Google began in 1996 as a project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin.

Larry and Sergey were both studying at Stanford University California. In their research project they came up with a plan to make a search engine that ranked websites according to the number of other websites that linked to that site (and ultimately came up with the Google we have today). Before Google, search engines had ranked sites simply by the number of times the search term searched for appeared on the webpage, and the duo set out to make a more aware search engine. The domain google.com was registered on September 14th 1997 and Google Corporation was formed a year later in September 1998. Google started selling advertisements with its keyword searches in 2000, and so Google Adwords/Adsense was born. These advertisements used a system based on the pretence that you only paid for your advertising if some clicked on your ad link hence the term Pay Per Click (PPC) was born. The term PageRank was patented in September 2001 this term is actually named after cofounder Larry Page and not, as some think, named because it is the rank of a page (webpage). Also in 2001 co-founder Larry Page stood down as the CEO of Google and former CEO of Novel. Eric Schmidt. was appointed as the new CEO of Google. Google moved its offices to its large Google estate (nicknamed GooglePlex) in Mountainview California in 2003, and is still based there today. In 2004, Google launched its own free web-based email service, known as Gmail. This service was made to rival the free online mail services supplied by Yahoo and Microsoft (hotmail). This new free email service shook up the very foundation of free email with its enormous 1 GB of email storage which dwarfed its rivals ten-fold. In 2004 Google launched Google Earth. Google Earth is an amazing creation that is a map of the earth based on satellite imagery. This interactive globe of the world allows you to type in a search for any place in the world and you will automatically be taken to that part of the world. The cool part is that with Google Earth you can zoom right in to street level and actually see your own street and even your house! An interesting fact in the history of Google is that in September 2005, Google made a new partnership with a very interesting company NASA. This involved building a 1-million square foot research and development centre at NASAs Ames Research Center. This was interestingly followed a few months later by the launch of Google Mars and Google Moon: two Google maps style applications built on pictures of the moon and the planet Mars. In 2006 Google launched Google Video. Google Video is a cool new search tool. As its title suggests Google video allows you to search the internet for videos. There are thousands of videos to make your search from; from personal homemade videos to TV shows made by the big television corporations.

In 2006 Google was added to the Oxford English dictionary as a verb the verb to Google has become so popular that Google has even been worried that their brand name might lose their copyright and patent protections, and allow other companies to be able to legally use the Google brand in their own brand. Today (Article written end of 2006) Google has a dominant controlling share of the search market. Google is the most widely used search engine on the internet with a 54% market share. Yahoo! Is Googles closest rival with 23%, less than half of Googles share, and MSN even falls far short of Yahoo!, lagging far behind in 3rd place with a 13% market share. If these figures arent impressive enough for Google, independent estimates say that more than 80% of search referrals come from Google Google receives about a billion search requests per day and with estimates that Google makes 12 cents for every search you perform, you can see that Google corporation is a very lucrative business! With the many many applications and products that Google has brought out, and the control it has over the internet it is possible that Google will become a very very influential part of all of our lives in years to come.

Vision and mission:organize world,s information and make it universally accessiable and useful.

Googles Internal Company Goals:A company paper* Google published internally earlier this year and which I got hold of outlined some of Googles big goals and directions for 2006. The list included several items, for example:

Google wants to have an improved infrastructure to make their engineers more productive. This includes allowing employees to have auniversal search tool containing all public Google information searched on all Google searches. Google also wants to build 10MW of green power to be on track to be carbon neutral. (They also want to reduce Borg disk waste by 50%... hmmm, Borg?) Google wants to be the best in search no surprise here. To reach that goal, Google wants to have the worlds top AI research laboratory. They are also focusing on getting rid of spam in the top 20 user languages, and increasing the accuracy of information they collect (through measures such as annotation). Another part of improving search is to always launch crucial user interface updates that people love. Google wants to push their ad system. E.g. in 2006, one of their aims was to sell $1B of new inventory. Google feels that if they make the worlds inventory available marketers will come. Google also wants to push their communities and content. According to the papers Google published, Google Video has 50% of the worlds online video attention (a number thats hard to believe, and especially interesting because Google still ended up buying YouTube). Google also emphasized that a fifth of all communication bandwidth on Google-owned properties, I suppose is read through Gmail. Google tries to make sure their tools are running everywhere. In around mid-2006, according to their internal numbers 60 Million Google Packs had been installed, but they still want to increase the deployment... especially for novice users. Google is always focusing on innovation. One of their top goals in 2006 thus was to increase the scale of innovation, even as the internal headcount grows (a growth which dozens of engineering scouts located around the world ensure). One more specific objective Google outlined as company goal earlier this year in another paper** available to me was to internally test a Google News prototype during the fourth quarter. This radically improved prototype should allow other news sources, and organizations and individuals mentioned in news stories to debate specific points. I wonder what that means... anyone? Im as puzzled about this as I am about the Onebox @ 100% via SETI mentioned elsewhere in the document (though unless Google is looking for extra-terrestrials, SETI is probably the code name for some internal infrastructure)... or the abbreviations FIGSCJKR spam, and EFIGSCJKR (the latter being something where Google wants to beat Yahoo).

In the meantime, Marissa Mayer was responsible to ensure that any site with over 10 million page views (per day? month?) renders in a second or less 95% of the time. Other teams saw their goals outlined by terminology such as 70% user happiness (Gmail 2.0), host XXM photos, up from XM (Picasa Web), an additional XXk machines for production indexing (index freshness), reduce bad landing page impressions by 20% (ads), or Playbacks: XXM/day (Google Video). If Googles release frenzy often appears chaotic from the outside, their internal goals do look very precise and organized... and almost every goal has a number attached to it, even when its a seemingly fuzzy area like user happiness. Another interesting feature foreshadowed in the Google papers was to grab relevant locations & dates from web pages allowing users to view results on a timeline of map. Keep in mind the papers are older by now so this might be what has already been released as Google News Archive search last month, or the Google Trends site. While the documents do not mention the goal of trying to decrease Google selfcensorship in China, there was mention of a Chinese Knowledge Search Beta.

Google Company Culture Google is a high-energy, fast paced work environment. While the dress code might be casual the company attracts and retains some of the brightest minds in the technology industry. There is a work hard, play hard atmosphere. The Google Mountain View, CA headquarters (aka the Googleplex) is a campus-like environment. There are workout facilities, a caf, well stocked snack rooms, and a dorm like environment. View the Google Office Descriptions for more details. In my opinion, one of the coolest programs at Google is the 20% time program. All Engineers at Google are encouraged to spend 20% of their work time on projects that interest them. Not only does this keep Engineers happy and challenged, its also good business: some estimates put half of all new product launches can be directly attributed to projects that came from the 20% time program.

Diversity in our culture and workplace

At Google, being yourself is a job requirement. When we encourage Googlers to express themselves, we really mean it. In fact, we count on it. Intellectual curiosity and diverse perspectives drive our policies, our work environment, our perks and our profits. It's the amazing diversity of Googlers that allows us to do extraordinary things.

Celebrating a culture of diversity Awards Benefits Equal Opportunity Celebrating a culture of diversity Diversity is an essential component of the culture at Google. Building diversity and inclusion into the way we operate around the globe continues to be an essential part of our business and our culture as Googlers.

The 6th Sense: Diversity Week in India In 2010 we organized The 6th Sense a week-long event with the theme of Diversity and Inclusion a first in Google India. Over 750 Googlers enthusiastically participated in this initiative to increase employee sensitivity and awareness of differences across genders, cultures, and sexual orientation.

We kicked off the week with Diversity 101, a tech talk covering basic frameworks of diversity and culture, resources available at Google, initiatives led by Googlers around the world, and how Googlers in India can get involved. Next, we attended the Engayging Lives session led by Nitin Karani, a well known gay rights advocate who has been working on LGBT issues for over 15 years. Nitin spoke about Humsafar Trust (Indias leading community-based HIV prevention organization), and ended with a panel discussion. The session received glowing feedback, including, Just discussing a sensitive topic in an open forum at Google was a picture of how diverse we are and is a good start in creating awareness. We also conducted a Yes, We Can workshop for a select group of women who had been nominated by their managers to participate. Participants brainstormed and shared ideas on overcoming obstacles, prioritizing work, and being a super woman. "I worked elsewhere before joining Google and I can very clearly differentiate between the two workforces. Initially I thought it was just a coincidence that such a diverse workforce is employed here. It was great to know that it was no coincidence, but instead due to the great effort taken by a lot of people here at Google.

Sum of Google Celebrations In 2009, a group of Googlers organized an event at the Google headquarters in Mountain View, CA, designed to celebrate our culture of diversity with food, music, dance performances, and executive speakers. This group of passionate Googlers launched the first event in a series of Sum of Google Celebrations with over 1,000 Googlers attending. 2010 saw the expansion of the Sum of Google phenomenon, with over 5,000 Googlers in 22 offices participating across JAPAC, EMEA, and the Americas. In Mountain View and Santa Monica, ERG leaders participated in a panel moderated by Laszlo Bock, (VP, People Operations), and joined 500 Googlers in celebrating with live dance performances, food, and an I am Part of the Sum photo shoot. In Bangalore and Hyderabad, we launched the Sum of Google Celebrations for the first time in India. Attended by over 500 Googlers in June 2010, the event included interactive kiosks set up by Googlers that provided employees with information on our diversity and inclusion initiatives across the country. In collaboration with the Google Culture Club, Googlers in Taiwan came out in large numbers to showcase the many ways they contribute to the Sum of Google.

In London and Zurich, local diversity teams and ERG leaders hosted Sum of Google TGIF celebrations.

Cultural Celebrations: Diwali and Google Mela Each year the Indus Googler Network (IGN) celebrates the Diwali Festival of Lights with 6,000 candles lighting the way at Charlie's Cafe at the Googleplex in Mountain View. This event is one of many hosted each year by the Indus Googler Network (IGN), formed to help raise cultural awareness of countries and people in the Indus region. This event is a fun way to get Googlers from across the world to come together, learn about new cultures, and tap into their hidden talents! At Diwali 2010, hundreds of Googlers and their families participated in an evening celebration where they collectively lit over 6,000 candles. The competition brought out beautiful and unique designs, merging Indian mythology with Google Culture. IGN celebrates the Indian Independence holiday with Google Mela, bringing together dancers, musicians, poets, game players, fashionistas, artists, and foodies. This years theme was Colors and Flavors: Diverse Regional Indian Culture, with 15 dance performances and 4 food buffets, featuring regional foods and dance from different parts of India. This Google celebration was cohosted by IGN, the Google Culinary Team, and the Dance Department.

What is google strategy:Boiling Googles strategy down to just one thing is impossible, but Internet marketers (and search marketers in particular) ought to be thinking about where Google wants to take the industry, because even if Google ultimately cant go where it wants, the industry will be changed regardless. Watching Google helps us understand not only where Google is going, but where others might go also. So, what is behind all the actions weve seen Google take over the years? Some of the motivations are simple. Googles revenue is based on advertising, so it needs more and more places to show its ads to increase its revenue. So, expanding its reach through its AdSense contextual ad network makes sense. So does its acquisition of DoubleClick. Both of these moves allow Google to place ads on Web properties it does not own. Similarly, Google has been consistently acquiring properties that serve as venues for its ads, such as Blogger and YouTube. Google has also pioneered new offerings that attract audiences for its ads, such as Gmail.

But Googles strategy is far richer than merely adding new venues for the same kind of ads it shows on search results pages. Google knows that the reason that its ads have commanded premium prices (versus banner ads) is because Google ads have the customers attention. When someone is searching for something, they are interested in the ads, while Web surfers might not be. Google understands that the attention paid to a message is a critical part of why it has high value to an advertiser. So, attention is more than real estate. Showing a display ad does not ensure true customer attention. True attention is a function of relevance. Google already commands attention with its search ads, and seeks to create similar relevance with other forms of advertising. The act of searching itself is based on relevance, but Googles contribution to advertising relevance is the hybrid paid search ranking schemethey were the first to rank search ads based on the combination of bid price and clickthrough rate. By adding clickthrough rate to the previous high-bidder approach, Google not only maximized its income, but also increased the relevance of those paid search ads. Its reasonable to think that the gradual increase in clicks on paid search ads is partially caused by the fact that they are more relevant than they once were, and searchers have learned trust them more. But thats not Googles strategy, its Googles history. Google has a history of selling advertising that is the most relevantits relevancy is driven by the attention people pay to it. Googles strategy is to broaden this kind of relevancy beyond search. Google wants plain old banner ads to command the same level of attention that paid search ads do. And the key to that kind of relevance is personalization. Thats Googles strategy. If you look at what Google has done over the years, it all ads up to finding out more about everyone. The Google toolbar can report search terms and Web sites visited. Geotargeting identifies where they are. Google Analytics reports all activity on a Web site. Google Checkout knows what gets bought. Google Website Optimizer knows which variations of your marketing message work best. Gmail knows what your customers say, even in private. Google might even bid on mobile phone spectrum, which might allow it to know peoples whereabouts and even more of their behavior. And its all tied together with your Google Account. Some people see some sinister Big Brother aspect to this, but I think its just the natural evolution of relevance. Search engineers have spent the last 40 years working on the content, but now its time to focus on the searcher. Thats why youre seeing Google and the other search engines beginning to personalize search results. And it will only escalatea few small changes to results here and there will lead to more and more personalized results over time. But thats not all. Behavioral targeting and retargeting brings personalization to banner ads. (Even ISPs are looking at behavioral targeting.) And Google is well-positioned to mine personal information, given how well it has executed its strategy. Its hard to remember how, just a few years ago, Google seemed less capable than Yahoo! and Microsoft to bring about personalization. Those companies had portals that promised to detect far more information than Googles simple (and

anonymous) search interface. Its remarkable how much ground Google has covered since, so that today it appears to know more about searchers and surfers than anyone. Could anything derail this strategy? The most likely problem Google will have to face down is a backlash based on privacy concerns. As the public becomes savvier about privacy with each passing year, providing free software might not be enough to persuade people to part with their privacy. Even the work underway is slow because searchers dont understand the benefits of personalized search. Google is well aware of this danger, so it remains to be seen if they can evade it. Its always dangerous to attempt to summarize a companys whole strategy in a short blog post Googles strategy is far more diffuse and nuanced than this. But it helps us to try to simplify things to their essence, even at the risk of oversimplifying, because it helps us understand the forces at work in Internet marketing. Understand that what Google wants to do might not happen, but it is certain to affect what others do and what eventually does happen in Internet marketing. If you pay attention to these broad themes as you do think through your marketing strategy, youll be more prepared for whatever does come along.

Google Enterprise strategy: 'Death to the hierarchy' By Donna Bogatin | November 14, 2006, 3:51pm PST I enjoyed breakfast at the spanking new Google NYC headquarters this morning, along with a rare inside look at the Internet search behemoth's enterprise search strategy. The Google Enterprise Seminar in a Box Search Appliance multi-state road show landed in New York today and about 200 executives from corporate, government and not-for-profit organizations attentively listened to Michael Lock, Director of North American Sales for Google Enterprise, making the Google case for enterprise search. Wouldn't it be great if search within your company was as easy as search on Google.com? Lock honed in on a simple message of Googley goodness: Google Enterprise Solutions makes organizational life as fast and effective as a personal search at Google.com. Lock prefaced his finely tuned sales pitch for Google Enterprise Solutions with an ode to Google: Google is a different kind of technology company, we build technology products that people love, not that they have to use.

Lock put forth that now users expect more out of technology, a no manual ease of use. Consumerization of information technology has heightened the expectations of end-users, in both their personal and professional situations, Lock asserted. Googles Enterprise Solutions strategy is to introduce products that look like consumer applications being used in personal lives within the organization. Googles core search product and user experience informs Googles Enterprise search products. The Google philosophy is to take the Google Internet search paradigm and bring it into the enterprise. Lock cited Google.com user search behavior and expectations. The average user types 1.7 words into the Google .com search box and expects to obtain satisfaction within the top three to five results, or will go somewhere else. Lock underscored, however, that users are generally not going somewhere else (Yahoo, Micorosoft, Ask.com), proudly noting that Google accounts for 60% of Internet searches. Lock quantified Internet search as a $15 billion plus market and pegged the enterprise search market at less than $1 billion. Google believes its formula for enterprise search will fulfill unmet organizational needs.

Lock juxtaposed the Google Internet search experience to the typical enterprise search experience. Google search uses one search box to navigate a single, comprehensive index; Enterprise search, however, involves silos of information. Google search offers great relevancy, enhanced by updated Google algorithms; Enterprise search, however, offers poor relevancy. Google search is simple and easy to use (less than 1% of users call upon the Advanced Search function); Enterprise search, however, is complex to use.

Lock concluded his Google search vs. enterprise search smackdown with his ace in the hole: Google search is free to the end user; Enterprise search starts at seven figures. Google believes the Google Enterprise cost advantage is a key competitive differentiator and said Google intends to aggressively drive down the price per document of its solutions. Lock underscored the increasing importance of search to the organization: Information volume is exploding: Documents Web pages Email IM Chats Intranets Databases Images File shares Spreadsheets Desktop Given the explosion of unstructured data in the enterprise, old methods of information management dont work, Lock asserted. He also offered a remedy: Death to the hierarchy! Lock put forth personal anecdotes to proclaim you dont put email in folders and declare GMail the victor over Outlook. Lock spoke of the old (pre-GMail) Outlook days when he would look forward to his transcontinental commutes for six hours of time to categorize email. Lock entertainingly, but pointedly, emphasized that Google solutions do not demand what he portrayed as labor intensive and inadequate user categorization via hierarchical folder structures. Lock then used his own GMail account to illustrate what he believes is the superiority of implicit organization via a single, intuitive search box. Lock proudly concluded that he has left behind hundreds of Outlook folders. In declaring Death to the hierarchy, was Lock obliquely suggesting an impending end of the Microsoft desktop folder dynasty? I asked Lock for a projection of when Google will succeed in bringing Death to the hierarchy. Lock offered that forward thinking enterprises are moving away from hierarchical data organization, but no specific date for an absolute demise of the "hierarchy" was provided.

BCG MATRIX:-

Cash Cow - The Search-Ad business is Google's Cash Cow, and at the moment makes all the profit Google earns - they have a very large (dominant) market share, but over time it is a slowing market (relative to the rapid growth of technology sectors and under increasing competitive pressure). They are thus doing what every company is advised to do in this position, ie to invest their surplus in faster growing industries and so keep up the pace. To this end their rate of acquisition has been phenomenal, not least because - by and large - their ability to launch their own successful products has so far been pretty lacklustre (Buzz is just the most recent to join the list) Question Marks - most of Google's acquisitions tend to be in the Question Mark camp - small market shares but in rapidly growing markets. No doubt the strategic thinking is that the Google infrastructure will be able to rapidly ramp up the growth of these small companies. In the pst, Google has been quite good at this, and refined the offerings before finally launching - problem is that by and large it hasn't worked more recently, and many of the acquisitions have withered, finding themselves becoming...

Dogs - these are plays that lose market share and/or the sector declines. Google places some bets early so the sector fizzles out, which is fine - low cost option plays are a creditable achievement. The problem is when too many Google acquisitions look like Jaiku - it was a decent competitor to Twitter but died as Twitter exploded, forcing Google into some far more high cost/high risk plays (such as Buzz) later in the day. Chrome could be a dog - the browser market is mature, they have a low market share - if the current consumer Ad campaign doesn't massively increase market share then its likely to be another failure. Stars - the aim of all the acquisitions is clearly to become Stars, those businesses that surpass the old business and launch Google into new areas. GMail / Google Docs and YouTube are the current successes - but none of them make any money, in fact YouTube would be spectacularly bankrupt if it wasn't for massive subsidies. And Stars have to make money eventually - very large services that lose money are a millstone around any company, and may well attract regulatory attention for being anticompetitive. So right now, these ain't real Stars, given their unprofitability they are more like black holes. So Google has to engineer something more here.

SWOT Analysis: Strengths: Google Already number one search engine has established a brand name, in which its users trust. Its dependable, reliable and fast. Google needs very little end user marketing as the name itself is getting word by mouth publicity. Google has a simple interface and it gives comprehensive results without confusing its users. Google has low operation cost as it uses low cost UNIX web servers for indexing millions of web pages across internet. Google has hired PhDs who are continuously working hard in order to enhance search algorithms and make searching faster, efficient and relevant. By 2003, Google has already powered over 75% of the 300 million searches conducted daily in the U.S. and 300 million plus outside the U.S. Google provides an interface to 88 languages to make it comfortable to search for its users in different countries. Google uses state of the art search technology to index pages regularly in order to give most updated results to its users. Google also weights the votes and ranks web pages with its PageRank technology to give its user access to most important pages first. Google is not biased towards advertisers. It clearly separates relevant advertisements and actual results by giving Sponsored Links tag to sponsored results when user searches to get information with some keyword. Moreover, it also ranks sponsored links to keep most relevant sponsored links on the top. Google offers localized search called search by location where users can get results showing vendors, products and services nearby their areas. Google also has a range of innovative additional services like Images, Groups, Directory, and News. Google didnt complicate its website by making itself a portal; rather it kept tabs for these services on its homepage so users can easily navigate and that also keeps the website as simple as it was earlier. Google has also come up with solutions for wireless handheld devices, personalized toolbars, catalogues which are added essence strengths. Google quickly routes the user to the webpage and doesnt linger for ad revenue. Weaknesses: Many spammers manipulate Googles ranking technology by creating dummy sites with thousands of links to pages that they wanted Google to rank highly. Googles link based ranking did not employ actual traffic analysis. Googles Cost Per Click advertising charging and ranking policy is confusing and makes it difficult for marketers to predict where their ads would be positioned and how much they would cost. Googles contextual advertising was perceived by marketers to be less effective in generating sales because visitors to web pages showing editorial content were less likely than searchers to

be ready to buy. Contextual search algorithms are not 100% perfect and many a times make mistakes. Googles localized search algorithms too sometimes result in errors due to automated indexing. Googles business model is complex, depending upon both google.com and mass market portals for its revenue. Although Google is a dominating player among search engine websites, only 50% to 65% of web search queries are answered accurately by it. Google doesnt have sticky like Yahoo! And MSN have which can attract users. Google doesnt have highly personalized search by which it could charge users with switching cost if they decide to leave Googles services. Opportunities: Google can increase switching cost by tracking users search histories with their permission and could remind users through emails for the relevant search updates as per their personal interest. Google can become a mass-market portal like Yahoo and MSN and can increase switching cost for its users. Google can add sticky like chat rooms and email systems to attract users and survive in tough competition. Google can enhance personalized and localized searching and can also add localized paid listings of advertisers. Google can start new services like multimedia, product search, private database, and print media. Google can also merge with an established mass-market portal to lock in large number of users and advertisers. Google can start giving full fledged services on hand held mobile devices to capture market beyond conventional internet. Threats: Google partially depends upon some portals like AOL. Getting those contracts terminated, Google would lose considerable share of its revenue. There is no long time entry barrier in this business. Many competitors can emerge in coming years with same services, better interface and names and can catch up Googles market. Googles confusing Cost Per Click ranking and charging policy could disappoint its advertisers and company would start loosing many of them. Competition and rivalry: Portals like yahoo provide more services and solutions with conventional search than Google do. Google would start loosing its users due to added attractions in such portals. MSN is coming up with its new operating system called Longhorn which would be having implicit query feature. Longhorn search will be able to search the web, blogs, news sources, hard drive files, email plus attachments all from a keyword search without a browser. Users will be able to search directly from already established Microsoft programs like MS word. This would handcuff users and ultimately it would harm Googles market. Overture has been Googles old competitor. Though Google has acquitted more advertisers

than Overture, Googles share of market revenue lags behind overture by 20% and there is always competition for getting collaborated with well known mass-market portals like AOL, Yahoo and MSN. Googles scale might also become a liability in order to cop up with new and enhanced search techniques if companys ability to modify its algorithms and database architecture was constrained by its server infrastructure and the size of its index. If Google comes up becoming portal, it may lose its simplicity and comprehensiveness because of which it is favorite among its users. Google can get trapped in issues regarding privacy if it decides to go for highly personalized search for which it has to capture users personal information. If Google decides to merge with some already established mass-market portal, it will start loosing its well earned brand name. Recommendations: Googles core competence is its strong search technology which gives accurate results to its users and that also at the right place without misleading them. Google should concentrate on making its search engine much more accurate, relevant and dependable which is most important thing as far as the users objective is concerned. Getting more users would also help the company in getting more advertisers and ultimately earning revenue. Google should start giving services like print, multimedia, travel, mail, Instant Messaging etc. to compete with one stop portals like Yahoo and MSN, but without changing its simplicity and comprehensiveness. Google can navigate users by putting simple links on its homepage and at the same time it would be able to sustain its traditional looks. Google has already started contextual and localized search solutions. It should improve the quality and relevance of results of these services as well as should start gathering revenues from advertisers who are covering certain areas and willing to pay only for the results which are accessed by the users of the area in which they are providing services or products. Google should also put in efforts to improve its search algorithms and stop spammers from spoofing and getting their pages ranked high. Google should also start providing personalized search solutions by storing users information with their permission and making web search comfortable for them when they come back. This would help the company in generating long term relationship with the customers. Google should regularly take feedback from its advertisers and should make changes in its charging and ranking policies if it is appropriate for both the parties as well as in favor of search engine users. Google can also generate revenue by indexing database of large organization and providing them private search solutions. Conclusion: It is not recommended for Google to merge with mass-market portal. Though that would help Google in securing users and advertisers but it would also harm Googles independent growth. Google has cutting edge technology and excellent minds behind it and it should use that in providing users with 100% relevant search results. Though rival portals are coming up with strategies to handcuff users but finally users would choose the one who gives most accurate

search results. As far as profit is concerned, locking in maximum market from quality services would automatically help Google in attracting more number of advertisers to make revenue from. Thus, Google should keep updating its technology and services with the same simplicity and comprehensiveness as it has been providing since its establishment.

Porter's 5 forces for Google

Force Supplier/Power

Impact on Google

Google is regionally not globally dominant. Competition Elimination and Substitution: Microsoft embedding their search tool into their Explorer browser. Threat of forward integration Google search may not perform as well with new software releases from Microsoft and Apple. Yahoo & Microsoft have radically improved their search engines and can on pass/deploy their search tool through their products. There is no such thing as the perfect search engine thus a better search engine invented by another will critically affect Google mayhap even mortally as 40% of the company revenue comes from advertising which is driven through the search engine. Online marketing and the rules governing what is good and bad practices (e.g. cloaking <reference>) are still evolving this could affect Googles current technology and philosophy. Switching costs are mostly related to hardware (storage of indices and speed of information return) and accuracy related (webbots/crawlers) Search tools are easily scalable. While there is currently not a great degree of legislative interference this will most likely change <web reference to Google and Big Brother> <Level>. Rules/ethic have not been defined so the environment is easily exploited or manipulated. Currently there are only a few rivals (Microsoft, Yahoo) so the degree of rivalry is more oriented to an oligarchy this could bring attention of UN or individual countries as a restriction of trade in the future. Switching costs for most of the search tools are nothing. Brand identity is important (if not paramount Google has made the language as a noun and a verb) Rival search tools are not dissimilar to Googles tool.

Barriers to Entry (Potential for New Market Entrants)

Competitive Rivalry (Degree of Rivalry)

Search tools are also used without overt referencing (which impinges on their discoverability) eBays search tool is Google. Improving on the search engine and its features is a significant task for a large number of highly skilled IT technologists. High. Switching costs are negligible Buyer inclination to substitute is primarily driven by speed and accuracy of the result and also by the overt pushing of ads that are included with the search results and pages. Users of the search tool are demanding more services and complexity or sophistication with the search tool to remain loyal to its use. Ad Revenue is directly related to use - - even the loss of a small percentage of use can mean significant revenue loss to Google or the other search generating companies. Technology requires extremely skilled staff high degree of competition for a limited pool. Loss of company/trade secrets if skilled staff more from one search generating organisation to another. Use of the search rankings is a significant leverage point by the owners of search tools in bargaining. Loss of ranking has in the past led to costly legal arguments equivalent of e_defamation_of_character or denial of services <add references> Users of the search tool are becoming more sophisticated and demanding other services also for free. Substitutes are available and for the same price: free No real reviews are undertaken on what features the web community would like to see so each search company employs researches to straw poll/guess directions. Two client groups web community wanting to search/locate items and the organisations selling products have to satisfy both client groups equally. Threat of backward integration?

Treat of Substitutes (Product & Technology) Development

Buyer Power

4 Keys To Google's Success I heard David Drummond, Google's General Counsel, speak at Stanford Law School yesterday. Drummond was ostensibly there to talk about some of the legal issues facing Google. He did talk a bit about the difficulty of complying with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in an environment where content owners seek to enforce their rights through Google rather than directly with the infringing sites. He also addressed questions from the audience about the subjective nature of Google's page rankings when it determines that a website has attempted to manipulate page rankings. But Drummond spent the better part of his time talking about what has made Google successful. Drummond pointed to 4 factors as the key to Google's success: 1. Technology. Along with its innovative approach to page ranking, Google is a purposebuilt hardware company, building all its own servers from components it buys directly for their manufacturers. According to Drummond, Google now operates the world's largest distributed computer system. 2. Business Model Innovation. By perfecting the nature of targeted ads, Google not only has created a highly effective revenue generator, it has produced what it hopes to be a better experience for its users. It is Google's goal to make their targeted ads at least as relevant and useful to users as the search results themselves. 3. Brand. According to Drummond, a European study recently determined Google to be the number one most recognized worldwide brand. Indeed, Google has become a verb ("I can't wait to get home and Google him") which poses real challenges to a company seeking to protect the strength of its mark. 4. Focus On The User Experience. Product decisions at Google are driven by optimizing for the user experience first and for revenue second. The folks at Google firmly believe that the better the user experience, the more easily money will follow. I believe that all of these are important factors in developing any great technology company. Powerful customer-focused technology with an eye towards making money -- that's pretty much the formula. Even brand, which can be prohibitively expensive to develop ahead of customer traction, will likely follow product leadership. Google's success isn't rocket science, it's just good old fashion company building. Good for them for the discipline. It's an excellent model to follow.