Notes

Google, Yahoo!, Pandora's Box And The Lottery
In the fall of 1990, the musical group Snap had a monster quantity one hit record referred to as, "I have Got The Energy."

These days, a search engine and a directory (AKA) Google and
Yahoo!--number one and amount two respectively, have "the
energy," and we handed it to them on a silver platter.

The aforementioned search engine and directory are the two
biggest players in the multi billion dollar pay-for-search
industry.

Our stubborn and foolish reliance on search engines have
assisted to open up a "Pandora's Box" of greed, arrogance and
theft.

Yahoo! Express is a excellent example of all 3 of
those evils! Check out their terms:

"Please preserve in mind that payment does not automatically
guarantee inclusion in the directory, website placement, or
web site commentary. As with all web sites recommended to us, ultimate
judgement remains solely with Yahoo! editors. Yahoo! Express
Ensures All Yahoo! Express submissions will be evaluated
within 7 company days. You will get an e mail
response within 7 business days, stating whether your
entry is accepted or declined. (If your entry is denied, you
will be advised why.) The Price of Yahoo! Express Yahoo! Express
needs a US $299.00 non-refundable, recurring annual fee
per submission, or US $600.00 non-refundable, recurring
annual charge for submissions offering adult content and/or
solutions. Yahoo! Express does not ensure a listing in the
Yahoo! directory, nor does it assure the kind of
placement or description that your site will receive if
accepted. Please go through our Yahoo! Express Terms of Support to
evaluation the terms and situations of Yahoo! Express."

I suggest, think about this for a second. You pay $300 to $600 to get listed in their directory, and they tell you they can not assure your web site will be listed. And by the way, if your site is rejected, we'll just preserve your money!

Why does Yahoo! do that? Since like "lambs going to
slaughter," we enable them to!

Here's yet another instance of greed, arrogance and theft? Examine
out this statement from Google:

"We are exposed to the danger of fraudulent clicks on our adverts.
We have frequently paid refunds connected to fraudulent clicks
and count on to do so in the future. If we are unable to stop
this fraudulent activity, these refunds might improve. If we
find new proof of past fraudulent clicks, we could have to
issue refunds retroactively of amounts previously paid to
our Google Network members."

Now, I don't know about you, but I for one refuse to think
that bunch of poppycock about Google becoming powerless to stop click fraud. The difficulty is, there's no incentive for them to stop it. It actually isn't going to matter to Google how many times a person fraudulently clicks on your ad. Why ought to it? It isn't going to affect their pocketbook. They still get their funds both way!

And they don't even have to worry about processing an avalanche of refunds, because many of their advertisers never even know how to analyze their log files. As a result, they have no thought how much money they're shedding. So, they just keep proper on replenishing their spend-per-click accounts, foolishly hoping to catch "lightning in a bottle!"

Why is not Google carrying out much more to avoid click fraud? I do not
know precisely, but I have a couple of theories. Very first of all, Google's advertisers haven't expressed the required outrage to impact alter. Secondly, I feel Google has looked at the bottom line and determined, it is truly a great deal much more cost successful to issue a couple of refunds than to create the engineering to get rid of click fraud.

Otherwise, Google would have stepped up to the plate like a accurate leader and mentioned one thing comparable to this ficticious statement:

"Absolutely nothing is more important to us than our customers. They
helped make us who we are today, and we will not let them
down. We are established to meet and defeat click fraud head
on--no matter how how extended it requires or how a lot it
in the end costs!"

By not issuing the over statement or something along these
lines, Google revealed its true colours!

In my article, "The Truth About Search Engines: Taking part in A
Game You Cannot Win," I compared the odds of acquiring a higher
ranking in the search engines akin to winning the lottery.
This is what I wrote:

"If you go strictly by the numbers, Yahoo!, MSN and Google
are the "Large 3" of search engines and directories. Between
them, they index hundreds of thousands and millions of pages in their
directories. Even though Google claims to index over four billion.

Nonetheless, which is a topic for yet another day. The stage is, out
of all these hundreds of thousands and millions of pages, there's area
for only a extremely few websites at the best of the final results
pages.

That indicates, if you go strictly by the amount of indexed net
pages in their directories, you have a much better chance of
winning the lottery, than obtaining large sufficient in the outcomes
pages to where it really is going to make a significant difference
in your traffic. That is not my opinion, it is a truth!"

Following that post was published, you must have observed some of the e-mails I acquired from angry Search engine optimization specialists, telling me I did not know what I was talking about, and writing something like that was reprehensible and irresponsible journalism!

Irresponsible journalism. Actually? As the saying goes, "the
proof is in the pudding." So, I'm going to let my readers do
the math:

In accordance to a current examine by Inktomi and NEC Analysis,
there are presently over two billion internet sites on the
Internet. http://meganfoundation.org/mainkan-toto-macau-4d-hanya-dengan-100-perak-dan-menang-besar/ Google, Yahoo and MSN are deemed the "Large three"
of search engines and directories. In other words, individuals
three generate the majority of visitors.

Now, we all know the leading 10 is deemed prime real estate,
with regard to the search engines. Research have proven that
if you happen to be site is listed outside of the leading ten spots,
there is a significant drop-off in site visitors. Sadly,
there are only a complete of thirty best ten spots amongst the "Large
three."

Are you still with me so far? There are only thirty
obtainable leading ten spots, and an estimated two billion
websites on the Internet. You do the math! Thirty and two
billion certain sound like lottery odds to me. What do you
believe?
Homepage: http://meganfoundation.org/mainkan-toto-macau-4d-hanya-dengan-100-perak-dan-menang-besar/