abnabooks Chapter 203 Hesitation and Plagiarism
Chapter 203 Hesitation and Plagiarism
Chapter 203 Hesitation and Plagiarism
Leam Lyman left, carrying Ernst's instructions, and departed Mountain View to continue his wrangling with those capitalist institutions.
The impact of Google's AdWords (GG) system continues and is spreading outwards.
A somber atmosphere pervades Yahoo's headquarters in Sunnyvale.
This company, which once symbolized revenue in the internet industry, now appears somewhat gloomy due to the rise of Google AdWords.
The atmosphere in the conference room was so tense that it felt like a storm was about to break out. The air seemed to freeze, and everyone was breathing cautiously.
All the company's top executives were present. These decision-makers, who were usually so spirited and witty, were now sitting in their seats with serious expressions. Their eyes were fixed on the Google AdWords data report projected on the projector, as if drawn by a magnet. The strings of data were like thorns piercing the hearts of each of them.
Ivan, the manager in charge of market research, broke the silence first, his voice tinged with undisguised seriousness: "Gentlemen, I'm sure you've all seen this data report. The achievements of Google's AdWords GG system in the market are so remarkable that even describing them as astonishing would be an understatement."
"Their Google Ads campaign has completely revolutionized our understanding. The Google Ads content is highly relevant to users' search topics, as if it were tailor-made for them. The direct result of this precise targeting is an explosive increase in Google Ads click-through rates. More importantly, the conversion rate after users click is also astonishingly high, which was unimaginable in the previous Google Ads model."
He paused, seemingly to calm his inner turmoil, before continuing, "What puts even more pressure on us is that, according to information I've gathered from various sources, many large brands have already set their sights on Google's AdWordsGG."
"These brands used to be key clients that we competed for with other competitors, but now they're turning their attention to AdWords."
They have shown great interest, and many are even actively considering contacting Google.
"Imagine if all these major clients actually switched to Google Mobility, Google's GG revenue would definitely experience explosive growth." As soon as he finished speaking, the conference room fell silent again, with only the faint sound from the projector remaining.
Yahoo founder Jerry Yang frowned, his once relaxed brows now clouded with worry. His fingers unconsciously tapped lightly on the smooth conference table, each tap seeming to strike the hearts of everyone present.
The company executives present all looked very serious. They were all veterans who had been in the business world for many years, and they naturally understood that once Google's model gained a foothold in the market and achieved economies of scale, it would inevitably have an impact on Yahoo's GG business, on which it depended for survival.
After a long silence, someone finally spoke up, their tone tinged with confusion and worry: "Is the GG model we've relied on still worth continuing under the impact of Google AdWords?"
"Google's website design is clean and simple, without too many complicated elements, so users are not disturbed during use. This has led to a steady increase in their user base. But what about us? Our Google, in its excessive pursuit of exposure, has become increasingly intrusive, with pop-up ads and banner ads everywhere, and users' resentment towards this is growing day by day."
These words, like drops of boiling oil, instantly sparked a heated discussion in the conference room.
Someone immediately chimed in, "That's right. Banner graphics and pop-up graphics are obviously not very appealing, and this isn't just a problem at Yahoo; almost every internet company is caught in this vicious cycle."
Web pages are filled with a large number of irrelevant and annoying banner ads and pop-ups, a common phenomenon in all internet companies.
However, regardless of whether these tools are useful to users, they receive very few clicks and generate very little revenue.
Not only are users dissatisfied, but even Google servers have complaints, which is why the cost of Google services on the Internet is not going up.
But Google's AdWordsGG is like a ray of light in the darkness, just like the slogan they shouted at their launch event: "GG is no longer a nuisance."
It cleverly places GG on the right side of the search results, occupying a very small space and not interfering with the user's reading of the main text at all.
In particular, precise targeting has greatly increased conversion efficiency, creating a huge gap between them and all other internet companies.
But is this a reason for Yahoo to change its GG model? Change is easier said than done; it involves a series of complex issues such as corporate strategy, technology research and development, capital investment, and market response.
Faced with such a momentous decision, who would dare to make it lightly? Even internally, there was no consensus.
At this point, CFO Jimmy stepped forward, his face showing firm opposition: "From a financial perspective, Google has indeed delivered a very impressive performance report since the launch of AdWords. But that doesn't mean Yahoo should blindly follow suit and change its current GG model."
"Don't forget, even though Google has left us behind in terms of GG revenue, it's still Google."
Today, even Yahoo itself has to admit that it is not on the same level as Google and cannot be compared at all.
Although the two companies are not in the same competitive field, user numbers are fundamental, and Yahoo cannot compare with Google in this respect.
With a larger user base, isn't it only natural that Google earns more GG revenue?
He continued, "More importantly, Yahoo's monthly Google revenue is steadily increasing, and the company's financial situation is excellent. Given this favorable situation, why risk changing our profit model?"
"It's important to understand that any change carries risks. If problems arise, it can not only affect the company's revenue but also trigger a series of chain reactions. In particular, those Wall Street representatives who only care about short-term interests are most concerned about the company's short-term performance and stock price fluctuations. They will absolutely not support a move like changing the GG model, which could affect short-term profits."
As soon as Jimmy finished speaking, someone immediately stood up and echoed, "Jimmy is absolutely right! Changing things is easier said than done."
Google has always invested heavily in technological research and development. Their keyword matching technology is far ahead of ours, and AdWords has formed its own complete ecosystem.
"If we want to emulate Google now, we're practically starting from scratch. This requires a huge investment in technology research and development, team building, and marketing. Such a large investment will inevitably reduce the company's revenue significantly. If revenue declines and the stock price crashes, who will bear the responsibility?"
"And there's another very important issue," another executive added. "If we follow suit and change the GG model now, we'll be labeled as imitators. The internet industry's biggest taboo is a lack of innovation. Once we're labeled that way, it will not only affect the company's brand image but also give competitors an opportunity. They will definitely take the chance to criticize us, saying that we don't have our own core technologies and innovation capabilities and can only follow in others' footsteps. This will cause great damage to our company's reputation and market competitiveness."
Just as voices supporting maintaining the status quo were gaining the upper hand, some people raised different opinions: "Although everyone's points have some merit, we cannot only see the immediate benefits and ignore the potential crises. The current GG method does indeed cause great trouble for users, that is an indisputable fact."
"In the past, all internet companies did this, and we could take it as the industry norm and not think much of it. But now it's different. Google's emergence has broken this norm. They won the approval of users and Google users with a superior Google model. If we don't change now, who can guarantee that our competitors won't follow Google's example?"
"Once other competitors make changes and launch a GG system similar to AdWords, our users will inevitably suffer a large loss, and GG revenue will naturally decline significantly."
"Therefore, we must re-examine user needs and at least take some measures to improve user satisfaction. Only in this way can we retain users and lay the foundation for the company's long-term development."
These words shook even those who initially supported maintaining the status quo. Jimmy then spoke again, saying, "Improving user satisfaction is actually quite simple. We can follow Google's example and place Google on the right side of the search page. This way, we don't need to invest heavily in technological upgrades, and we can reduce Google's interference with users to some extent, providing a better experience."
The meeting room remained noisy and filled with endless arguments.
Some people think the plan is too conservative and cannot solve the problem at its root, while others think it is a safer approach that allows for change while mitigating risks.
As for Yahoo's founder Jerry Yang, he maintained his usual style. Faced with such a heated argument, he was unable to make a decision, and his indecisive personality was exposed at this moment.
He sat in his seat for a long time, listening to the argument between the two sides, his expression constantly changing. In the end, he just waved his hand wearily and said, "Let's do it Jimmy's way first and see how it goes."
Yahoo made a hesitant decision when faced with Google's AdWords GG model.
Meanwhile, Bill Gates, far away at Microsoft headquarters, behaved quite differently from Jerry Yang, demonstrating a boldness and decisiveness far exceeding Yang's.
Netscape and Microsoft had initially reached a tacit agreement to sever their partnerships with Google search and cease using Google search, much to Bill Gates' delight.
In his view, this is undoubtedly a heavy blow to Google's search engine business, and may even directly ruin Google's future development in the search field.
He had even begun to fantasize that after Google ran into trouble, Ernst would personally call to beg for mercy, and he would look down on this defeated dog like a proud God, enjoying the glory of the victor.
But to his utter surprise, Google was well-prepared and did not panic despite the joint suppression from Microsoft and Netscape.
The sudden launch of Google Chrome revealed Google's foresight to everyone, with some even suspecting it was a carefully planned strategy.
After all, developing a browser requires a lot of time and effort, and it is obviously illogical that Google could complete the development of a browser and launch it to the market in just a few days.
Therefore, Google Chrome must have been developed in advance, waiting for IE and Netscape to be exhausted in the browser war, and for one of them to be unable to hold on, so that Google could take the opportunity to launch its browser, take over the banner of confrontation, and occupy a place in the browser market.
On the day Google Chrome was released, Bill Gates stood in his office and hurled insults at Ernst, calling him a shameless scoundrel.
But to his surprise, Google not only had a presence in the browser field, but also launched its own profit model.
Even he had to marvel at Google's GG model, which completely broke the shackles of the traditional GG model and opened up a completely new path.
"We must keep up. Judging from Google's experience, the traditional Google model will inevitably fall behind the times and be eliminated by the market; it's only a matter of time. Google's page design is cleaner and more streamlined, providing a better user experience—this is the design style users truly prefer."
"If we don't make changes in time, we will inevitably be abandoned by the market in the end."
His gaze swept over each of the executives present, and he continued, "Although Google currently holds a certain advantage in the technology field, Microsoft also has its own profound foundation and strong resources, and we must not back down because of this."
"We need to re-examine user needs. Whether it's the UI design of the product or the existing Google system, we need to make sweeping reforms. In particular, the Google system must be adjusted as soon as possible to make Google content more aligned with user search content, improve Google's accuracy and conversion rate. Only in this way can we take the initiative in the competition with Google."
Microsoft is a large and powerful company, but it's going into the browser business to make money, not to lose money.
How do free browsers make money? Google's fees basically determine everything.
Since the split between Microsoft and Google, Bill Gates has regarded Ernst as his biggest enemy. He is both angry at Google's speed of development and innovation, and has to admit that Google is powerful.
In his view, Google has indeed seen further and moved more steadily than Microsoft in the field of Internet application software.
However, Microsoft is not without its own trump card, namely the enormous strategic value of its operating system.
In terms of browsers, IE's technology may not be as advanced as Google's for the time being, but we can invest huge sums of money in technology research and development and marketing, so at least we can catch up.
But what about the system platform? Does Google really dare to rashly enter the operating system field and compete with Microsoft?
If Ernst really had such thoughts, he would be laughing in his sleep, because that would be courting death.
Because of the impact of Google's AdWords GG system, not only Yahoo and Microsoft, but almost all Internet companies are now in a dilemma.
Is the investment similar to Google's? Money is the issue.
Should they continue down this path to ruin? They know it's a dead end.
>