person at Microsoft, nor nasty corporate raiders, nor smug columnists has any concept of how powerful an idea it is. They need to stop trying to bomb and burn down the house of Yahoo and give Jerry some space.

Yahoo Open Strategy Unchained as Microsoft Wilts

Microsoft is backing off of the takeover attempt on YAHOO! So glad to hear it. The cultures clash, the combination would have been absurdly bad for search and Yahoo can now fully embrace and promote the YOS! (Yahoo Open Strategy) concept they've been discussing since the San Francisco Web 2.0 conference about six weeks ago.

I'm also glad to see that the silly Carl Icahn tantrum is over, and they he probably lost big money on the dumb proxy fight move. What was he thinking?

I've not been a fan of Yahoo due to their odd monetization and content corralling practices in which they insist on hosting content produced by others so they can advertise around it - and not even link back to the content producers in most cases. No wonder they weren't liked by most SEO's - they won't give links. They bought dozens of companies to gain the audience share, but let them die over time.

BUT! I've been excited by the prospects discussed at Web 2.0 by Yahoo around opening the network to developers and the ideas of others. It's a social network play that deserves to succeed in it's own way - a way that will be mostly determined by how freely those external developers and partners are allowed to create and explore the Yahoo network through YOS!

Microsoft / Yahoo Merger Off: Ballmer Walks Away

Well, it's over, thank goodness. Microsoft has walked away from their unsolicited bid for Yahoo. Whew! Deep sigh of relief from many Yahoo senior employees. But predictions are for an ugly day on Wall Street for Yahoo Monday morning - with a potential return by Microsoft with a lower bid after Yahoo tanks in the markets.

It's frustrating to those of us who love search to watch this epic battle, knowing that Microhoo may yet emerge from the burning embers. I commented in my last post that the Yahoo Open Strategy announced by Ari Balogh last week at Web 2.0 introduced some exciting prospects for the future of search if they can successfully pull it off and Microsoft doesn't win the merger through a lower offer and proxy battle. Well nobody has even commented in the news about the effect the YOS could have, not even Microsoft.

Maybe I'm way off base with this one, but I'm going to stick to my assertions until we see how this all shakes out. If Yahoo survives to stand on it's own and can put together the strategy for opening up their entire network to developers in a sweeping move like they've outlined - I predict that Yahoo could overtake Google in two years - but only if Google stands still and watches - which is not likely either.

Danny Sullivan has an excellent analysis and commentary on the Microsoft / Yahoo / Microhoo battle. I'm surprised that he didn't bring up Yahoo Open Strategy either - is it because nobody expects them to survive to see where that could take them? What if the merger happened - would Ballmer nix YOS?

I'm no Yahoo fan. I've disliked their strategy for years, I hate how they buy up companies and then kill them off or let them die within Yahoo, I can't believe they didn't leverage GeoCities and Yahoo Groups to become a social networking leader. I'm astonished that they aren't more profitable than they are because they emphasize monetization above audience satisfaction and utility. (Yahoo mail still doesn't allow pop access unless you pay for it when gmail allows this access, even using imap.) So I don't use my Yahoo mail account except to log in to the few services I use like MyBlogLog, Yahoo Groups and Flickr.

The public seems completely uninterested in the whole thing if Google Trends is any indication. The chart showing searches for the story and news stories seem to drive little interest. (click to enlarge)

Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!

Well - I will once again throw out a cautious cheer for Yahoo and hope that they survive the Wall Street rollercoaster to pursue Yahoo Open Strategy as it is their best hope for a true contribution to search. Without YOS - it's over for Yahoo IMHO.

Yahoo Open Strategy a Volley Against Microsoft?

Yahoo announced last week at the Web 2.0 conference that they are opening up their entire network to developers to build apps and mashups. The announcement was covered by Greg Sterling for SearchEngineLand and the brief 14 minute announcement and explanation by Yahoo CTO Ari Baolgh has been covered by very well by Michael Arrington at TechCrunch. There's also a wonderfully prescient view from Loren Baker at SearchEngineJournal - from a YEAR ago, which he looks at again in the light of Yahoo announcements this past week.

Here's a video of the Ari Baolgh Web 2.0 Keynote presentation, thanks to Yahoo Video:

I got to attend a later, Friday Web 2.0 presentation titled "Yahoo! and Open Platforms, A Deeper Dive by Yahoo Chief Architect of Platforms, Neal Sample, who delivered as promised with a presentation on how the whole Yahoo Network, including Yahoo Mail, Flickr, Answers, etc. all get reworked and rejiggered to make this one massive Social experiment.

I've taken a look elsewhere at the Y!OS or Yahoo Open Strategy idea through the lens of privacy concerns this may raise for the 500 Million claimed Yahoo users.

But privacy issues aside here, this announcement could truly gain Yahoo an increased bid from Microsoft now that the MSFT deadline for a response from Yahoo has come and gone this past weekend. Watching the video above, one has to imagine Balogh seeing this as a presentation directly to Microsoft and picturing the camera as Steve Ballmer - the video being made available first to Michael Arrington at TechCrunch (hmmm what Yahoo strategy!), who put it well in his coverage, saying:

They still, of course, have to actually launch this massive project - for now it’s all ideas and vaporware. And no one knows what Microsoft thinks of all this, or what happens to YOS if that deal is done.

Now let's see how the press reacts Monday morning and what noises Microsoft makes in light of these Yahoo announcements. Microsoft invested $240 Million in Facebook not long after they announced a much smaller scale "Open" strategy, that's the same Facebook which is not even participating in the Google Open Social model - but Yahoo is participating and - one might argue - leading in this monstrous experiment that must have Microsoft groaning in agony.

Microsoft, open? They gotta hate this Yahoo Open Strategy (YOS) idea. Google moves to undermine Microsoft on Google Docs, Yahoo moves to undermine Microsoft takeover bid by open-sourcing their entire network (hmmm what Yahoo strategy!).

Despite my privacy concerns, I'm excited at what this may mean for search in general - not just for Yahoo - but for the web and how search works. I've been critical of Yahoo for their massive acquisitiveness in the past and have never understood how they failed to take advantage of their massive audience to become a social networking leader (Geocities anyone?).

This is big and I can't imagine how this could fail to evolve search and social media. It will affect everyone if they pull it off successfully and if Microsoft doesn't screw it all up for them with a proxy battle and eventual win.

I never could have imagined myself in a position to cheer for Yahoo, but I may ... I just may. ;-)

$299 Yahoo Directory Paid Link Worth Every Penny

I originally wrote the article below in August of 2005, note the copyright date at the bottom. But I was nudged to republish it after seeing a Sphinn post discussing the value of a Yahoo text link.

My three-year-old, but still true article follows:

Last week a client called me excitedly exclaiming that their Google PageRank had jumped a notch and their targeted keyword term now ranked #23 (up from #45) for their competitive search phrase. I asked the client if he'd been notified by Yahoo that his site was now included in the index after we had submitted it three weeks ago. "Yes," he said, "but why are you changing the subject?"

"I'm not changing the subject. Inclusion in Yahoo Directory is the most likely reason for the jump in both your search position and your PageRank. Remember when you doubted the value of inclusion in the Yahoo Directory and I pushed for submission anyway? Now you know why I insisted."

That seemingly expensive Yahoo Directory listing has one little known benefit to your website. It is the most important and valuable text link you could ever purchase. That one link from one source will do your ranking more good than any other single link (except possibly the Open Directory).

Many webmasters look at potential traffic referred from the Yahoo Directory as the determining factor for submissions, when that is not the best reason for inclusion - It's the link value that matters above all else in this case.

I've had several SEO clients see a leap in ranking for targeted search terms a week or so after that Yahoo Directory link goes live for them. Many clients have argued with me about the value of that Yahoo Directory text link. But at $299, the yearly fee is cheaper than many of those commercial text link ads sites and does far more for your ranking in search engines OTHER than Yahoo.

Why? It's purely the value of that link. Search engines know that only sites of a certain quality level will submit and get accepted into Yahoo Directory. They know that serious businesses will pay that yearly fee, while marginal or hobby sites will not pay that $299 every year. Surely there is some level of value assigned in search algorithms to inclusion in the Yahoo Directory.

It's a little known technique for gains in ranking which is based purely on empirical observation over time. But the result of inclusion in the Yahoo Directory is the same for every client, every time - their PageRank ratchets up and targeted search terms suddenly take a big jump just a week or two after inclusion. The same is true of inclusion in the free Open Directory Project at http://DMOZ.org .

I've seen client sites jump from positions on page three at MSN search to top 5 positions on page one of the MSN SERP's following inclusion in the Yahoo Directory. Now we are submitting this same client to the Open Directory for the 5th time in as many months hoping for elusive editors to add the site, leading to another jump in search position and PageRank if and when they get around to adding the site to the DMOZ database.

You do know that Google uses that Open Directory listing in their own directory, don't you? It's worth submitting and resubmitting until they finally include your site. It really is worth the trouble to keep trying, no matter how long they ignore your submissions.

One caveat always applies to Directory submissions! They must be done with great care applied to keyword phrases used in the site description. That single line of text you submit in the "Site Description" text box on the submission page will strongly affect your keyword phrase ranking in OTHER search engines for a very long time.

Take care in crafting a keyword rich and effective description for your site. I always request that clients either have me submit for them or use text I've written for them in that description. If you do it badly, it will be re-written by an editor who cares more for categorization than keyword rankings. Be Careful!

Before you run off begging for reciprocal links from slick webmasters or purchasing text links of dubious value from text link outfits, submit to Yahoo Directory and pay the $299 (or $24.92 monthly) for the most undervalued text link available. Then swallow your pride and re-submit to the Open Directory until they finally include your site.

Rock your rank with dynamite text links! Yahoo Directory and the Open Directory Project.

Copyright © August 23, 2005

Mike Banks Valentine blogs on SEO at: http://RealitySEO.com/

Universal & Blended Search at SES San Jose

The Search Engine Strategies session on Universal and Blended Search was the highlight of the day at SES on Monday. A great panel made up of a cross section of industry luminaries made for stimulating and varied discussion of one of the biggest things to launch in search for years. Panelist Greg Jarboe of SEO-PR suggested that Universal search is a huge development and rivals the Google Florida update.

Jarboe showed some screenshots including recent phrases in the news done NOT at Google News, but at Google standard search. A half dozen examples brought up in various combinations - news story results (with photo thumbnail), videos, photos, blog results, maps, images and onebox results. The position of each of those in the rankings varied, but news and maps were usually nearer the top or at the top, with video results hovering around the middle of the page and blog results, photos (from image search) at the bottom of the page.

While we've heard the term "Google Universal Search" used quite often, this is the first time I've heard it shortened to "G.U.S." Sherwood Stanieri of Catalyst Online followed Jarboe and discussed how universal and blended search affects video in the rankings. In researching how positions in the top 10 results change but show inconsistencies in how their rank was determined by relating those results to pagerank, number of views of those videos and numbers of comments to those videos on social sites and finally, the popularity of the topic searched on.

In Universal search it appears that Google "Hot Topics" (formerly Zeitgeist) is a part of the algo since those topics spiking in popularity will bring up video results more often if they are on that list (and likely photos, news and relevant blog posts).

Bill Slawski of SEO by the Sea was up next and pulled his expected studious dissecting of search patents into the discussion. While I'd love to say I did follow a few of his examples and agree with his conclusions and assertions - I can't outline them effectively here as they seemed to bounce around a bit, pulling bits and pieces out of published patent here and there and back to his own findings, then to search results.

Google engineer David Bailey leads the Universal Search effort and summed up his thoughts on what Universal Search means to SEO by saying "Business as Usual". OK David, I happen to agree, but couldn't you expand a bit? Tim Mayer of Yahoo briefly how Yahoo's Blended search intent was to improve user experience, but to me it appeared that Yahoo intends to do all they can to keep searchers on the Yahoo site, with pop-up windows, shortcuts to the giants of ebiz and exclude all but their own pages from click-throughs. Eric Collier of Ask talked about their new 3D search, and how fewer users moved to page two of results, suggesting better relevancy of page one results.

I'll reiterate what David Bailey had to say "Business as Usual" when it comes to SEO - Google improves results and sends more searchers to relevant sites, Yahoo keeps users on their site and Ask works pretty well, but can't get a handle on a substantial market.

Mike Valentine is an SEO Specialist offering occassional commentary on Search Engine Developments through his Reality SEO Blog and developed WebSite101 Small Business Ecommerce Tutorial in 1999 to help educate the little guy to the intricacies of online business.

YahooSoft or MicroHoo! How to Beat Google

MarketWatch discussed the merger talks between Microsoft and Yahoo today. The states headline states flatly 'YahooSoft' not enough to take on Google!

That analysis is no doubt galling to both companies. Both have failed to gain significant market share of search, despite what seems like endless acquistions activity by Yahoo and confident Microsoft promises to build their own better system for search.

MSN was stung by Google's winning $3.1 billion bid for DoubleClick last month (even though MSN reportedly made a higher offer) and while Yahoo countered by buying another Ad server, Microsoft counters by offering once again to buy Yahoo. Fact is, neither approach is likely to work to wrest control of market share from Google. My favorite quote from the MarketWatch story is:

"Here are two companies that are bad at the same thing," said Scott Kessler of Standard & Poor's. "With a merger, you get one company still bad at doing that same thing."

Wow, that about sums it up. But what is the solution for the two? It seems odd that the #3 player is talking of buying the #2 player and combined (a generously estimated 38% combined total), their reach would still smaller than the competitor they both want to take on.

I've poked fun of both Yahoo and MSN for years for various reasons, most have to do with a lack of focus or for putting monetization above utility of tools and services and all of their flailing about.

It's simple guys. Build or buy a great service, not a service designed to take market share, not a service you can leverage to beat the competition, not a service that mimics Google - just build something that works well and that you have a passion for. Something that is just too cool and everyone wants to use. Make it popular first, THEN monetize it Are you listening Yahoo? Or is it going to be MicroHoo?

Mike Valentine is an SEO Specialist offering occassional commentary on Search Engine Developments through his Reality SEO Blog and developed WebSite101 Small Business Ecommerce Tutorial in 1999 to help educate the little guy to the intricacies of online business.