5 Insights Into The Google DoubleClick Deal to Take Over Affiliate Marketing And Banner Ads

Affiliate marketing and banner ads aren’t *totally* evil… but mostly, right? I mean, we all love seeing tons of search results with different sites all trying to sell the *exact* same product - and banner ads - well those are just the best and most wonderful thing to see plastered all over the web! Right… The blogosphere is great because only people with something good to say make it to anything similar to what could be known as popularity.

Ecommerce is a bit different, but still, no one likes banner ads and not too many people would put affiliate networks in the “Do No Evil” category. 3.1 Billion dollars is a lot of money for Google to spend to purchase display advertising giant DoubleClick (to go along with their pay per action affiliate-ish network). It’s close to the most ever invested in an internet company. So just imagine the kind of bread that Google is planning to make with it - and all the rivals they have pissed off.

1. Google spent too much, agian, but made the right move in terms of accomplishing their “Rule The Universe.”

2. Yahoo! and Mr Softy will have a very hard time ever sitting at the top of the search / web empire… (hence being so pissed)

3. Unless of course MSN buys Yahoo! and AOL (hell maybe even the WSJ and NYT) - then big G will have their work cutt out for them (what a twisted world that would be).

4. Good News! Look for websites (in Google’s search results at least), whose sole purpose is to host ads to affiliate sites and make a buck, to disappear slowly but surely, stop cluttering up our search results, and be replaced by better sites (well prettier sites that actually have an audience) with quality content written by good writers (or at least writers who have something interesting enough to say that they develop *natural* links) - all because only the strong (and friend of big G) will survive.

5. The web just may get better. Of course, it can always get worse.

It’s no surprise that MSN is pissed. They should be. One Slashdot commenter suggests, “Google is the new Microsoft.”

The truth is they have every right to suggest that the deal be reviewed, everyone does. It’s pretty scary in many regards.

Google believes, “you can make money without doing evil,” so then why go after the affiliate and banner spaces you ask? To make *more* money. To increase shareholder value. To, “focus on the user,” “do one thing really, really well” and … wait a minute, that’s not right. To be “democratic on the web” or maybe it’s simply because “great just isn’t good enough.” It can’t be “doing one thing right” anymore, not after they keep trying to play with traditional advertising models like print and radio. It’s gotta be simply part of their goal to be Masters of The Universe.

It sounds more like “capitalism on the web,” plain and simple. But hey, I can understand - you can’t give everything away for free. Just look at Wikipedia and all the problems they have had because they just gave *it* all away for free. Jimbo is doing something about it with Wikia. It truly is always about the balance of providing valuable information *and* supporting the distribution of the information.

Supporting the distribution of anything, or capitalizing on it, does not mean you have to plaster crap all over it. One look at Times Square, or pretty much any other major city, and you can see how the “sell ads on anything and everything” mentality has gotten out of hand. However, with all this said, Google has historically been aware of this fact, with its stark interface and disdain for affiliate marketing in general. Google has a chance here to strip the crap out of affiliate marketing and display advertising. I hope they do.

Just after DoubleClick announces they are setting up an auction-like system for the buying and selling of digital ads (hint: pay per click advertising model), Google buys them. It’s no surprise that MSN is pissed. One Slashdot commenter suggests, “Google is the new Microsoft.” A thought on many people’s minds for years.

DoubleClick will charge a commission for each ad impression traded on its exchange. David Rosenblatt, the company’s CEO, believes they, “may derive the majority of revenue from the new service within five years.” HipMojo reminds us that the New York Times itself was only valued at 3.3B - barely higher than DoubleClick! John Battelle is surprised, “My sources told me that Google was building its own, now it’s clear it wanted the relationships which came via a market leader.” ValleyWag reminds us we are simply repeating history. I wonder how many people will compare this (like everything else the past 5 or so years) to another bubble about to pop.

This bubble isn’t popping anytime soon. As online advertising grows - businesses want as much as they can get of it. Google is simply trying to take over advertising.

They could be just after some buzz to increase their already obese stock price. But I hope not seeing as their stock fell over a buck after the deal.

Maybe investors think Google should stick with the “doing one thing great” approach.

Still, it generated quite a lot of buzz.

The simple and equally scary truth is that Google is so close to a monopoly it’s freaky. The “the giant will get even bigger.”

Yahoo! can always come up with the next wave of the social portals of all social ports, but industry analysts, “predict that Yahoo does not have the cash or the stomach to make major acquisitions.” People wondered if Yahoo! purchased DoubleClick that they *may* be able to really compete with Google - look’s like that’s not an option anymore

I’m not sure that its DoubleClick trying to be “the eBay for online ads,” but more like Google trying to take over affiliate marketing and banner advertising.

On a closing note, this is all just further evidence that, no matter what Jason Calacanis says, Search Marketing and SEO and eveything that’s in the umbrella in general, will never die.

*Thank you http://persuasion.typepad.com/ for the cool Google/Monkey graphic

Bookmark to: