Since Microsoft made its $44 billion offer for Yahoo! (so far rejected), many industry veterans, including Fred Wilson
and Paul Kedrosky, have proposed ideas for Yahoo! to increase profitability, avoid a take over by Microsoft (which could potentially damage M&A activities) and stay
independent (though without search, I’d call it semi-independent). In this
article, let’s take a look at the other side of the coin and discuss a scenario which would give Microsoft the competition power it needs without
Yahoo!
While Microsoft’s revenues are dispersed into many areas such as home software, enterprise software, entertainment, and Internet advertising, Google’s revenues currently depend solely on online advertising. While this may sound like a weakness, Google is currently well ahead of the competition and the barriers to entry in online ads are pretty high. Microsoft knows that, otherwise they wouldn’t be so ambitious about acquiring Yahoo!
But what Microsoft can do here is to change the rules of the online advertising game by making it more open in general and less profitable for Google. There have been many companies who have claimed to make advertising more open; OpenAds and RightMedia (which is now owned by Yahoo!) are just a couple of them. But what these companies actually did was make the advertising process more transparent. Advertising is still under the control of networks which manage literally everything; publishers, advertisers, parameters, matching algorithms, etc.
However if one can split up this "network atom" and divide it into more efficient parts, things will be very different. See the graph below:

In an open advertising model, the inventory silo, placement silo, and parameter silo are controlled by many different organizations, which can interact with each other and create advertising mashups. Today Google provides these silos under the following services:
The most crucial part of the advertising network is the inventory silo. Therefore, in order to make the open advertising model a reality, a company (presumably Microsoft) would have to jumpstart things by opening up its inventory silo - so that others could use that inventory to create new applications for placement, parameters, etc. What would happen is:
The graph below summarizes the ecosystem I’ve just described:

With this model, a web page that consists solely of a Flash game is not stuck with Google’s "contextually relevant" option. It can mash up a bunch of parameters, or get help from 3rd parties and choose the best option for itself.
As shown above, this creates a whole new economy for parameter providers. It also opens new doors for 3rd parties for matching inventory with providers, mashing them up, analyzing and finding the best solutions for advertisers and publishers. It would also enable advertisers to make bids by filling out some XML files and allow the best ad to be displayed on particular page in the best way for a particular visitor.
This model would not only eliminate the dominance of a single network and create a whole new economy for a lot of players, but also it could prevent a possible bust in the Internet industry.
Today’s online advertising is far too linear. Whoever clicks gives the same amount of money to the publisher and the network. That is, under the current model, the click of a person with limited purchase power is worth the same as a click from Bill Gates.
But this unfair model is not sustainable. Because what it does is to shift money from real production to vaporware. The economy can only get better if clicks on ads produce real results. And that can only be established in an open model in which everyone participates, and all parameters are run in a fully competitive and flexible environment.
Yahoo! is too risky for Microsoft because of the size of the deal and possible inefficiencies. So my advice to Microsoft is to let Yahoo! remain as the online media mogul. Let Google be the search giant. Instead, focus on shaking up the advertising industry by pushing it toward a democratized structure, make it work for everyone, and weaken Google's business model before it takes a bite from your Office and Windows revenues.
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
That's a really interesting idea. But as always, the big elephant in the room is going to be privacy. How do you ensure that private user data is being protected when it is being bought and sold by the "placements" providers?
Posted by: Josh CatoneI like .. its nice .. very nice ...
Posted by: Aziz | February 13, 2008 2:16 PMYes Josh, right... But I think invisible hand of God (aka free market) can overcome this problem. If a site releases your private data, then you won't use it and switch to another one, that's why everyone is gonna be more careful about it. Don't forget, everyone was concerned about Gmail too at the beginning, but now I'm rather happy to see relevant ads every time I check my email. Same with Facebook News feeds. I'm sure such an open model would arise privacy concerns pretty quickly but that's what happens whenever an innovative model comes in.
Posted by: Emre Sokullu | February 13, 2008 2:20 PMThis sounds like a great idea though I am not qualified to comment on its feasibility.
Interestingly enough, I was thinking just the other day that MSFT needs to do something really big and crazy cool to get the web/tech community onside. I got as far as thinking that it would need to be something to do with open source and be in either the mobile space or in the ad space that it so desires to compete better in. This idea would seem to fit the bill excellently.
Great post.
Posted by: IdeaTagger | February 13, 2008 3:19 PMI just interviewed a Yahoo that just discovered they were safe from the layoff's. This person's take on how the various interactive properties interact with the revenue generating side (ads), was very interesting. I hope you don't consider this link to be a shameless promotion.
http://bizcast.typepad.com/clients/2008/02/acquisition-pre.html
Posted by: Alan Wilensky | February 13, 2008 3:28 PMWell its a nice idea but the only person who is going to do that anytime soon is thesame Google, because they are not proprietory, they like open source and they go pro open source ( Android, Gears, Mysql, GWT). But microsoft on the contrary has never liked to do things with the community and if they try it they will rather be digging their grave further, they should just die safe. its like a football player trying to play basket ball because a good basket ball player is gaining much hype and football is failing. brother you just need to play the football till you die :D
Posted by: mambenanje | February 14, 2008 6:52 AM
Posted by: opinionA | February 14, 2008 7:24 AMThis is exactly like the model Rightmedia is offering today, is it not? Any closed network (including google) can join this exchange platform. Well at least for certain types of ads..
@mambenanje: I don't think so, it's not an issue of being angel or evil, but it's an issue being market leader or underdog. So here the underdog is Microsoft, so they are more likely to do this.
@opinionA: I mention RightMedia in this article, no? They aren't opening things like I explain here, what they do is to make the advertising process more transparent - which is good but not so disruptive.
Posted by: Emre Sokullu | February 14, 2008 7:49 AM