Another month, another search data report from comScore.

In the June episode, both Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft’s (MSFT) Bing gained a weensy bit of market share, while Google (GOOG) gave some up.

But a caveat all around: There is still a lot of uncertainty in the results because of issues involving extra search query-clicks being generated via questionable techniques around contextual search, which comScore (SCOR) said it will eventually fix.

According to analyst Imran Khan of J.P. Morgan:

Without adjustments, Google domestic core search market share was 62.6% in June, down from 63.7% in May. Google domestic core search volume growth of 12.7% Y/Y in June was up from May’s 9.1% growth.

Unadjusted, Yahoo! domestic core search market share increased to 18.9% in June from 18.3% in May. Yahoo! June core search volume was up 13% Y/Y, an improvement from May’s 1% growth. We believe the company is working to address its search market share as outlined at its recent Analyst Day–though the majority of the near-term uplift is coming from efforts to ensure third-party measurement is correctly crediting Yahoo! for contextual searches.

Unadjusted, Microsoft sites domestic core search market share increased to 12.7% in June, from 12.1% in May. Microsoft grew June core search volume by 77% Y/Y, accelerating from 68% growth in May.

Twitter has quietly been reaching out to marketers about its new ad platform for a few months, but now it’s a full-fledged marketing blitz. The messaging service rolled out its ad strategy to the press last night; today it’s going directly to the ad industry, via COO Dick Costolo’s presentation at Ad Age’s Digital Conference.

I’m not sure how much more Costolo will reveal that Twitter hasn’t put out already–or may be waiting to talk about at tomorrow’s Chirp conference. But since I’m here I’ll liveblog it anyway.

Liveblog

Costolo says he has been waiting five or six months to give this presentation. It’s time to walk through the rollout, he adds, making note of his “fascinating nontraditional” prediction last fall.

He explains the Twitter ecosystem. The ad platform has to go everywhere, not just to Twitter.com. He refuses to call the ads, “ads.” They’re “just tweets.”

“Promoted tweets,” that is.

He walks through the @hashtagtees example.

There’s a menu from which ad buyers can pick search terms and associate them with specific tweets they’ve already published.

Promoted tweets look and act like regular tweets except that they’re labeled as promotions and stay at the top of the Twitterstream.

A promoted tweet “combines earned media and paid media in one space,” Costolo says.

“Earned” media are free, Costolo reminds the audience. That is, if people retweet your paid tweet, there’s no charge additional charge.

The pitch continues: Ads are “real time,” and so are analytics–you can see how ads are performing second-by-second.

Twitter will start with Twitter.com search. That’s phase one. The plan will roll out more broadly, but the company is doing it this way because it wants a “thoughtful, user-centric approach” to figuring it out. “We will quickly expand into syndication…all of our syndication partners.” And here, Costolo specifically mentions UberTwitter in the list of partners.

Important: Twitter will definitely expand into the regular timeline at some point. That is, you will be getting ads in your stream whether you search or not. Ad-free Twitter is over.

Costolo talks about the “resonance” metric Twitter will use to figure out which promoted tweets show up and where.

Each ad partner will see a scoreboard with different metrics: Retweets, @replies, #tag click, avatar clicks, link clicks, views after RT.

Advertisers won’t pay for ads that don’t resonate with users.

Next, Costolo describes communication on Twitter as both “one to many” and as a “real-time interest graph.”

Pricing will start as CPM. Twitter is doing this because it doesn’t know how to correlate “resonance” with value yet. As the company figures this out, it will move to a pricing model based on ROI.

Here comes Porter Gale, VP of marketing for Virgin America, a launch partner. She notes that @jack is flying VA right now.

[You're not missing anything here.]

Um, here’s a free ad for two-for-one tickets on Virgin. Don’t really follow it but sure you can figure it out if you’d like.

And here’s Ellen Stone, SVP of marketing at Bravo.

She is also excited!

[You're not missing anything here, either.]

Stone describes some sort of live, real-time convergence between shows broadcast and users’ tweets. Makes my head hurt. Hope it doesn’t pop up during “Top Chef.”

Back to Costolo: More monetization coming. Commercial accounts coming after promoted tweets will “feather into this platform very very nicely.” One dashboard will manage both products.

Q&A

Will tweets be syndicated to Google (GOOG), Yahoo (YHOO), and other partners that take the stream?
Costolo says yes, without mentioning any specific search engine or media pub.

Will there be revenue-sharing with publishers and bloggers?
Yes, with developers and publishers. Costolo says Twitter will talk about this at its Chirp conference and focus on the syndication piece there. Revenue sharing will be “very transparent,” he adds.

Early reaction from consumers?
Yes, Twitter is getting a “wait and see,” Costolo notes. [From whom? Who's seen it?] The company will take its “learnings” from search and go forward. Twitter ads should be live and running now.

What CPM are you charging?
Twitter is playing around with different numbers, trying to figure it out. When a term is owned or created by a client, like Virgin America, should it have “rights” to that hashtag, whereby no one can outbid it? Some hashtags only have value at certain times. Like “Super Bowl,” which is only useful for a couple hours in the year. So we have to play around and test different kinds of pricing. “We don’t know the answer to that yet.”

What kind of reactions are you looking for from users?
Costolo says Twitter is looking to see whether people click or interact with ads and paying attention to the tenor of reaction: Positive or negative, etc. Think about the iPad launch this month. People were having battery issues. Someone could have jumped in in real time and bought a promoted tweet that dealt with that. Twitter’s hope is that when people see these, they’ll get why they work.

Please talk about search volume.
“Massive. It’s huge.” Will talk about hashtags tomorrow. But on Twitter.com, it’s a small piece of traffic. So we’re not maximizing revenue now. We’re figuring it out.

How will location work with ads?
“We think significantly.” There are lots of opportunities down the road. As this gets more sophisticated, will see opps for small and big business.

Will marketers be able to get resonance scores for companies that aren’t using promoted tweets?
Not at first. But possibly.

Will you share revenue with TweetDeck, etc.?
Yes. We’ll talk about this tomorrow so we can save something for those guys. Revenue-sharing will be very transparent. Costolo name-checks Iain Dodsworth of TweetDeck and Loïc Le Meur at Seesmic.

Finished up. I will have some questions for Costolo myself, a little later this afternoon.

Late last night, Yahoo’s Tapan Bhat (pictured here) posted an update on the ongoing redesign of the Internet giant’s homepage, a massive undertaking given that 300 million people visit it each month.

Bhat, who is SVP of Yahoo’s Front Doors, Communities and Network Services, said the company was completing the first phase of its “bucket testing” and collecting feedback, but that, “Bottom line is we’re getting closer to the final design, but we’re not quite there yet.”

Indeed not, according to several sources at Yahoo (YHOO), who said that the massive underhaul of the homepage has been a much more complex, much dicier effort and was taking a lot longer than expected to launch.

(You can see examples of the redesign and also Bhat’s post last night on Yahoo’s corporate blog, Yodel Anecdotal, below.)

When the redesign–which is called “Metro” internally–was announced last September, Bhat said the changes would initially impact less than one percent of worldwide users in the United States, the United Kingdom, France and India.

But he also said they would then be rolled out to a wider and wider circle over the next six months. That has not happened, obviously.

Why? One key reason: Some results in limited testing showing actual declines in traffic, both from pointing outward more and also having people stay on the homepage with beefed-up “one-click” features.

The biggest issue is openness, which is aggressive in the new design, especially for Yahoo.

But it is a move pushed strongly by former CEO Jerry Yang. The idea is that Yahoo was a “starting point” for consumers was one of his key strategies.

That includes adding in lots of widget-like applications, or apps, onto the homepage from outside partners, and many more links to sites all over the Web.

“We’re pointing people off Yahoo and they are going,” said one exec about Yahoo’s first massive redesign since 2006. “While being open is a good thing, it also means less traffic inside Yahoo.”

Said another: “A lot of us want it to point more to great Yahoo services we offer instead of giving everyone else the benefit of our size.”

And the results so far, several sources said, have definitely caught the attention of new Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz, who some say might be considering slowing the wider rollout of the new homepage that insiders said was expected to be well on its way by spring.

Delay is, of course, common in massive projects like this, especially in this case, since the Yahoo homepage is a powerful “firehose” all over Yahoo and the Web.

When I contacted Bhat earlier this week to ask about the status of the homepage redesign, he would not comment about when it would roll out widely or about results of the testing, or give me access to the redesigned pages.

But he did kindly offer to walk me through the progress so far, next week at Yahoo HQ in Sunnyvale.

Then an update from Bhat suddenly appeared last night, in which he outlined that positive and negative feedback from that small number of Yahoo customers who have been using the new homepage.

Apparently, testers love the streamlined look and feel and the apps, and prefer the new page over the current one.

They also want even more apps, though, and think Yahoo should nix the darker color, as well as give easier access to mail and other services.

One assumes that is just a tiny bit of the feedback, especially given how dramatic the changes are.

In a post last fall when the redesign was announced by Bhat, I wrote that Yahoo was “employing a design that more significantly allows users to customize the starting page in a way that essentially amounts to a kind of My Yahoo-lite for everyone.”

That meant the ability to get to information and services more quickly, with links to outside email providers, initially from Google (GOOG) and Time Warner (TWX) online unit AOL.

The test design also includes a prominent left-hand vertical bar, with applications from both Yahoo properties and third-party services like eBay (EBAY), which are easy to add and remove.

Eventually, Bhat said at the time, there would be thousands of apps, from Yahoo and also from outside developers.

“People want broadcast and narrowcast at the same time,” said Bhat then. “They want choices, but they also don’t want to do the work involved [in programming their own homepage].”

Noting that it was not the dashboard approach of My Yahoo or iGoogle, Bhat added at the time: “People are time-starved…so it is important to the user to get to their relevant daily information as quickly as possible without having to click around.”

But, said several sources at Yahoo who have seen the Metro results so far, by giving them more options, especially outside ones, clicking around is precisely what users do.

More next week when I visit with Bhat…

Until then, here is a screenshot Bhat posted of the latest look for Metro last night, and below it are several screenshots of the initial Yahoo redesign, as well as Yahoo’s current homepage (click on the images to make them larger).

In addition, Bhat’s whole post last night about Metro’s progress is at the very bottom.

This is the latest iteration of the homepage redesign:

This is the homepage that was rolled out in September 2007:

This is a homepage rolled out in September 2007 that includes more outside apps:

This is the homepage rolled out in September 2007 that shows how email from Yahoo and Google and AOL would look:

This is a screenshot of Yahoo’s current home page:

And here is the full text of the Bhat post from last night, below.

Update on our new homepage testing

Tapan Bhat
Senior Vice President, Yahoo! Front Doors, Communities and Network Services

The Camera Phone Predator Alert Act would require camera-phone manufacturers to include an audible “click” or other sound when the device takes a photo. That sound won’t be able to be disabled or silenced, according to the draft of the bill.

“Congress finds that children and adolescents have been exploited by photographs taken in dressing rooms and public places with the use of a camera phone,” the draft says.

Read the rest of the post

ComScore subsequently backed off its claims a bit, publishing a blog post called “Why Google’s surprising paid click data are less surprising” which explained that the decline in Google’s paid clicks it charted could have been the result of the company’s click-quality initiatives and not a slowdown in its business. But on Tuesday, comScore published another report that showed growth in paid search clicks is slowing. One of its key data points: Google’s paid clicks grew by just 1.8% year-over-year.

Well, Google reported earnings yesterday and according to its metrics, paid-click growth grew by about 20%. And CEO Eric Schmidt did not let that discrepancy between those two figures go unremarked: “The business model continues to work very well,” he said. “It’s also interesting to note that paid-clicks growth is much higher than has been speculated by third parties.”

“Third parties” in this case being comScore. Now, granted comScore’s metrics included U.S. clicks alone, while Google’s included worldwide clicks, so comScore’s estimate, in all likelihood, isn’t off by 18.2%. That said, it’s still off according to Google–which, with that one little quip from Schmidt, sent comScore’s shares down more than 7%, the same decline it suffered at the research outfit’s hands back in February.

ComScore subsequently backed off its claims a bit, publishing a blog post called “Why Google’s surprising paid click data are less surprising” which explained that the decline in Google’s paid clicks it charted could have been the result of the company’s click-quality initiatives and not a slowdown in its business. But on Tuesday, comScore published another report that showed growth in paid search clicks is slowing. One of its key data points: Google’s paid clicks grew by just 1.8% year-over-year.

Well, Google reported earnings yesterday and according to its metrics, paid-click growth grew by about 20%. And CEO Eric Schmidt did not let that discrepancy between those two figures go unremarked: “The business model continues to work very well,” he said. “It’s also interesting to note that paid-clicks growth is much higher than has been speculated by third parties.”

“Third parties” in this case being comScore. Now, granted comScore’s metrics included U.S. clicks alone, while Google’s included worldwide clicks, so comScore’s estimate, in all likelihood, isn’t off by 18.2%. That said, it’s still off according to Google–which, with that one little quip from Schmidt, sent comScore’s shares down more than 7%, the same decline it suffered at the research outfit’s hands back in February.

Net income rose 31% on revenue growth of 42% from a year ago, exceeding Wall Street estimates. Overall paid clicks rose 20% in the quarter compared with the period a year earlier. That’s down from 30% growth of the previous quarter, but better much better than the forecasts of, ahem, certain third parties. “Our ongoing innovation in search, ads and apps helped drive healthy growth globally across our product lines, yielding another strong quarter for Google,” said Chief Executive Eric Schmidt. Apparently, the slowing U.S. economy hasn’t had much impact on the company’s business.

Shares of Google soared past the $500 mark in after-hours trading on the news. Seems the company’s historic run is far from over.

The collectibles retailer claims it paid Yahoo’s Search Marketing unit, formerly known as Overture Services, some $936,000 between 2002 and 2006 for click-throughs. It assumed these click-throughs were from legitimate customers, but it turned out they were generated by Yahoo/Overture affiliates who received commissions based on the number of clicks their sites generated for advertisers.

“These clicks were not actual traffic, but were fraudulent clicks,” BigReds claims in the suit. “Affiliates of Overture used software programs, employed people, and/or directed people other than actual customers to click on plaintiffs’ links from keyword search results.”

To be fair, Yahoo did offer BigReds a refund for the fraudulent clicks. It just wasn’t as large as the retailer had hoped–$17,082.80.

I headed online to start researching (I was looking for a used car) but was overwhelmed by an avalanche of information. Everyone seemed to have something to say about cars, whether in blogs, community forums, editorial reviews, Kelley Blue Book values, Carfax reports or local dealer sites. As I discussed my findings with friends and family, more people than not were surprised to hear about the variety of research and price comparisons available online.

This week’s column is an overview of sites that may help you or someone you know browse for a new or used car on the Web. I used sites ranging from trusted resources like ConsumerReports.org to search engine tools like Yahoo Autos. This column can’t possibly mention every car-searching resource on the Web; rather, it’s just a taste of what’s available.

Edmunds.com and ConsumerReports.org both feature informative data on a number of new and used vehicles. Edmunds is a free site specifically geared toward cars, including an online magazine for enthusiasts called Inside Line and a Web forum for discussions about automobiles called CarSpace. I used various tools on Edmunds.com, including one that estimates the true cost to own a specific car over time. I especially enjoyed reading an article titled “Confessions of a Car Salesman,” which proved uncanny in predicting a range of tricks and techniques the salespeople used when I first visited a car dealership.

Edmunds offers a four-step pricing system, which includes getting quotes from dealers, and a payment calculator, which estimates monthly payments. Edmunds teams up with AutoTrader.com to help perform searches for certified pre-owned or used cars online.

Consumer Reports covers products as well as cars but keeps much of its most useful data behind a Web-site subscription, which costs $26 annually or $5.95 monthly (magazine subscribers can pay a discounted price of $19 a year). You need this subscription to access CR’s respected ratings and certain sections of its Web forums. These ratings were helpful to me, as they assessed numerous aspects of specific car models, including trouble spots by year, performance, safety and fuel economy.

CR also offers valuable lists such as “All Recommended Cars,” “Best and Worst Used Cars” and “Reliable Used Cars by Price.” A car-buying calculator is an asset to this site that helps you decide whether it would be smarter to buy or lease a vehicle.

Google, Yahoo and AOL all present special search-results pages when you search for a specific car for sale, using drop-down menus and various ways to sort results. Google Base for automobiles, found by selecting “Vehicles” from www.google.com/base, is a list of data submitted to Google. Drop-down menus help broaden or narrow results by sorting the data according to certain attributes, such as make or price. Vehicle-search results can be viewed in one of three formats: List View, Table View or Map View — an illustration of each car’s location in relationship to a Zip Code. I found Table View most useful because it organized data in smart, spreadsheet-like displays so I could quickly skim through columns listing price, color, amenities and mileage.

But not all car searches within Google Base returned the same drop-down-menu options for sorting. In a few instances, I couldn’t sort my search results by model year. Google Base does show the date on which each car was listed.

Yahoo Autos, found at www.autos.yahoo.com, teamed up with Cars.com to offer richer content, including a Car Finder feature that helps people narrow down what type of new car they might like according to price, driving style and fuel (type and economy). Yahoo even tries to answer car questions with its Yahoo Answers Q&A tool, which lets people submit questions. I found user reviews on this site, as well as expert reviews provided by NewCarTestDrive.com, an auto-review site.

The used-car section in Yahoo Autos reminded me of Google with its drop-down menus and results that displayed in list or map views. List view shows plenty of information in one glance, including an image of the car for sale and the number of additional available photos. From this list, users can link directly to view or order Carfax reports or email the dealer, saving time wasted on excess mouse clicks and browsing.

AOL Autos, found at http://autos.aol.com, does a nice job of integrating Web 2.0 features such as pop-up menus that appear within a page rather than in an entirely new Web page. Vehicle-search results are found by entering a few criteria for a new or used car, and used-car results can be further narrowed by adding or subtracting desired specifics listed on the far left of the screen. Some specs include model type, engine, year or extras like heated seats or a sunroof.

This site can also condense numerous used-car listings into one graph that illustrates car prices in relationship to mileage or year. Selecting any point on the graph reveals a short description of a vehicle’s location, price and mileage. For new cars, AOL Autos offers lengthy expert reviews from NewCarTestDrive.com, as well as user reviews.

Both Yahoo Autos and AOL Autos walk users through steps to get price quotes from dealers for new cars.

Carfax.com provides car-history reports using vehicle-identification numbers, or VINs. For a $30 fee, used-car buyers can use Carfax.com for 30 days. This report shows a vehicle’s history such as if it was a rental or not, how many different owners it had, how long each owner possessed the vehicle and where it came from. Tips pop up within these reports, including one that warned me about “curbstoning,” a term that describes an individual without a dealer’s license looking to sell a number of cars by posing as a private seller.

As can be expected, many newspaper Web sites offer automobile sections that display digitized classified ads, so be sure to check your local paper’s Web site.

At the end of the day, test-driving a car will be a true test as to whether or not you like it — no matter how much research you’ve done online. But knowing your stuff before you visit a dealership can save money and time.

• Email mossbergsolution@wsj.com.

In a blog post today, comScore CEO Magid Abraham and senior VP James Lamberti argue that the decline in paid clicks is likely the result of improvements in Google’s click programs. “The evidence suggests that the softness in Google’s paid-click metrics is primarily a result of Google’s own quality initiatives that result in a reduction in the number of paid listings and, therefore, the opportunity for paid clicks to occur,” the two wrote. “In addition, the reduction in the incidence of paid listings existed progressively throughout 2007 and was successfully offset by improved revenue per click. … Separately, there is no evidence of a slowdown in consumers clicking on paid search ads for rest of the U.S. search market.”

What’s more, the comScore execs write, Google’s click-quality initiatives don’t necessarily translate into more clicks. “If the ads are more relevant, consumers would need fewer clicks to get what they are looking for,” they explain. “Perversely, a high number of clicks means that the ads are not delivering what the user is looking for on the first try, which induces additional clicks on the second or third try. The benefits to marketers are real, but also counterintuitive. If the users get to what they want with fewer clicks, it means those clicks have a higher conversion rate, or deliver higher quality leads.”

Ah. Well, if that’s the case, why didn’t you say so in the first place? Or at least before you singlehandedly knocked 7% off the company’s share price.

Perhaps the slowing economy is having an impact on Google’s growth after all. Certainly the continued deceleration in the company’s paid click growth suggests as much. In October of 2007 Google showed 37% click growth. In November it showed 27%. Then in December it showed 12%. And in January it showed no growth at all. As Henry Blodget notes over at Silicon Alley Insider, that sort of steady decline seems more a trend than “a wacky one-month comScore aberration.”

Google shares are down more than $34, or about 7%, at $451 as I write this.

Perhaps the slowing economy is having an impact on Google’s growth after all. Certainly the continued deceleration in the company’s paid click growth suggests as much. In October of 2007 Google showed 37% click growth. In November it showed 27%. Then in December it showed 12%. And in January it showed no growth at all. As Henry Blodget notes over at Silicon Alley Insider, that sort of steady decline seems more a trend than “a wacky one-month comScore aberration.”

Google shares are down more than $34, or about 7%, at $451 as I write this.