Yahoo Taps New Chief for Ad Post

Yahoo Inc. hired former Microsoft Corp. executive Joanne Bradford to lead its U.S. advertising sales force, helping to rebuild its executive ranks after a string of high-profile departures.

The Sunnyvale, Calif., company announced the move Tuesday, along with the departure of David Karnstedt, a longtime Yahoo executive and senior vice president of U.S. sales. Mr. Karnstedt is joining venture-capital firm Redpoint Ventures.

Ms. Bradford, who will carry the title of senior vice president of U.S. revenue and market development, inherits a challenging role. Yahoo is struggling to retain its prime position in selling display advertising during tough economic times while pushing out new products. Meanwhile, a number of senior advertising and product executives have left the company in recent months, dampening morale.

In an interview, Ms. Bradford said she was excited by the competitive challenge of helping Yahoo keep up. "It's a time when they can use leadership and different perspective," she said. Her initial plans include spending time with Yahoo's full range of advertisers and working with Yahoo's media group on new premium packages, she said.

Ms. Bradford recently worked as executive vice president of national advertising services for Spot Runner Inc., a closely held Los Angeles firm that uses the Internet to help companies create ads for television. Before that she was a top executive at Microsoft's MSN Internet business -- earning a reputation as a good motivator of her employees who helped Microsoft build strong ties to large advertisers and ad agencies.

Ms. Bradford joined Microsoft in 2001 and was part of a team of executives that helped top management realize that the software company needed to invest more in online advertising. At times she clashed with other executives who fought against the advertising expansion.

For Ms. Bradford, the Yahoo position is a return to a job that she is perhaps most comfortable with: motivating teams of salespeople.

Her appointment comes two weeks before Yahoo plans to step up its attempts to woo advertisers through a series of events and announcements at a major advertising industry conference in New York. Hoping to cast off some of the shadow of negotiations over a sale to Microsoft and investors' frustrations with the board, company executives will be trying to generate interest in its existing offerings and a new advertising technology platform scheduled to roll out later this year.

Ms. Bradford will report to Hilary Schneider, executive vice president of Yahoo U.S. In an interview, Ms. Schneider cited Ms. Bradford's "raw strategic insight" and experience working with customers as evidence she is a good fit for the job. "She's a relationship person," she said.

By: Jessica Vascellary & Robert Guth
Wall Street Journal; September 10, 2008

Big Marketers Challenge Google-Yahoo deal

Some of the country's biggest marketers are rallying to oppose an advertising deal between Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc., as the Justice Department considers whether to go to court to block the agreement.

The Association of National Advertisers, a trade group that represents major companies like Procter & Gamble Co. and General Motors Corp., sent a letter to the Justice Department Thursday calling the deal bad for advertisers and recommending that it be blocked. The group announced the letter on its Web site on Sunday.

The agreement, announced in June, gives Web-search giant Google the right to sell search and other text ads on Yahoo sites, sharing the revenue with Yahoo.

Whether the letter will influence federal antitrust regulators remains unclear, but it is considered a blow to Yahoo and Google because of the trade group's high profile. Until now, big marketers have been reluctant to come out against the deal publicly because of Google's growing power in the ad business.

Some large advertising agencies and midsize advertisers have endorsed the deal, however, saying they think it will make advertising on Yahoo more effective.

But in an interview, Bob Liodice, chief executive of the ANA, said the group believes the ""deal is, on balance, a negative"" for advertisers. The trade group has been studying the proposed arrangement for more than a month. Mr. Liodice said the group is concerned that the deal could raise the price of search advertising. It also is worried about the ""concentration of power"" that the alliance represents, he said. Google and Yahoo agreed not to implement their deal for as long as 3½ months after its announcement to give the Justice Department a chance to review it. But the companies have said they plan to push forward in about a month.

Yahoo said in a statement that the company was ""disappointed"" with the ANA's move but ""remains steadfast in its belief that this deal -- in which prices are determined by demand-driven auctions, and not by collaboration between Yahoo and Google -- will strengthen Yahoo's competitive position in online advertising.""

Google spokesman Adam Kovacevich said ""numerous advertisers"" have supported the agreement, which will help advertisers show more targeted ads across more inventory. ""Advertisers care far more about getting a good return on their advertising dollar than they do about buying cheap ads that don't bring in customers, and this deal will clearly help advertisers reach Yahoo users more efficiently,"" he said.

Yahoo executives are banking on the deal -- struck as Yahoo was seeking alternatives to selling its search business to Microsoft Corp. -- to help dig it out of a multiyear slump and restore investor confidence. Yahoo shares closed Friday at $18.08, down from around $30 after Microsoft's failed $31-a-share bid for the company in January.

Yahoo executives have estimated that the deal, which isn't exclusive and allows Yahoo to select when to use Google ads, could generate $800 million in annual revenue for Yahoo.

Since the partnership was announced in June, many online advertising executives have expressed concerns that it could diminish competition and boost prices in the market for ads that appear alongside search results.

Google and Yahoo dispute that, arguing that since search ads are sold through an auction process, neither company can set prices. U.S., European and Canadian regulators are examining the agreement.

Google and Yahoo combined sell more than 80% of U.S. search ads, which account for the largest part of the online-advertising business. Google alone has more than 70% of that business. The Justice Department has been reviewing the deal for months, questioning some ad executives and advertisers about what it would mean for the advertising business.

The department, which doesn't comment on pending reviews, is gathering depositions and evidence that could be used to block the deal if a decision were made to do so, people close to the matter say. But taking testimony in the course of a review isn't unusual, and does not necessarily indicate antitrust regulators will challenge the agreement.

As they weigh comments from outsiders, regulators often discount the views of competitors who complain about a deal, as Microsoft has done. They are likely, however, to listen closely to customers, in this case major advertisers, so the association's letter could be a significant hurdle.

Microsoft and Michael Kassan, a longtime advertising and media executive who is now consulting for the company, have been lobbying Madison Avenue's advertising and media-buying executives, as well as marketers, to oppose the Yahoo-Google alliance, according to ad executives. In testimony during House and Senate hearings about the deal, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith argued that it would lead to fewer choices and higher prices for advertisers.

Mr. Liodice says that while Microsoft raised its concerns about the deal, that wasn't the reason ANA chose to scrutinize the agreement. ""We don't want to have anyone think that Microsoft was the instigator or influencer"" of this action, he said.

The ANA said it began discussions with its members shortly after the accord was announced. It says it talked several times to both Yahoo and Google.

ANA's board, made up of well-known marketing executives including Brian Perkins, Johnson & Johnson's vice president of corporate affairs; Stephen Quinn, chief marketing officer at Wal-Mart Stores Inc; and Betsy Lazar, executive director of media and advertising for General Motors Corp., approved the group's move.

The ANA has a powerful lobbying arm in Washington, D.C. It has taken an active role in advertising issues, such as defending food companies from growing public pressure to curtail advertising as a way to address rising childhood obesity rates. The trade group has also been heavily involved in defending direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs.

Last year, the group raised questions about Google's acquisition of display-advertising company DoubleClick, petitioning the Federal Trade Commission to review the merger. But the FTC approved the deal.

By: Suzanne Vranica & Jessica Vascellaro
Wall Street Journal; September 8, 2008

Gap Widens in Online Advertising

Rivals Struggle to Catch Up to Google As Buyers Favor Search Ads Over Display


Spending on Internet advertising is climbing at a healthy clip -- rising 20% in the U.S. in the second quarter -- and growth forecasts are strong despite the weak economy. But that growth isn't being enjoyed by everyone.

The gap is widening between spending on simple search ads, Google Inc.'s core turf, and spending on flashier display ads, which companies such as Yahoo Inc. and Microsoft Corp. had hoped to use to gain ground on Google.

Faced with a slowing economy, advertisers are sticking to what they view as the safest way to reach online customers directly: the plain text ads that appear on search-result pages. Search-ad spending is on track to reach $10.4 billion this year, double what will be spent on display ads, according to research firm eMarketer.

That divergence of fortunes may be bad news for companies counting on a comeback for display ads, which ruled the Web in its early days. Though Yahoo and others say they have seen demand for these ads as they introduce technologies that better target the ads, they have been slow to regain favor.

CreditCards.com is typical. Jody Farmer, vice president of strategic marketing for the credit-card portal, says he has experimented with buying display ads. But as the economy tightens, the site, which spent $30 million on online marketing last year, is focusing on search ads. "We have to be a little more thoughtful about how we spend our money," he says.

The trend comes as Google rivals Yahoo, Microsoft and Time Warner Inc.'s AOL have invested billions of dollars in building and buying new display-ad technology to deliver more relevant and engaging ads to users on their sites and on the sites of other Web publishers. They hope to win back advertisers who have poured money into search ads.

Mark Scholz, global search manager for Hewlett-Packard Co.'s printer division, says that while his budget is relatively flat, he is spending more on search ads by pooling together funds from product groups eager for the extra lift they are accustomed to from search campaigns. "In the event there are budget cuts, I am one of the last ones they go after," he says.

Google, with more than 70% of the U.S. search-ad market, has much to gain from the trend. But the Mountain View, Calif., company also has made some big bets on the display business. Google is trying to tap brand advertisers to buy display ads on Google-owned properties such as YouTube and on other sites. Tighter display-ad budgets could hamper that expansion, which it fueled with its acquisition of DoubleClick last year for more than $3 billion.

The gap between Google and its rivals could widen as search grows faster than display. Search ads are forecast to represent 42% of overall U.S. online ad spending in 2008, according to eMarketer, up from 40% in 2007. Display is expected to stay flat, at about 21% of overall spending.

Google's rivals caution that there is a wide mix of display-advertising types and that some are performing well in the current environment. Spending on display ads is forecast to reach $5.2 billion this year, up from $4.5 billion in 2007.

Brad Goldberg, Microsoft's general manager of search, said the company has a number of advertising products for which the tough economic environment is a boon, including a new cash-back shopping search service.

Lynda Clarizio, executive vice president of AOL, says the company has the mix of ads that marketers are looking for in a downturn, even though it doesn't have a traditional search business.

A Yahoo spokesman says investments in new display technologies helped the company meet its financial goals in its most recent quarter, despite the tough economic environment. And he notes that Yahoo's U.S. search businesses is growing briskly as well.

There are signs that search may eventually take a hit too. John Aiken, managing director of research firm Majestic Research, says some smaller businesses have begun cutting back the number of keywords they are buying in recent months, although large marketers continue to spend freely. He says Google is "potentially stretching for dollars," noting that it has begun displaying more ads for some keywords.

Nick Fox, director of business product management at Google, says more ads may be showing up for some keywords because, as advertisers spend more on search, Google has more relevant ads to show. "We are not making any short-term trade-offs," Mr. Fox says.

By: Jessica Vascellaro
Wall Street Journal; September 4, 2008

Yahoo's 5-Year Low Draws Rebound Bets

Shares of Yahoo Inc. slid to a five-year low Thursday, and options traders appeared eager to bet on a rebound.

Trading in Yahoo options leapt to four times the normal level as investors picked up 168,000 calls that allow them to buy the company's stock and 19,000 puts that allow them to sell it, according to Track Data.

Traders convened around October calls for most of the session, showing particular interest in October $25 calls and October $30 calls. The former are priced at about 15 cents and make money if Yahoo shares pull above $25.15 before Oct. 17. Yahoo closed at $17.75 a share, falling 5.4% in 4 p.m. Nasdaq Stock Market composite trading.

Looking further ahead, one trader pursued a "call spread" in January contracts -- buying January $22.50 calls and selling twice as many January $27.50 calls. Priced at about 50 cents, the positions make money if Yahoo climbs above $23.

In many cases, options traders appeared to be getting in position for a noteworthy event that could boost Yahoo's share price, experts said.

With the stock trading well below the $33 price that Microsoft Corp. offered for Yahoo, the company's board -- now staffed with activist investor Carl Icahn and two of his allies -- might feel compelled to oust Chief Executive Jerry Yang, they said.

Other experts said that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer could make another attempt to acquire Yahoo before year's end, which would also prompt an upward move in the company's stock.

"Ballmer might come back when the price gets low enough because he knows he needs the platform," said Paul Foster, a strategist with TheFlyOnTheWall.com.

Several Plays Made in Intel Options

Traders pounced on Intel Corp. amid a broad-based selloff in semiconductor stocks. Intel shares have fallen 10% since last Friday's close, and closed the Thursday session at $20.52, down 4.7%, in 4 p.m. Nasdaq Stock Market trading.

Trading in Intel jumped to three times the normal level Thursday, as investors picked up 168,000 calls as well as 50,000 puts.

While the calls outnumbered puts more than 3 to 1, which suggests bullish activity, most traders appeared to be selling the calls.

They unloaded large numbers of September $21 calls, in particular.

Analysts said the activity suggests that traders think the stock will start to stabilize or that the shares are unlikely to climb above $21 apiece before Sept. 19.

By: Tennille Tracy
Wall Street Journal; September 5, 2008

Mossberg Does Chrome Walk Through

Chrome Offers New Way To Surf Net, as Microsoft Beefs Up Internet Explorer

Google has introduced a new Web browser, called Chrome, aimed at wresting dominance of the browser market from Microsoft's Internet Explorer. The move takes the Google-Microsoft rivalry to a whole new level. If Google succeeds, it will be a big deal, with major ramifications for the future of the Web.

But just how good is Chrome? How does it differ from IE and from less popular, but still important, browsers like Mozilla's Firefox and Apple's Safari?

I've been testing Chrome for about a week, trying out all its features and using it side by side with Microsoft's latest iteration of IE, which came out just last week.

Google's new Chrome Web browser challenges Microsoft's dominance of the browser market, says Walt Mossberg. The Chrome is innovative and smart, but still has some rough edges, he says.

My verdict: Chrome is a smart, innovative browser that, in many common scenarios, will make using the Web faster, easier and less frustrating. But this first version -- which is just a beta, or test, release -- is rough around the edges and lacks some common browser features Google plans to add later. These omissions include a way to manage bookmarks, a command for emailing links and pages directly from the browser, and even a progress bar to show how much of a Web page has loaded.

Chrome's interface has some bold changes from the standard browser design. These new features enhance the Web experience, but they will require some adjustment on the part of users. For instance, Chrome does away with most menus and toolbar icons to give maximum screen space for the Web pages themselves. Also, Google has merged the address bar, where you type in Web addresses, with the search box, where you type in search terms. This unified feature is called the Omnibox.

One striking difference in Chrome is how it handles tabs, which display a single Web page. In Chrome, each tab behaves as a separate browser. The bookmarks bar, Omnibox, menus and toolbar icons are located inside the tab, rather than atop the entire browser. The tabs appear at the top of the computer screen. Chrome also groups related tabs. If you open a new tab from a link in a page that's already open, that new tab appears next to the originating page, rather than at the end of the row of tabs.

Despite Google's claims that Chrome is fast, it was notably slower in my tests at the common task of launching Web pages than either Firefox or Safari. However, it proved faster than the latest version of IE -- also a beta version -- called IE8.

Meanwhile, Microsoft hasn't been sitting still. The second beta version of IE8 is the best edition of Internet Explorer in years. It is packed with new features of its own, some of which are similar to those in Chrome, and some of which, in my view, top Chrome's features.

For example, while IE8 also groups related tabs, it assigns a different color to each such tab group and allows you to close them all with one click. It has a "smart" address box of its own, that drops down a list of suggestions as you type, though it retains a separate search box.

IE8 also has breakthrough privacy features that exceed Chrome's, and includes a new technology called Accelerators, which allows you to take rapid action on any selected word or phrase on a Web page, such as generating a map for a place name, without switching to a new page.

As they develop, each of these browsers has a good chance of besting Firefox 3.0, which I have regarded as the best Web browser for Windows, the only operating system on which Chrome currently runs. But they will have to get faster at loading pages. And, to best Firefox on the Macintosh, Google will have to make good on its promise to produce a Mac version of Chrome, something it says it will do in the coming months. Microsoft has no plans to produce a Mac version of IE8.

Chrome and IE8 are far more advanced than Apple's Safari. Safari is speedy on both Mac and Windows platforms, but lacks many of the key intelligent features of its newer Google and Microsoft rivals.

Why is Google igniting a new browser war? There are two main reasons, and both involve competing with Microsoft. First, the search giant fears that because its search engine and other major products depend on the browser, Microsoft -- with its rival online products -- might be able to gain an advantage by altering the design of IE, which has roughly a 75% market share.

Second, and more important, Google sees the Web as a platform for the software programs, or applications, that currently run directly on computer operating systems, notably Microsoft's Windows. It says current browsers lack the underlying architecture to enable future, more powerful Web applications that will rely more heavily on a common Web programming language called JavaScript. Chrome was designed to be the world's speediest browser at handling JavaScript.

That move might one day make Chrome a sort of online operating system that competes with Windows. "Think of Chrome as more than a simple Web browser," Google declares. "It's a platform for running Web applications."

I tested Chrome, and IE8, on a plain-vanilla Lenovo ThinkPad laptop running Windows XP, and equipped with a modest processor and one gigabyte of memory.

To gauge Chrome's speed at loading Web pages, I launched two large groups of typical Web pages simultaneously, each site opening in its own tab. One group included 15 sports sites, the second 19 news sites. In both tests, Chrome's speed fell in the middle, at 35 and 44 seconds, respectively. IE8 was slower, taking 49 and 75 seconds to open the two groups of sites. But Firefox and Safari were much faster, notching identical speeds of 19 seconds for the 15 sites and 28 seconds for the 19 sites.

Google claims that future, more sophisticated Web applications relying more heavily on JavaScript than today's sites do would run faster on Chrome. Of course, I couldn't test any claim about future scenarios, but I did run Chrome on several JavaScript test sites, used by developers. It handily beat the other browsers. However, Google doesn't claim users would see much difference on current Web application sites.

I also tested Chrome's compatibility with scores of common Web sites. In general, it did well, rendering the sites properly. But I ran into problems with video. Some video sites refused to recognize Chrome, because its development has been a secret. On others, like Major League Baseball's site, videos mostly played properly, but sometimes didn't.

IE8 also has some compatibility issues, for different reasons. It's the first version of Internet Explorer to hew closely to Web standards. Earlier versions used some nonstandard ways of rendering Web sites, prompting some site designers to adopt techniques that made their pages work in IE, but look odd in Firefox and Safari. Now, ironically, these pages also look strange in IE8. So Microsoft was forced to build in a special Compatibility View button that users must click to see the sites properly.

Chrome is built on three core design principles. The first is its spare user interface: just two menus and a handful of toolbar icons. IE introduced a similar approach in its version 7, but with a difference. Microsoft allows users to restore a traditional menu bar; Google doesn't. The only toolbar icon you can add in Chrome is a Home button.

The second principle is that a user can type anything into a single place, the Omnibox, and instantly get suggestions on where to go, gleaned from the user's own browsing history and Google's rankings of popular sites. Whether you type in a Web address or a search term, the Omnibox is very smart. In my tests, it sometimes came up with the right destination after I typed only one or two letters of the name of a site I often visited.

The Omnibox has another cool feature: Tab-to-Search. If you type in the name of another site that includes its own search feature, like Amazon.com, the Omnibox lets you just press the tab key to search within that site, without opening it first. Chrome, through its Options settings, also lets you change the default search engine used by the Omnibox. Instead of Google's own search service, you can use Microsoft's Live search, Yahoo search, or others.

The third big principle behind Chrome is that each tab runs, under the hood, as a separate browser. Tabs can be dragged off the main browser and turned into separate windows. If one tab crashes, the rest of the browser keeps running. But this doesn't work perfectly. In my tests, all of Chrome died on me when I tried watching an Olympics video on the NBC site.

You can even make a tab a standalone application that runs from the Start Menu, or the desktop, as if it was a separate program.

Chrome has a few other key features. When you open a new tab, you don't get a blank page, but a set of thumbnails for your most-visited pages, plus lists of recent search engines you've used, recently used bookmarks and recently closed tabs.

Like other browsers, Chrome puts up a warning when you try to visit a malicious or phony Web site, and it has a private browsing mode, called Incognito, which allows you to browse without leaving any history on your computer -- a feature popularized in Safari.

Chrome also has a pop-up blocker, but it's annoying because it flashes a notice that a pop-up has been blocked. IE also does this, but unlike in Chrome, the warnings are much less intrusive.

Internet Explorer 8 has some new features Chrome lacks. Its private browsing mode, called InPrivate, is the first I've seen that not only leaves no traces on your own computer, but also bars Web sites from collecting some types of information on where you've previously been surfing.

While IE8's address box and search box remain separate, each also offers rapid suggestions; and both are organized better than Chrome's. For instance, the suggestions that drop down from its address bar are divided neatly into categories drawn from the browser's own guess, your history and your favorites. One downside: For this to work in Windows XP, you must first install Microsoft's desktop search product.

Like Chrome, IE8 lets you switch your default search provider, but it also allows you to switch search engines on the fly. When you type in a search term, icons for alternate search engines appear at the bottom of the suggestion list, and you need only click on these to see search results from, say, Google, instead of Microsoft's own Live search engine.

IE8's Accelerators feature presents a blue-arrow icon above any text on a Web page that you have selected. Clicking on the icon brings up a list of actions you can take using the selected text, such as posting it to a blog, emailing it, mapping it or searching it. While these actions are set by default to use Microsoft's own Web services, you can change them to use Google's, Yahoo's, or those from other companies.

Microsoft also has built in a feature called Web Slices. These are portions of a Web site that a site developer can designate to appear in the IE8 Favorites bar and to constantly update themselves. An example might be bidding on eBay.

Like Chrome, IE8 also displays useful information whenever you create a new tab, including a list of recently closed tabs and a list of Accelerators.

With the emergence of Chrome, consumers have a new and innovative browser choice, and with IE8, the new browser war is sure to be a worthy contest.

By: Walter S. Mossberg
Wall Street Journal; September 2, 2008

New Microsoft TV Campaign

Lots of Jerry Seinfeld Dry Comedy Babble but Not Much About Computers

We Thought Bill Gates Retired?

Crispin Porter + Bogusky, which won Microsoft's $300 million creative account in February, has released its debut ad in an anticipated campaign featuring Jerry Seinfeld.

The minute-and-a-half-long spot went live yesterday and depicts Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld meeting at a fictional discount store called Shoe Circus. Quirky small-talk is exchanged.

Computers are not mentioned for over a minute, at which point Seinfeld asks whether Microsoft ever intends to launch "moist, chewy" and edible PCs. Gates wiggles his trousers in response, then the ad cuts to a tagline: "The future. Delicious," followed by the brief appearance of a Microsoft logo.



Seinfeld's participation in this campaign cost $10 million alone, according to MacRumors. High anticipation for the campaign, coupled with the ad's failure to establish the merits of Microsoft products, drew scrutiny from technology and ad bloggers.

The spot was also compared to a years-old American Express effort featuring Seinfeld: "It's kinda like Seinfeld's really long, really rambling Superman ad for Amex he did a few years back. We hope the rest of the campaign is better," Gizmodo wrote.

Other blogs painted it as a direct rip off AmEx's work. "Seems eerily similar to the work done for American Express with Jerry Seinfeld," wrote blogger Adam Kmiec with a note of sarcasm, posting the ads together so readers could compare them.

In a letter to Microsoft employees, SVP Bill Veghte said the campaign's intention is to "engage consumers and spark a new conversation about Windows.

"Think of these ads as an icebreaker to reintroduce Microsoft to viewers in a consumer context," Veghte opined. "[As] the campaign moves into its next phase, we'll go much deeper in telling the Windows story and celebrating what it can do for consumers at work, at play and on-the-go."

TechCrunch has a complete copy of Veghte's letter.

Whatever their stance, most bloggers can agree the ad succeeded in sparking a new conversation. The campaign's "next phase" is expected to appear in a month's time.

Agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky is typified by its offbeat work. One of its major successes includes the ongoing Burger King campaign featuring The King, a silent mascot in a large plastic mask.

But not all its oddball efforts strike happy chords. Last year Crispin lost the ConAgra Foods account after trying to reanimate the late Orville Redenbacher in a popcorn ad — a campaign that was also panned by bloggers.

Google's Online Video Quandary

Last summer there was a bit of a kerfuffle when one analyst's misdirected math led to wildly swinging estimates for a new advertising model for YouTube, the online video-sharing site owned by Google.

Morgan Stanley analyst Mary Meeker's original forecast suggested the model--small overlay ads that run on the bottom of online videos--would contribute $720 million in net revenue. Silicon Alley Insider analyst Henry Blodget kindly pointed out that Meeker had made a small error, meaning the actual estimate was a mere $720,000. Meeker dug back into the calculations and provided ranges from $76 million to $189 million. Blodget's own analysis suggested year-five revenues ranging from $200 million to $13 billion.

One year later, the only thing that's clear is that YouTube's financial performance is not meeting the expectations that led Google to pay $1.7 billion for YouTube in 2006. The problem isn't traffic, with YouTube now reaching close to 60 million consumers a month. Rather, YouTube hasn't found a way to have revenue grow at the same pace as traffic.

Why have YouTube's revenues grown more slowly than projected? One key challenge is that Google's core business model--matching search terms to ads--hasn't naturally fit with YouTube's model.

When Google purchased YouTube, some analysts expected it could port that model to video, turning YouTube's traffic into a gold mine. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. The keywords that describe a video don't always provide sufficient information to guarantee a successful match with an advertiser's target customer or message.

For example, imagine that a pet food company wanted an ad tied to the search term "dog food." While that search highlights vintage dog-food commercials, it also brings up a video spoofing disgraced NFL player Michael Vick, who is in jail for charges related to dog fighting, and a video titled "Alert! Rat poison in pet food boycott China K9 Killers!" Pet food companies are not likely to be excited to be paired to these kinds of videos.

All in all, Google sells ads against only about the 3% of YouTube's videos that are provided by or cleared by media companies. The other 97% is off limits.

Also, Google faces a classic quandary. The most "proven" money-making model for video advertising is to run short ads before or after a video plays (in industry lingo a "pre-roll" or "post-roll"). Extensive pre-rolls might cause angst among YouTube users who appreciate the ability to flip from video to video.

So YouTube is left with a huge audience but an uncertain business model. In some ways, this challenge should feel familiar to Google--it debuted in the late 1990s as one of close to 20 different search engines. While superior technology helped Google succeed, what really allowed it to break free from the pack was its disruptive business model that allowed companies to bid to place text-based ads tied to specific search terms.

While Overture (acquired by Yahoo! in 2003) pioneered the model of auctioning off search terms, Google put together an end-to-end model that made it simple and effective for Google search engine optimization and for companies of any size to advertise online, creating a juggernaut.

Google doesn't appear to be innovating to the same degree in the online video space. Rather, it appears to be trying to force-fit models that work on traditional television or on the Internet onto video advertising. This approach--cramming old models into new spaces--rarely produces breakthrough results.

Google needs an innovative business model to realize the potential of online video. Meanwhile, contenders are emerging online. One, start-up company VideoEgg, has introduced a series of online advertising models meant to deepen user engagement.

One such model places "widgets" at the bottom of an ad that allow users to see different versions of the ad or get more information. VideoEgg only charges advertisers if a consumer actually engages with an ad in some way.

VideoEgg's model might not be the answer, but overlays and pre-rolls are not likely the answer either. If Google tries to force-fit old models onto online video, it will create space for a competitor to do to it what it did to Yahoo! and Overture.

By: Scott D. Anthony
Forbes.com; August 25, 2008

Microsoft's Sneak Attack On Google

Forget about that $44 billion takeover bid for Yahoo. Microsoft's latest assault on Google is slier.

Since May Microsoft has been reimbursing people up to half of the value of items they buy using its search technology. The gimmick isn't working. In July Google's share of all searches jumped to 60% from 53% a year ago, while Microsoft's share slumped to 12% from 13.6%, according to Nielsen Online.

Now comes Chief Executive Steve Ballmer's latest would-be Google-toppling tactic (after his failed bid to take over Yahoo: a sneak attack using the newly launched version of Microsoft's dominant Web browser, Internet Explorer. Ballmer isn't portraying the updated browser as a Google destroyer, but many of its features turn out to be a crafty way for people to get around using the most popular search service.

"We didn't design this with Google in mind," insists Internet Explorer head Dean Hachamovitch. He adds: "It's not clear what the consequences might be."

The engineers in Redmond deserve a little more credit than Hachamovitch wants to give. The new browser comes with a search box in the upper right-hand corner and, just below that, a row of tiny logos for various search destinations, such as Yahoo, Ebay and MySpace. You can select which destinations you want to include here.

If your search will likely end up in Wikipedia, for instance, with a single click over a little "W" you can search only that encyclopedia. Amazon.com displays items for sale. The New York Times shows snippets of stories. So far 27 Web sites have joined the drop-down column, including Facebook and Digg.

Microsoft is, uncharacteristically, keeping its hands off, giving Web sites the option to serve up results and customize how they appear. It also magnanimously lets those sites take all the revenue from ads alongside the results. That's a sly stab at Google's business, though this kind of searching--where users already know where they want to go--doesn't yield especially lucrative ads for Google.

Another Google-dodging feature in the new browser: Highlighting a street address on a Web page launches a map, with the default set to Microsoft's Live Maps (though you can change this default to Google Maps).

Internet Explorer is the most widely used browser. This gives Microsoft a nice advantage over Google. Just as Microsoft used its dominance in operating systems to get its browser onto millions of computers, it now can rely on that browser to offer Web software. Microsoft needs that weapon as Google encroaches on its turf with freebie Web versions of word processors and spreadsheets.

Best do this while the dominance lasts. Firefox's market share jumped by a third in the last year to 19%, while Internet Explorer lost 6 percentage points to 73%. Still, even that rival gives it a little credit for the new browser. "They're playing catch-up, but I'm glad they're playing," says John Lilly, chief executive of Firefox publisher Mozilla.

Victoria Barret
Forbes.com; August 27, 2008

Google Hits Double Digits

Google turns 10 on Sunday. In the corporate world, it's still just a baby--but the Internet king's meteoric rise makes this birthday a milestone.

The Mountain View, Calif.-based company created the booming online advertising industry, turning Internet searches into cash to the tune of $16.5 billion in annual revenues. Google's stock price has a life of its own. It shot past $700 last year and has since fallen back to $450; its market cap is now at $142 billion, which puts it in league with the likes of Bank of America and Hewlett-Packard. Those companies, however, have annual revenues of more than $100 billion.

Since going public, the company has used its Googlebucks to acquire a slew of innovative startups--ranging from photo-sharing service Picasa, video site YouTube and even the core of its Google Earth mapping service. It also has raised a bunch of homegrown consumer favorites, including e-mail service Gmail and social networking site, Orkut.

The number of searches it handles has grown astronomically. In 1998, Google reported that it handled 10,000 searches a day. That number leaped to 500,000 a day in 1999. Google doesn't share those numbers widely now, but research group comScore estimates that Google hosted 235 million searches a day in July of this year.

There's another way to gauge Google's growth. The first Google index in 1998 had 26 million Web pages. In July, a Google search engineer tallied up how many unique URLs the company searches to find content: the number was 1 trillion. At this rate, a "googol" worth of pages (or 1 followed by 100 zeros) can only be a few years away.

Now the Internet king is going after much more: It wants to be a worldwide data center that stores every piece of personal and corporate information. Google is pushing cloud computing to accomplish this--and challenging tech's old top dog Microsoft to pick up the pace or go home. This week, Google unveiled Chrome, a Web browser aimed at toppling Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

Google's maverick corporate culture and slogans have also made headlines. Employees work inside a compound that mimics a college campus, get free organic meals and are allowed to work on a pet project one day a week. The company has said repeatedly that it wants to make the world a better place. Its defining slogan was "Don't be evil," but it has been officially modified to "You can make money without doing evil."

Indeed, Google has become one of those companies that epitomizes an era, introducing literally transformative technology on the global stage.

But Google's meteoric rise wasn't part of a calculated plan--initially. Back in 1998, Stanford grad students Larry Page and Sergey Brin just happened to take an interest in organizing information on the Web, and in true Silicon Valley fashion, they founded Google in a friend's Menlo Park, Calif., garage.

Soon after, Google stumbled upon a way to make money from advertisements placed alongside online searches results and hired Eric Schmidt, who had headed Novell and served as chief technology officer at Sun Microsystems, for adult supervision. The trio of Schmidt, Page and Brin have turned Google into a money machine and innovation powerhouse.

But what goes up must come down, right? Probably. Wall Street used to count on Google for hitting or surpassing analysts' earnings targets, but the company had a few misses the past year due to hiring sprees and technical changes to its search algorithms.

And there's the perennial question of whether Google needs to diversify its revenue stream in case businesses find better and cheaper ways to advertise. So far, the company hasn't found another way to make money--and it's not very concerned about it either. Google believes that if superior technology finds users, users will help it find a business plan.

Oh, let's not worry about all that boring stuff now. It's time to celebrate 10 years in business. But don't expect music, dancing and laughter at the Googleplex Sunday. Even though Google was incorporated on Sept. 7, the company says it has never partied on this day and doesn't plan to start now.

By: Wendy Tanaka
Forbes.com; September 5, 2008

Yahoo Vote-Counting Error Overstated Support for Yang

Yahoo Inc. said a greater number of shareholder votes were cast opposing the re-election of Jerry Yang and other directors than reported, after a company responsible for processing multiple shareholder votes said it made a mistake in handling those of one large investor.

Acknowledging the tabulation error, Yahoo said 66% of votes were cast in support of Mr. Yang, who also is Yahoo's chief executive, down from the 85% it had announced. Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock received a 60% favorable vote, down from 80%. Yahoo director Ron Burkle's share of supportive votes fell to 62% of votes cast from 81%.

The disclosure didn't affect the outcome of Friday's shareholder election, in which all directors were re-elected. It weakens the endorsement Mr. Yang and other directors involved in negotiations with Microsoft Corp. received during Yahoo's shareholder vote last Friday and could serve as possible ammunition for critics who continue to seek strategic changes at the Sunnyvale, Calif., Internet company.

Broadridge Financial Solutions, which was responsible for sending Capital Research Global Investors' voting preference to be tallied, was behind the glitch. Capital Research, which owns at least 6% of Yahoo, has been a steady critic of the Yahoo board's decision to reject a number of offers from Microsoft.

Chuck Callan, senior vice president of regulatory affairs at Broadridge, said a printout the Lake Success, N.Y., company sent to the voting tabulator mistakenly cut off the first digit of the number of shares the investor wanted to withhold for certain directors. The incident was isolated and triggered by a unique combination of factors, including the fact that at least 100 million shares were being withheld. Broadridge -- which processes votes for 14,000 meetings a year -- determined that no other meetings within the past 18 months were affected, and it has fixed the problem.

Broadridge investigated Monday at the request of Capital Research Global Investors, which suspected that the number of withheld votes ought to have been higher. A few investors Tuesday drew attention to another issue -- the fact that significantly fewer votes were cast this year than in previous years. Some have suggested that investor confusion around Carl Icahn's proxy contest, which he ended with a settlement that allows him and two others out of a group he recommends to join the board, could have resulted in more ballots being invalidated than in previous years.

Shareholder voting glitches aren't uncommon given the number of companies involved in the process, says Claudia Allen, chairwoman of the corporate-governance-practice group at Neal Gerber & Eisenberg LLP, a law firm in Chicago. "Most of the time these things happen you don't hear about them," she said, describing this as a case of a shareholder "sending a message."


By: Jessica Vascellaro
Wall Street Journal; August 6, 2008

Google Tackles Microsoft In Launch of Browser

Google Inc. plans to introduce its own Web browser, the latest twist in its battle with Microsoft Corp. over key Internet technologies.

In a posting on a company site Monday, Google indicated that a version of the software, called Chrome, would be available for download on Tuesday. It said the software is designed to make it faster to browse the Web and easier to run applications without downloading software to a computer. The product will be offered on an open-source basis, meaning others can modify the software code.

Google's new Internet browser, Chrome, is a strategic weapon in the company's battle with Microsoft. But prompting consumers to actively choose a browser is no easy task, MarketWatch's John Letzing reports.

The Google browser takes direct aim at Microsoft Corp.'s Internet Explorer, which is by far the most widely used program for viewing Internet sites. The two companies already compete in Internet search engines, where Google holds a wide lead. Google has also developed Web-based alternatives to Microsoft's popular Word, Excel and PowerPoint programs.

While many people pay little attention to which browser they use, the choice makes a big difference to software companies. They can use the precious screen real estate to promote their own Web services. Moreover, they can tailor their browsers to ensure compatibility with their other products.

Google executives have expressed concern that existing browsers might fail to support the sort of new Web-based applications they want to develop as they seek to expand the company's influence beyond search. By building its own Web-browsing software, Google is ensuring that it will have a platform for its Internet services that needn't conform to other companies' standards.

News of the Google project spread after an unconventional leak by the company itself. Google Blogoscoped, a blog that follows the company, reported Monday that Google had sent it a comic book outlining the specifications of the browser.

"We realized that the web had evolved from mainly simple text pages to rich, interactive applications and that we needed to completely rethink the browser," wrote Sundar Pichai, a Google vice president of product management, on the company site. "What we really needed was not just a browser, but also a modern platform for web pages and applications, and that's what we set out to build."

Danny Sullivan, editor in chief of Internet news and analysis site Search Engine Land, said Google's decision shows how the browser is competing with the traditional operating system as an important platform for software development. He predicted that Google will encourage people to adopt Chrome by releasing some products and updates for Chrome users first, while continuing to support other browsers.

Persuading Consumers

Google may nonetheless have trouble persuading consumers to download its browser. Many people find it easier to use the browser that comes loaded on their computer, which is typically Microsoft's Internet Explorer on computers that run the Windows operating system.

Dean Hachamovitch, a Microsoft executive who oversees Explorer, expressed confidence that consumers would continue to use the browser. He said Explorer "puts the services [users] want right at their fingertips, respects their personal choices about how they want to browse and, more than any other browsing technology, puts them in control of their personal data online."

Mr. Sullivan said Google hasn't had much success getting people to download its software, with the exception of mapping software Google Earth. "Just because Google has a browser out there, it doesn't mean everyone is going to use it," he said.

The browser has been viewed as a strategic weapon in high-tech circles since the mid-1990s, after Netscape Communications turned its browser into a fixture on many personal computers. Microsoft viewed that product as a threat that could set a new standard for software development, setting in motion a series of tactics that triggered the Justice Department's high-profile antitrust investigation of Microsoft.

In recent years, the Mozilla Foundation's Firefox browser -- a descendent of Netscape's Communicator product -- has gained popularity as an alternative to Internet Explorer. Firefox holds nearly 20% of the market, compared with about 72% for Explorer, according to Net Applications, a company that tracks the sector.

More recently, the browser has been seen as a lever in the battle over Internet search. Browsers include windows, or toolbars, that can be used to directly access a search engine, a program for finding information or sites on the Internet. Microsoft's Internet Explorer browser comes preset with a toolbar for Microsoft's search engine, though it can be reset to link to Google, Yahoo or other search engines.

That default setting, and how to change it, has been a contentious issue between Google and Microsoft in recent years. Google has claimed to regulators that Microsoft's domination of the browser market could give it an undue influence over search-engine use. Microsoft, meanwhile, has reworked its browser to make it easier for people to reset to competing search engines.

Google has been working on the product for about two years, according to one person familiar with the matter. The introduction of Internet Explorer 7 in October 2006 added more urgency to the effort, as Google grew concerned that the new version would make it easier for Microsoft to route users to Microsoft's own search service, this person said.

If people use the Google browser, the company could glean more information about what consumers are doing online, analysts say. Google could find that information useful, they say, in better targeting ads to individual users and conceiving new products. Google already knows a lot about online habits thanks to its domination of the search-engine market and Internet advertising.

Problems for Mozilla

Chrome could create problems for the Mozilla Foundation, the nonprofit organization that builds Firefox. Google has been a key partner for Mozilla, at times providing engineering expertise and paying for a spot as the default search service embedded in Firefox. Google and Mozilla last week renewed their agreement, which was set to expire in November, extending it until 2011.

John Lilly, Mozilla's chief executive, conceded that Chrome will increase competition in browsers, which also include Apple Inc.'s Safari software and a program called Opera from Opera Software ASA. But he added it remains unclear just how big an impact Google can have. "We have long years of testing and years of learning about how to make browsers," Mr. Lilly said. "Chrome is new."

By: Jessica Vascellaro and Robert Guth
Wall Street Journal; September 2, 2008

Google Starts Free Music-Search Service in China

After months of negotiations with music companies, Google Inc. has launched a free music-search service in China.

Internet users in China can search for songs by singer, song or album title on Google's search page and then download licensed music files for free.

The service will be supported by advertising revenue, which will be split between Google, the music companies and a Chinese music company called Top100.cn, Google announced Tuesday.

If successful, the new search service could provide a way to legally monetize digital music in China, where piracy has crippled the industry, for global music labels including Vivendi SA's Universal Music and EMI Group Ltd., which have artists who are popular in China. Dozens of other foreign and domestic record labels stand to gain from the launch, as well.

Rampant piracy has long eroded profits in China for these companies; industry analysts have estimated that as many as 90% of Internet users in China -- which now has the world's largest population of Internet users -- download unlicensed music online everyday via search-engine services that provide links to unlicensed music downloads.

According to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, a music-industry association, the industry loses hundreds of millions of dollars a year because of piracy.

Google didn't specify in its announcement which of the global labels have officially signed on. But the move could also set a precedent for the music industry world-wide, which is suffering from piracy to a lesser degree than in China.

Paid download services like Apple Inc.'s iTunes Store have grown rapidly, but not quickly enough to offset declines in CD sales, which still account for a significant chunk of recorded-music sales.

Under the experimental business model, the companies would provide high-quality recordings of licensed music for free, which is unprecedented in China.

The search would also provide information about artists and albums from Top100.cn's database for free. Watermarking technology would be used to track downloads for meaningful statistics for use in selling advertising.

Internet users outside of China won't have access to the service, which will be limited to China.

The music search could also give Google a significant boost in its struggle to gain market share in China, where its chief rival, Baidu.com Inc., has 64.6%, compared with Google's 26.1% as of the second quarter, according to technology-consulting firm Analysys International. Baidu, though not the only search engine in China to offer music searches and top-song charts that link to unlicensed music, has often been singled out by music-industry organizations because of its lead in the search market, which many credit to products like its music search.

By: Loretta Chao
Wall Street Journal; August 6, 2008

Meet Google Chrome ... The New Google Browser

G-Browser Project Work Continues Deep Inside Google's Mountain View Campus

Word surfaced Monday of a Web "comic book" introducing Google Chrome, the search giant's long-rumored open-source browser project. While the illustrations, created by cartoonist Scott McCloud, were not announced by Google, they do contain the quotes and likenesses of 19 Google developers.

The detailed, 38-page comic appeared on Google Blogoscoped, an unofficial Google blog. Update: The comic is now available on Google Book Search. The book is broken down into five main sections covering stability; speed; search and the user experience, security, and standards. Here are the key features, according to the book:

Stability
Each tab will run in its own process. These processes will be completely isolated from each other, will be killable from the operating system's process manager, and will be sandboxed to prevent them from accessing information on the user's computer. This architecture should lead to a more stable and more consistent browsing experience--performance of the browser should not degrade over time.

Google is using its search index to prioritize testing of the browser--the pages that are linked to the most from Google Search are getting the most automated hits to make sure Chrome is behaving correctly on them.

Speed
The browser is being written with WebKit, the open-source engine at the core of Apple's Safari and Google's Android. The browser is also getting a new Javascript virtual machine, V8. It's said to be a better solution for complex and rich Web applications--it should yield better performance as well as "smoother drag and drops" in interactive applications.

Search and user experience
In Chrome, browser tabs will take over the interface, becoming the primary navigational element. Each tab will get its own window controls. Users will be able to tear off tabs into standalone windows. (Related: developers will be able to control which window controls appear in a tab, creating, if they wish, Web applications that are embedded in a browser but that appear to be more like traditional desktop apps.)

Chrome's URL entry field will be called the "Omnibox," and, like Mozilla's "Awesome bar," will feed you suggestions based on your browsing history and live search results. It will be respectful of users, the comic says: "Inline completions will never flicker, never flash. It's perfect, aesthetically non-distracting."

The browser's default start page will show thumbnails of the user's most frequently visited pages and a list of their top searches. There will also be a private browsing mode, as IE 8 has.

Security
Chrome's architecture lends itself to secure browsing. Each Web page, or tab, runs in its own process, and is blocked from accessing other processes on the computer. "We've taking the existing process boundary," the comic says, "and made it into a jail." Different and more flexible permissions are being developed for plug-ins, however.

A database and API to access phishing and scam sites will be used in Chrome (and made public), which will hopefully reduce "zero-day" scam exploits. The browser will be constantly updated with this information.

Standards
The browser will be released as an open-source project. Also, Google will build the open-source local runtime Gears into the browser, and is hoping that it is taking up widely to "improve the base functionality of all browsers."

Yes, this is big
CNET News.com Editor in Chief Dan Farber's analysis of Google Chrome Monday was this: "It would be in line with other Google open-source projects, such as OpenSocial and Google Gears. Creating a competitor to Firefox, as well as Internet Explorer and Opera, could spur more innovation."

"Open sourcing the code is a smart way to avoid the 'Google wants to take over the world' fear, but it seems that Google has ambitions to create a comprehensive Internet operating system, including a browser, applications, middleware and cloud infrastructure."

The browser's start page will show thumbnails or previews of the user's most visited sites.

No official confirmation from Google yet, although Kara Swisher of All Things D cites sources who say that Google will make a Chrome download available to users by as early as tomorrow.

Originally published at CNET News; September 1, 2008

Google Market Dominance Goes Unchecked

No Viable Search Competitors on Horizon

Google is far from being unseated as the dominant player in the US search market. Accord­ing to ComScore data for July, Google led the core search market with 61.9% of searches conducted in the US. Yet, new search engines continue to launch with an eye toward solving market issues including privacy, click fraud and relevant results.

Yahoo had a 20.5% share of the July search market, while Microsoft came in third with 8.9% of searches, according to ComScore.

And, Microsoft is not giving up the fight. At the Search Engine Strategies conference in San Jose in August, Satya Nadella, SVP of Microsoft's search, portal and advertising group, said the com­pany was committed to investing in its search marketing.

Microsoft has made a number of acquisitions with the stated goal of improving its search results. On August 29, it acquired Greenfield Online for $17.50 per share, in a transaction valued at $486 mil­lion. As part of the deal, Microsoft also acquired Ciao.com, a price comparison, shopping and con­sumer reviews site.

“Retail-related searches are the most popular type of queries that search engines deal with today,” said a Microsoft spokesperson when reached by e-mail on Friday. “As part of Live Search's mission to deliver the best results, sim­plify key tasks and innovate in the search business model, Microsoft is confident that the acquisition of Greenfield Online will advance their commercial search efforts in Europe.”

Microsoft has also acquired travel search site Farecast and natural language technol­ogy company Powerset. It also launched Live Search Cashback, an ad-funded cash rebate program, in May. At that time, Microsoft said that its goal was to make Live Search the “premier search engine for the growing category of search queries that help consumers conduct research and purchase goods or services, and which are critical to merchants aiming to drive online sales of their products.”

With Google's dominance, other search engines are trying to enter the market in a niche way, said Chrysi Philalithes, launch managing director at Steak. For example, UBExact recently launched in beta.

“This search engine was designed out of user frustration, rather than as an IT person thinking up a new cool way to design search,” said Wilhelmina Stephen­son, founder and CEO of UBExact. Users have the option of using the UBExact search box or, if they want to save time, typing “ubexactyourtopic.com” into their browser's address bar, she said.

Like Cuil, another search engine that launched earlier this summer, UBExact is also focused on user privacy. “For me, designing the search engine to complement user privacy rather than interfere with it was a high priority,” Stephenson said. “We only use session cookies, and those have been set to automatically expire when you end your search session.”

Unlike the three major search engines, UBExact offers ads based on a flat-rate structure rather than pay-per-click. Accord­ing to Stephenson, preferred link ads that are keyword-based and appear on specific topics are available for $400 per year for local regions and $17,000 per year for metro regions. Nav Ads, which redirect searchers to a specific Web page, run under specific content topics and cost around $26,000 per year.

Stephenson claimed UBExact's pricing and tracking model makes “the opportu­nity for click fraud obsolete” by eliminating the discrepancy between what an adver­tiser is paying for and how many clicks an advertiser is getting.

And, as with Wikia Search, Mahalo,OrganizedWisdom.com and Scour.com, UBExact also uses humans to improve the search experience.

Human editors are contracted to elimi­nate spam, malicious content, unwanted ads and dead links and pages, Stephenson said. In addition to vetting content, the con­ tractors also organize Web sites based on content so users can search on UBExact by category.

Currently the use of full-time indepen­dent contractors as its human editors has kept costs low, Stephenson said. But, UBExact has plans to hire an in-house team, which will increase the fixed cost of human editing, she added.

It is likely that Google's growth will continue if the US Department of Justice approves its plan to enter a non-exclu­sive ad services agreement with Yahoo. If the plan is approved, Yahoo will have the ability to use Google's AdSense for Search and AdSense for content advertis­ing programs in the US and Canada. On Friday, the Justice Department confirmed that its antitrust division is currently review­ing the pending agreement. Both search engines said that they are happy to wait out the department's review process.

“We have been and will continue to work cooperatively with the Department of Jus­tice, and we look forward to moving ahead with the implementation [of the plan],” said Tracy Schmaler, a Yahoo spokesperson, in an e-mail to DMNews.

“When we announced our deal with Yahoo, we agreed to give the Department of Justice several months to review the deal before we began implementing it, and we continue to cooperate with regula­tors as that process continues,” said Adam Kovacevich, senior manager of global com­munications and public affairs at Google. “Ultimately, we have confidence that they'll be able to conduct their review within that time period and allow us to move forward.”

Originally from dmnews.com