Google Instant is Improving Ad Revenues, but was that the Motivation?



+ Add a Comment


I have to agree with Google on this one. Marin's statements make it clear that advertisers are raking in the cash from Instant. However, the same is not true for Google. A 2% increase ($380 million) in gross revenue sounds like a lot until you consider that their cost have risen about 118% ($10 billion) since 2006. Let's face it, $380 million to Google is like $76 to the rest of us. It's enough for a nice dinner for two at a decent restaurant, but that's about it.Now as to weather or not Instant is worth anything. I conduct several hours of internet research every week and I have used Google since it’s launch in 1998. I know how this search engine is supposed to behave. And I can say without reservation that Instant is a disaster. The response time of Google was never a real problem. Most searches were completed in under 1 second. And they were usually very accurate. Now Google completes a search in about 1/5th the time. But the results are near useless. I have experienced the following problems... Search terms are frequently ignored, quotation marks are always ignored, relevance ranking is rarely if ever applied, Google mis-navigates and Google locks up. A research project that used to take 1-2 hours now takes three times as long.



So if Instant not only makes search better but also earns Google more money, is it a bad thing? Why is this news?



anything to reduce typing on a small screen is a win for the user.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.