I've been following Umair Haque's fascinating articles on new media economics and 'edge competencies' - and I've noticed he prefers Google's media strategy to Yahoo's. I've been curious to understand why, because the common wisdom over the past year or so is that Yahoo has been making all the right moves in this new world of Internet-powered media. Whereas Google often seems to be more experimental and lacking in a grand strategy for their products. Which is not to say that Google isn't effective in this new landscape - far from it. Just that Yahoo has seemed to me to be leading the charge into 21st century media.
Well Umair has now posted about Yahoo's recent earnings call and on first reading, I have to say his dismissal of Yahoo came across as general and lacking in specifics. So I left a comment, which Umair replied to and IMHO it's more useful than his original post. Umair commented:
"I'm not trying to bust on Yahoo, nor do I have a bee in my bonnet - I'm just pointing out the obvious.
Let me try and simplify.
1) There's a new value chain emerging. Think reconstructors.
2) Industry boundaries are blurring. Think Google + radio.
3) The value equation is being rewritten. Think Pay-per-x.
In all these cases, Yahoo is an imitator. Why? They don't have a real competence - they don't know how to create value at the edge.
This is an economic trap. They acquire companies to learn how to do better, but can't touch them for fear of messing them up. No learning is built. More acquisitions are made...
Back to the 3 points above, this translates into a strategic trap. They're forced to try and dominate the old value chain (this is what aggregation, licensing, etc really mean), and can't build the new one.
Of course, YMMV."
I don't claim to be as smart as Umair on this topic - clearly he's put a lot of thought into this and his new media economic theories (which btw I wish he'd stop calling Media 2.0). And I see where he's coming from... Google is creating new markets at 'the edge' with products like Adsense and perhaps with this new radio play they're doing now. Yahoo is putting a lot of effort into social software and user-generated content, but are they actually creating new 'value chains' like Google? Or are they, as I think Umair is saying, using new methods to dominate old markets?
I'm unsure of the answer at this point, but I wanted to a) throw the question out there and see what others think (please leave a comment), and b) recognize the thought-provoking work that Umair is doing at the Bubblegen lab.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2602
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Yahoo "only" appeals to Americans whereas Google is far more popular here in Europe.
Posted by: Tinus | January 20, 2006 4:09 AM
I cant wait to see what these qualitative "this ad revolution" pro google bulls do when the "myopic" bears come out to play on goog and that p/e takes a hit and sentiment sours. Oh yeah, Yahoo have nothing but a diversified business and revenue line. Thats a bad thing. Yahoo have no value chain? Um, what ? Pick a segment, pick a chain they have it. Oh, and to say branding 1.0 is dead. unfortunately absolutely wrong. a large percentage of fortune 500 companies total advertising spend (not the sub 1% google gets) is above the line, brand spend. that aint changing. not all product objectives are sales. there is "awareness", "attitude" which is taught in most mba classes. Google has much more risk than yahoo of being a one hit wonder. It was a Great hit tho. Doesnt mean they'll replicate it in radio and TV by buying companies that enable the buying of the same 30 second TVC's and audio ads. not that they are great businesses and not that anyone crunches the numbers, its all potential. Google today get 99% of revenue from one source (thats not end users) 30% of the clicks are fraudulent, and noone has dominated search for more than a few years ever. So while Google are off on the edge with Derek Zoolander, they'll miss the next wave of dark web and vertical search, plus some really big click fraud and shorting. it should be fun rich.
Posted by: Ben Barren | January 20, 2006 5:41 AM
I just don't understand why anyone would want to use Yahoo. It's convoluted to the extreme. The only Yahoo service i use is Del.icio.us. That's it. For all others, it's Google.
Posted by: theCreator | January 22, 2006 10:58 PM
Richard, maybe the notion of a ‚Äúmedia strategy‚Ä? works against the concept of ‚Äúedge competencies.‚Ä? Perhaps organic results are not just tenets of the search arm at Google, but reach throughout the company. Certainly the internal infrastructure of Google is no mystery, and though I do not doubt that there is some ‚Äúdirection,‚Ä? it would be foolish to think that Google moves and develops in traditional ways.
If there is anything to be learned about the well documented history of Google, it is the company's characteristic ethos of develop first, interpret later.
Posted by: Guy Cardamone | January 25, 2006 11:38 AM