With the launch of Google’s Second Search Box are Publishers under a serious threat to their digital revenue streams? AdViking believes this is the case for two primary reasons:
- Lost Revenue
- Loss of User Control
Based on the recent crunching of revenue numbers, the general trend seems to be that Google’s revenue growth is at the cost of traditional media owners. Meaning that if any Publisher doesn’t see this as an additional direct and competitive threat to their business, then they really need to wake up and smell the coffee.
From early feedback AdViking has received, Publishers are giving mixed reviews to the Second Search Box. The more forward thinking and strategic are aghast and the less aggressive aren’t too worried and are saying that increased traffic will make up for the lost revenue of that initial hit. This is erroneous thinking for a few reasons:
In the short term, the loss of traffic will lead directly to lost revenue.
In the medium term, by counting on this additional boost in traffic, Publishers will become even more indebted to Google for driving traffic.
In the long term, as Publisher metrics worsen (eCPM, traffic, etc.) then this will lose to the further loss of advertisers as they spend more and more money with Google.
Loss of User Experience Control
Publishers have spent a lot of time and money working on the User Experience, especially as Search as moved to the primary method of finding content, the relevancy models for their search results.
By allowing Google to apply a one-size-fits all model, then all of the benefits of knowing your content, knowing your users, etc. is thrown out the window.
Below are two different examples that show the negative impact of the Google’s Second Search Box on User Experience.
Bear Stearns on New York Times
Laptop on BestBuy
- Official Google post about Second Site Search
- The cynic in AdViking questions, will these feature go away after the end of Q1?