Ling had worked closely with Google’s Marissa Mayer on various products in search and local, and had for a brief time joined Facebook before returning to Google via YouTube.

Badoo is a site for meeting and flirting with people that is increasingly used through mobile apps.

Badoo CMO Jessica Powell also came from Google, where she was previously a communications exec, as did Badoo’s head of engineering, Gene Sokolov.

The company said Ling will be in charge of product, engineering, business operations, partnerships and mergers and acquisitions.

Following Zuckerberg in the No. 2 spot is Google CEO Larry Page, who’s been broken out from his usual pairing with co-founder Sergey Brin. Brin’s down at No. 11 this year, followed by fellow Googler Marissa Mayer at No. 20.

Entirely absent from the 2011 list are Twitter co-founders Evan Williams and Biz Stone, who shared the No. 3 spot in 2010. They’ve since left the company and are back undercover working on new start-up projects together at Obvious.

Other featured techies this year include Jack Dorsey of Square and Twitter (8), Spotify’s Daniel Ek (18), Groupon’s Andrew Mason (27), Foursquare’s Dennis Crowley (28), Dropbox’s Drew Houston and Arash Ferdowski (29), Facebook’s Carolyn Everson (35), Opower’s Dan Yates and Alex Laskey (36), and Instagram’s Kevin Systrom (39).

The 40 under 40 issue hits newsstands on Oct. 24.

Today, Fortune magazine released its annual “50 Most Powerful Women in Business” and, as usual, it had its share of tech execs on the list.

And off it, too — first and foremost being ousted Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz, who was jacked completely from her 2010 No. 10 rank. She was No. 8 in 2009.

In her place: Newly designated Hewlett-Packard CEO and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman grabbed the No. 9 spot.

Also on the list: fast-rising IBM sales, marketing and strategy exec Ginni Rometty at No. 7; Xerox CEO Ursula Burns at No. 8; Oracle President and CFO Safra Catz at No. 11; Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg at No. 12; Google execs Susan Wojcicki and Marissa Mayer at No. 28 and No. 38, respectively; IBM North America GM Bridget Van Kralingen at No. 39; and Best Buy Americas President Shari Ballard.

Catz was the highest paid of the group, with $42.1 million in total 2010 compensation.

And also taken off this year: 2010 No. 14, HP’s Ann Livermore, who left her top job there, but still is on the tech giant’s board; 2010 No. 28 Cathie Lesjak, CFO of HP; 2010 No. 44 Lorrie Norrington, a former president at eBay; and Apple’s communications head Katie Cotton (she was robbed!), who was No. 50 in 2010.

The new list will be in the magazine on Monday, which is when a related conference will take place in Southern California. (I will also be in attendance there, along with other less powerful ladies.)

Whitman is scheduled to speak at the conference in the afternoon on Tuesday, October 4.

Ready, aim, fire — at Google at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s antitrust subcommittee hearing happening right now in Washington, D.C.

It is titled: “The Power of Google: Serving Consumers or Threatening Competition?”

Here we go:

11:04 am: As usual in D.C., the Senators on the committee get to pontificate first.

Oh, joy! (I used to live there and cover Congress stuff for the Washington Post from time to time and I am having bad déjà vu right now.)

A quick cut to Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt, who is appearing alone. He looks a little peaked, especially as the pols begin to describe the scary behemoth the search giant is.

And also that it is trying to force users to its other products.

Rut-roh.

11:07 am: Sen. Mike Lee, the Republican from Utah, who is a Google critic, is talking on about the search giant’s power, reading from his testimony in a dullish style.

I thought this dude was a Tea Party firebrand!

“The primary focus should be consumer welfare,” he says, blah, blah, blaaaaaaah.

11:09 am: Now, the subcommittee’s dour chairman, Sen. Herb Kohl from Wisconsin, is introing Schmidt, who is actually being introed by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

She is an Eric fan, obvi, praising his accomplishments at Google. But she also gives props to Jeffrey Katz, CEO of Nextag, who is testifying against Google later. Also, let her add, is the fabulous CEO of Yelp, Jeremy Stoppelman, another anti-Google speaker to come.

“I hope they tango rather than tangle,” says Feinstein inexplicably about those called to testify. Hey, white geeks can’t dance, although wrestling would also be hard for them too.

In any case, gotta love these everybody-loving pols!

11:14 am: Finally, Schmidt, who — of course — starts off invoking the last big tech giant who was here getting spanked by Congress.

Schmidt does not name Microsoft — classy, by which I mean not at all — but is referring to the software giant.

“We get it,” he says about the lessons Google has learned from Microsoft’s own antitrust troubles back in the day.

11:18 am: Schmidt is talking about Google and saying he welcomes the competition.

“Today it’s Google turn in the spotlight,” he says, still not uttering the word “Microsoft,” much as Microsoft execs have often not been able to say Google. “One company’s past [should] not be another company’s future.”

Now, the senators can have at him. Kohl is up first.

11:20 am: The first question is if Google is favoring its own products, via search.

Schmidt harkens back to what he calls early Google lore that it is just trying hard to get consumers stuff quicker.

The need for speed!

“Is really trusting Google to do the right thing sufficient?,” asks Kohl, who quotes former President Ronald Reagan’s famous line: “Trust but verify.”

That gives Schmidt the chance to talk about how quickly Google could lose out to competitors and then is onto how hard it is to do what Google does.

It takes extra-smart smartypants. Trust us, he says, as we are smartier!

11:24 am: Kohl comes back with a damning quote from Google’s famous Marissa Mayer, who apparently has said that the company favors its own products and why not?

Schmidt says he was not there when she allegedly said this, but that its own testing and intuition tells Google if consumers want a Google map or whatever tout de suite!

Kohl repeats the Mayer quote again: “We do all the work for the search page, so we put [a Google Maps link] in first.”

“I will let Marissa speak for herself,” says Schmidt, now too deep in the weeds of her verbal faux pas. Get out, Eric!

11:28 am: Sen. Lee is up, not taking any of this speedy, we-know-best business.

And he has a chart! I love a good chart. It shows Google info always ranks first in listings versus other sites it competes with.

Schmidt has not seen this poll, but thinks it is not accurate.

11:31 am: Let me note that Schmidt’s grey suit is fantastic looking. And right behind him, you can see Google’s top lawyer, the always nattily dressed David Drummond.

Back to the chart!

Lee wants to know why, according to his chart, that Google seems to come up first.

“Either way, you’ve cooked it,” claims Lee.

“Senator, I can assure you we have not cooked anything,” counters Schmidt.

(Note: Google does have an excellent cafeteria in Silicon Valley, complete with organic arugula and Kombucha for all.)

11:33 am: Hoo boy! But Lee’s time has expired, so Schmidt gets a break in the form of New York’s Sen. Charles Schumer.

I like the way he says “ee-no-vation” for innovation.

He does an expected plug for New York, of course. Somehow it is No. 1 in tech. Not so much, but brag on, Chuck!

11:38 am: Schumer is still talking about New York and its fab entrepreneurs.

Apparently, he has done a lot of jawboning with start-up dudes (likely over Kombucha) and they think Google is a positive force.

“Google is actually pretty good, we don’t see them as rapacious,” Schumer says the New York nerds tell him.

Is “rapacious” the criteria here?

Schumer is running out of time and has yet to ask a question and now is trying to get Schmidt to test Google’s broadband project in the Hudson Valley.

Now that’s rapacious!

Is there going to be an actual question here?

Yes: Oh please tell us, genius boy, what could Google do better?

Really.

11:42 am: Now, Sen. John Cornyn from Texas is on and asking about the prescription controversy Google was embroiled in recently.

Oops, I missed a bit when someone called me about the CEO mess at Hewlett-Packard I reported on earlier.

Onto Senator Amy Klobuchar from Minnesota. She is cleverly using an article about the Vikings football team to ask about how Google’s super-secret-sauce algorithm works and how it ranks results.

“Do you think companies should have a lot more certainty in how they are ranked?,” she asks.

11:51 am: Schmidt is not really answering, except to say Google is not perfect.

“We don’t know how to do it with more certainty,” he says, which is odd for a company that is perhaps the most irksomely certain group of geeks ever assembled on the planet.

Klobuchar moves to copyright issues. “There’s a real problem here,” agrees Schmidt.

Yes, and some media companies think Google is the problem and has not done enough to fix the problem.

“It’s difficult,” says Schmidt. Well, isn’t Google smartier?

“We’re under great pressure to resolve this,” he says.

11:55 am: Klobuchar is still worried about the small businesses, but she wants Google to come to Duluth.

Good lord, it’s a shakedown in plain sight. Maybe Google isn’t the scary one here! These pols seem pretty frightening.

Now Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley is saying he will attend some Google event in his state.

Of course!

Grassley makes a wishy-wishy statement, and we get to hear from Iowans on both sides.

Some are apparently concerned that Google is a troublemaker and some aren’t.

Iowans, like a lot of folks, are torn.

“We are happy to be judged,” says Schmidt.

12:00 pm: Now it is time for Sen. Al Franken from Minnesota.

“First let me say, I love Google,” he says.

Otay. I wonder if Franken knows that Google is a giant scary computer.

But, as a citizen of San Francisco, I say he should love whoever he wants!

Franken is also concerned about his love’s behavior and is taken aback by one of Schmidt’s previous answers.

It’s that irksome Marissa Mayer quote again.

When asked if the algo was unbiased, Schmidt apparently was not as sure as shootin’!

Now, it is onto Yelp and the fiery quotes from Stoppelman about how Google nefariously blocks the review site’s content.

Eric “generally” disagrees with Jeremy.

At one point Google tried to buy Yelp, so this is a fraught situation.

Does Franken know about the previous Google-Yelp hookup?

Drama!

Schmidt says it is Yelp’s fault for asking to be removed from the algo. Actually, Yelp only asked Google to stop jacking its fare.

12:11 pm: Oh noz, another pol? This time Sen. Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut.

He is super-smiley, while calling Google a “behemoth.” I like that word a lot and use it for the company often, although I always like to use a qualifier like “thuggish” or “freaky.”

Back to the blabby Blumenthal, who cannot seem to get out a question.

Wait! He asks if Google can suggest some fixes to “avoid government regulation.”

I. Kid. You. Not.

12:21 pm: Kohl is back and giving Google a little more slap-a-doo.

I like the whole Kohl thang of looking over his glasses down at Schmidt.

He asks: Should we trust Google? Should we?

In my opinion: If your mother says she loves you, you should check it.

So, no!

Schmidt assures him: “We make mistakes.”

Lee is then back, asking if Google gives preference to its own products in search?

Exactly the point and a question that is still not answered properly.

12:24 pm: Lee remains troubled by Schmidt’s testimony.

He uses terms like “leverage its natural dominance” and “significant market share to disadvantage” competitors.

Sounds like, um, Microsoft. And then it is back to that niggling Marissa Mayer quote. (Memo to the voluble exec, who apparently never met a microphone she didn’t want to talk into: You might want to take a day off today at the Googleplex.)

Google-luvin’ Franken is back and he is asking about mobile search.

Where Google is dominant again! (Jellllllo, Al, we in Silicon Valley know that one already!)

He asks if all Android devices come pre-loaded with Google products. Schmidt thinks two-thirds come with it, but handset makers can choose.

12:31 pm: Back to all-smiles Blumenthal, who says he has come to no conclusion.

But lo! He is not as silly as he seems and goes into an interesting racetrack analogy about how Google owns the track and now has horses and now those horses are winning.

Hmmmm…

Schmidt disagrees, natch!

He thinks the Internet is the platform and Google is the GPS.

Metaphor contest!

I think Google is a big tasty banana cream pie we can’t stop eating, although we know it’s bad for us.

That or an alien wearing an expensive suit who will soon eat us all.

Franken comes in with a doping horses joke. Remember when he was funny on “Saturday Night Live”?

Me neither.

It goes on without a lot of really good discussion. Klobuchar asks something, but I forget it immediately. My bad!

She has a last question about advertisers and privacy. Softball!

Let me write this for Schmidt before he inevitably spits it out: Of course, Google wants to protect privacy.

12:37 pm: Finally, the second panel of critics. Sadly, I must go to an appointment in Silicon Valley to visit one of its rapacious companies.

Oops, I meant ee-no-vative.

But, no worries, John Paczkowski will take over from here once it gets going again after the break.

12:47 pm: The panel’s back in session. The first critic to take a shot at Google, Thomas Barnett, a lawyer for Expedia.

12:51 pm: Riffing on Schmidt’s earlier “We know, we get it” comment, Barnett argues the opposite.

“Google doesn’t get it,” he says, adding that the company’s ever-expanding market power is troubling.

12:54 pm: Google is a monopoly, Barnett continues, and it has a duty not to abuse that position. He concludes by saying antitrust enforcement can and should play a role in maintaining competition in the markets in which it does business.

12:57 pm: Moving on now to Nextag CEO Katz, who has some tough words for the search giant. “Today Google doesn’t play fair,” he says.

He argues that Google rigs its results to drive consumers to Google Product Search when they search for information to inform their purchases.

1:00 pm: Next: Stoppelman of Yelp, who wonders if it’s even possible to create a company like Yelp today because of Google’s massive market power.

1:04 pm: Google’s outside lawyer, Susan Creighton, takes the mic next. Having trouble with the video stream from the Senate, but as best I can tell she talked broadly about the competitive landscape and reiterated Schmidt’s “competition is just a click away” narrative.

1:08 pm: She concludes by saying government oversight of Google’s search results rankings would put the company at a disadvantage and turn its search service into something akin to a “regulated utility.”

1:09 pm: Interesting. Creighton says she doesn’t believe Google has monopoly power.

1:10 pm: “Each of you right now can test whether or not you like Google’s search results and if you don’t like them it’s free and instantaneous to try someone else.”

1:22 pm: Apologies, the Senate video feed has gone from bad to worse.

1:23 pm: Franken asks Yelp’s Stoppelman and Nextag’s Katz if they could start their companies today given Google’s market power.

Both say that’s unlikely.

1:26 pm: Terse exchange between Franken and Creighton about whether Google paid Apple to be the default search engine on its iOS devices. Lots of back and forth, but Creighton finally concedes that there’s some sort of financial deal between the two companies.

1:39 pm: Sen. Lee asks what Google might do to “level the playing field.” Stoppelman suggests separating search from its other properties. Pipe dream.

1:40 pm: Well, it looks like it may be getting near the end of the session, which is a good thing because we get it to by now.

And that is: Nothing significant is going to get said here.

Mellody Hobson, president of Ariel Investments in Chicago, spoke with The Wall Street Journal’s Rebecca Blumenstein. Julie Louise Gerberding, president of Merck & Co.’s Merck Vaccines unit, sat down with the Journal’s Laura Landro. Marissa Mayer, Google Inc.’s vice president, consumer products, talked with the Journal’s Julia Angwin. And Debra L. Lee, chairman and chief executive of BET Networks, a unit of Viacom Inc., spoke with the Journal’s Alessandra Galloni.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Huber has held the title SVP of engineering for quite some time, and his product focus has recently been commerce and local, said a spokesperson. So, it may be that Huber wasn’t mentioned as part of the group of those promoted, because it was less of a change than the others.

Huber, in fact, posted with the title “Senior Vice President, Commerce and Local” in a Official Google Blog post today about the Department of Justice clearing Google’s acquisition of the airline data provider ITA.

Huber, who has been with Google since 2003, had previously led technology development for the company’s advertising and monetization systems. Before that, he was at eBay and Excite@Home.

It was announced in October that Marissa Mayer, the highly public Google exec who until recently lead the search team, would be leading the company’s local and location services. So, it’s also notable that Huber, rather than Mayer, has the title of SVP of that group.

Things are sure shaking over at Google, since the sudden departure on Monday of Jonathan Rosenberg, Google’s head of product management and one of its most senior executives.

While his exit was portrayed as friendly all around, sources with knowledge of the dicey situation said that was definitely not the case.

Instead, moving aside Rosenberg was newly installed CEO and Co-founder Larry Page’s first parry at remaking the search giant in his own image.

Moving management chairs around is one of the tried-and-true way new leaders often try to effect that kind of dramatic change and several sources said Page has been tossing them about rather than just rearranging them.

That was certainly clear in last night’s knighting of six new SVP titles upon a group of execs, all very close to Page.

The promoted in new business units: Sundar Pichai, SVP of Chrome; Vic Gundotra, SVP of social; Andy Rubin SVP of mobile; Salar Kamangar SVP of YouTube and video; Alan Eustace SVP of search; Susan Wojcicki SVP of ads.

Of them, Eustace was previously an SVP, in charge of engineering and research, and Wojcicki had recently held the title SVP of product management.

It’s all the next step in Page’s overhauling the company’s management structure, as I reported in this column earlier this week was in the works.

As I wrote:

The main theme that seems to be emerging: An elimination of Google’s more centralized functional structure–where Rosenberg was one of several manager kingpins–to one in which the individual business units and their engineers, such as its most independent Android division, rule more autonomously.

Reimagined like this, Google would become an ambidextrous organization with more powerful unit line execs, mostly engineers, doing what needs to be done to succeed, less burdened by the need to vet every little effort through various managers of Google’s powerful operating committee.

This, of course, brings into focus that fates of several other SVPs on the formal management structure list on Google’s Web site and still serving on that OC.

Leaving Eustace off, since he has a new SVP title, they are: Nikesh Arora, SVP and Chief Business Officer; David Drummond SVP, Corporate Development, and Chief Legal Officer; Shona Brown, SVP, Business Operations; and Patrick Pichette, SVP and Chief Financial Officer.

How their roles evolve or do not–all might stay as is, of course–will be the next interesting part of what I am calling PageYank:

Nikesh Arora:

In a widely read column earlier this week, investing gadfly Eric Jackson argued that Arora is probably the most vulnerable of all the senior executives at the company.

The high-profile Arora is well known both inside and outside the company as both highly ambitious and consistently pugnacious.

While that is not necessarily a bad thing to be, that style has garnered him some criticism and he is often referred to as “Darth Vader” among detractors (and even some supporters).

Still, Arora has been a consistent producer of results over his tenure, which might be all that matters. In fact, it might also make him an attractive candidate for a CEO job outside Google.

But, perhaps most important right now though, is that Arora is “definitely not part of Larry’s inner circle,” said one source, adding “and that’s a very important place to be right now.”

Incidentally, that inner circle currently seems to consist of many of those promoted last night–Kamangar, Rubin, Pichai and Gundotra–as well as search leads Udi Manber and Amit Singhal and, of course, Co-founder Sergey Brin.

And not, it seems, Arora.

David Drummond:

With Kent Walker recently promoted to an SVP title, along with being Google’s general counsel, does the company need a Chief Legal Officer or does it need to winnow down another layer of management?

As one source told me, “Why do you need a Drummond, when you’ve got a Walker?” It’s a fair point.

While also in charge of both public policy and corporate development, Drummond has been known more for benign absence at Google than for aggressive presence.

Some also suggest that the affable exec, who has been at Google since early on and is presumably very wealthy, might also not want to sign up for the long-term commitment that Page now expects of his top managers.

Shona Brown:

Before she came to Google, Brown spent a decade consulting for McKinsey and is widely credited with optimizing Google’s internal structure.

But Page is not a McKinsey guy and he’s obviously not a big fan of Google’s current management organization anymore.

That might not bode well for the legendarily sharp-elbowed Brown who most sources describe as highly strategic but also as extremely difficult to work with.

Still, if Page is tinkering with the way Google is organized, Brown might also be the one he turns to find a new structure.

That said, he seems to be fine doing it on his own and some suggest Brown will move to another role within the company rather than leaving.

Not all agree.

Said one source: “I wouldn’t be shocked to see Shona go. Frankly, I’m surprised she survived as long as she did, but then I didn’t think Rosenberg would last this long either.”

But, said another about Brown, who has previously taken time off from Google and returned: “I’d never count Shona out.”

Patrick Pichette:

He’s not going anywhere, as far as I can tell. The friendly and erudite Pichette is widely admired at the company and by Page–the most important admirer of all at Google these days.

He’s also been a smart and stable presence on earnings calls and does a job with Wall Street analysts and investors that Page is pretty much uninterested in and–more to the point–completely incapable of doing well.

Let’s be honest about the socially awkward CEO: Page’s frequently prickly and robotic style makes Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg look like Cary Grant.

Pichette stays.

As for everyone else, as Page reaches even further down into the organization at Google, it will be interesting to see where the next chair will fall.

One thing is clearest of all: Page is positioning himself as the centerpoint of the entire company.

Because make no mistake, these new autonomous divisions all report to him, in a system that mimics Apple and its legendary leader Steve Jobs.

A tough act to follow, to be sure.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Google’s Page Begins Major Reorg: Engineers, Not Managers, In Charge
• Product Chief Jonathan Rosenberg to Leave Google
• Larry Page as CEO: Steve Jobs or Jerry Yang?

Here are a couple of great photo opps from the visits, where Gaga spoke to Google and Twitter employees (interviewed by Google VP Marissa Mayer and Twitter co-founder Evan Williams, respectively).

Lady Gaga and Google CEO-to-be Larry Page:

(credit: her Twitpic account)

Lady Gaga learns about “the path of a tweet in our Rails stack” from Twitter technical lead Raffi Krikorian:

(credit: Twitter programmer Justin Chen’s Twitpic)

And here’s the full “Google Goes Gaga” interview (which included questions submitted by fans on YouTube):

Gaga’s next tour stop is in Vegas, so maybe she’ll visit Zappos.

Google hosted singing sensation Lady Gaga today at the Googleplex in Mountain View, CA.

What more can BoomTown say, except that it is certainly interesting to see the sublime meet the ridonkulous–like one of her kooky music videos come to life.

It would have only gotten better if Gaga had worn a dress made of organic tempeh from Google’s cafeteria.

Here is the video of the interview with the Silicon Valley search giant’s Marissa Mayer:

The Internet-search giant this year has hired several hundred sales representatives to call U.S. businesses such as spas, restaurants and hotels to promote new advertising initiatives, people familiar with the matter said. The effort includes an office in Tempe, Ariz., with around 100 sales representatives, one of these people said.

Since 20% of searches done on Google are for local information, “a strong Web presence can help neighborhood businesses answer those searches and bring in more customers,” said Marissa Mayer, Google’s vice president of geographic and local services, in a prepared statement. Google’s new local ad offerings “are simple and they work, so we’ve been investing in marketing and sales to support them.”

Read the rest of this post on the original site

As the possible acquisition of Groupon by Google chugs along–sources tell me bankers are starting to swan around annoyingly, which could be a sign of fruition, but we shall see–BoomTown realized that I have been remiss in mentioning one likely key person in the deal strategy.

And, I am only guessing, that would be the Silicon Valley search giant’s relatively new head of commerce, Stephanie Tilenius (pictured above).

That’s because the unassuming former longtime eBay exec–you won’t see her all over the scene swanning, for sure–is one of the few at the company sharp enough to have seen Groupon’s copious local retail data from its social buying business as a strong fit into Google.

I met Tilenius a dog’s age ago when she co-founded PlanetRx.com, a very early online drugstore in Web 1.0.

In her long tenure at eBay, she ran eBay North America, global product management for eBay Marketplaces, merchant services at its PayPal unit, eBay Motors and eBay Asia Pacific and Latin America.

After she left eBay in late 2009, Tilenius came to Google early this year, in the newly created position of VP of commerce. In that job, she has purview over Google Checkout, payment system and e-commerce.

And, while Google’s former search experience and now new local head Marissa Mayer is often mentioned as benefiting from this Goopon deal, it seems to me that it is Tilenius who will be charged with taking Google in this pricey and risky new direction.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

According to sources close to the situation, Google has offered $5.3 billion for Groupon, in what would be its largest acquisition yet, if completed.

Sources said the deal for the Chicago-based social buying site seems likely to be struck, even as early as tomorrow, although it certainly could fall apart right up to the end.

But, if done, it will move the search giant instantly to the top spot in local commerce online and give it huge troves of data about consumer buying habits and merchant information across the globe.

Combined with its pending $700 million acquisition of ITA Software, the travel data firm, that should freak out regulators worldwide and could be considered Google’s own version of a jobs plan for antitrust lawyers.

That said, it is a killer move for Google–despite the high price–given it has long tried to enter the local advertising space, with decidedly mixed results.

With its more than $33 billion in cash and strong stock, it had previously tried to buy local reviews site Yelp, in a deal that fell apart for reasons that are still unclear.

In contrast, Groupon, founded in 2008, has taken off like a Roman candle and dominates the huge market for social shopping and discounting.

While the $6 billion Google is considering paying seems high, Groupon’s fast-growing revenue and profitability make its multiples less daunting, said those familiar with the matter.

It will certainly be a big payoff for Groupon’s investors, including Silicon Valley’s Accel Partners, as well as Battery Ventures, New Enterprise Associates and Russia’s DST Global.

Groupon has gleaned about $170 million in venture funding from them, most of which it has not needed.

That’s because it has reportedly attracted upward of $50 million in monthly revenue.

It has done this by offering “daily deals”–getting a massive discount from local retailers in return for delivering customers via marketing via email and on social networks, especially Facebook and Twitter.

Typically, local merchants rely on less effective newspaper circulars or paper couponing.

In what will certainly be one of the deal’s ironies, Google could own a start-up that is largely powered by rival Facebook’s massive skein of social networking connections.

Facebook, of course, recently introduced its own Facebook Deals offering.

BoomTown first wrote about the deal discussions between Groupon and Google two weeks ago, noting the price would be well above the $2 billion to $3 billion offered by Yahoo.

That interest from Yahoo, which was first to sniff around the fast-growing social buying site, was first reported here too–mostly because I apparently like to stalk Groupon CEO and Justin Bieber lookalike Andrew Mason.

(And I will personally be fascinated to see how he’ll mesh with Marissa Mayer, the former search experience head who is now leading local for Google.)

The New York Times–which does not ever seem able to give credit, as All Things Digital and other blogs always do happily and without fuss–is also reporting a $6 billion price tag for Groupon.

While we all await the outcome of this potential blockbuster of a deal, here is a video interview I did with Mason this summer in Vancouver, where I asked him specifically about Google’s interest (actually, I suggested he mug Google co-founder Larry Page for dough).

Note the Bieber haircut:

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101129/googles-groupon-offer-5-3-billion-with-700-million-earnout/feed/ 30 http://allthingsd.com/20101119/the-landscape-around-googles-hiring-binge/ http://allthingsd.com/20101119/the-landscape-around-googles-hiring-binge/#comments Fri, 19 Nov 2010 22:38:35 +0000 Liz Gannes http://networkeffect.allthingsd.com/?p=605 After a year or two of stagnancy, the Google employee count is growing rapidly again. But the growth spurt and retention efforts seem forced, and unlikely to be the perfect formula to keep the company at the top of the Web heap, despite its clout, market share and massive revenue. Part of the problem is that the company’s executives seem out of touch with how the Web is evolving.

The search giant has 2,076 job openings, as tabulated in a story by Reuters last night. It has acquired more than 20 start-ups this year, it’s giving all employees a 10 percent raise and it’s still adding search market share–even if only measured in tenths of percentage points. The company is even building a new 1.2-million-square-foot corporate campus in Mountain View, Calif., that is to include housing. Google now has more than 23,000 employees. It’s currently adding about 100 people per week, said a source.

But it’s an awkward time at Google, where a group of employees can leave, create a start-up and come back two years later through an acquisition with $50 million in their pockets. And the stories about competitive hiring wars with Facebook just keep getting more fantastical.

According to a source, a Google engineer recently ended a counteroffer war with Facebook by accepting $6 million worth of Google stock to keep her job there. Apparently she was not in a senior role at Google, but part of what made her so coveted was the fact she’s a female engineer. And this was Google’s second counteroffer after she had already told them she was going to Facebook.

At this point, Facebook (narrowly) has fewer employees than Google has job openings.

Google needs to find a way to foster its employees’ entrepreneurial desires and talents. The promise of exponentially growing stock options versus a simple raise still tempts many people.

Part of why Google needs to “get social” so badly isn’t just on a product or market level, but to impress its own employees. At a place where the top management is firmly ensconced and immutable, younger employees, especially, say they are turned off by their bosses’ lack of social media savviness on a personal level. It’s clear that tomorrow’s tech leaders are already blogging, Tweeting and Facebooking, so why are today’s leaders still resisting?

Here’s a quick tally (tell me if I’m getting any of these wrong): Eric Schmidt has a Twitter account that he updates every week or two, mostly to promote Google stuff. Sergey Brin’s last blog post and Tweet were both in January. Larry Page doesn’t seem to do much of anything personal or professional online; there’s not even a LinkedIn account or a Google Profile that I can see. Marissa Mayer seems to be the most active high-profile Google exec on Twitter, and actually responds to people there, as well as syndicates some Foursquare updates. As for the folks leading Google’s social stuff: Vic Gundotra’s last Tweet was in May. Bradley Horowitz isn’t blogging much anymore, and his last Tweet was a month ago.

Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics statement.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101119/the-landscape-around-googles-hiring-binge/feed/ 10 http://allthingsd.com/20101027/local-hero-google-ups-the-ante-with-place-search/ http://allthingsd.com/20101027/local-hero-google-ups-the-ante-with-place-search/#comments Wed, 27 Oct 2010 18:00:12 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=51470 Search advancements at Google continue apace, with the company rolling out a steady parade of tweaks and enhancements. Last month, it was Google Instant–real-time search results as you type. This month it’s Place Search, a new way to present search results for local queries.

Essentially, Place Search delivers location-specific search results by organizing content from across the Web around a place, much like Google News aggregates news information around a particular story. And, according to Google, that will make it that much faster and easier for its users to get local information, which they are increasingly looking for. The company says that about 20 percent of searches conducted on Google are local in terms of their overall intent. And it’s so confident of that metric that for queries that have a very heavy and clear local intent, it will automatically switch users into the Place Search mode.

“This is all about contextual discovery,” Marissa Mayer, the company’s VP of geographic and local services, told me this morning. “Think of it this way, as another layer of the Web. One of the first layers of the Web was the content of the Web itself. You looked at a Web page and analyzed its content. That was the purpose of our original search product. Another layer is social–what are the social aspects of the Web? What are the ‘people’ aspects of the Web? Who created this page? Who read it? Did they like it or not? Do I know them?

“Now, we’ve got another fundamental layer: Location. Where was this page authored? Is it about a particular location? Where are the people who this page is relevant to? You start combining these layers–content, social, local–and you get something very powerful.”

Indeed. Particularly in the mobile space, at which Places is very clearly aimed.

Place Search is rolling out now and should be available globally in the next few days.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101027/local-hero-google-ups-the-ante-with-place-search/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20101012/a-new-role-at-google-for-marissa-mayer-location-local-services/ http://allthingsd.com/20101012/a-new-role-at-google-for-marissa-mayer-location-local-services/#comments Tue, 12 Oct 2010 18:00:35 +0000 Beth Callaghan http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=30964 Marissa Mayer, designer and developer of Google’s iconic search product–and, as its first female engineer, an icon herself–will be taking a new role overseeing location and local services for the company, according to an email statement. As vice president of search products, Mayer introduced more than 100 products and features, and expanded the site to over 100 languages.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101012/a-new-role-at-google-for-marissa-mayer-location-local-services/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100823/boomtown-casts-the-google-movie-youre-welcome-hollywood/ http://allthingsd.com/20100823/boomtown-casts-the-google-movie-youre-welcome-hollywood/#comments Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:54:00 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=32572

With the news that a Hollywood production company is working on a movie about Google, based on the nonfiction book “Googled: The End of the World as We Know It” by Ken Auletta, BoomTown has been noodling on which actors would be good to cast in the various roles of the top players.

While the Google film isn’t as juicy as the film about Facebook–“The Social Network,” coming out this fall (and, par for the course, the social networking site beats the search giant to the big screen!)–there is plenty of opportunity to bring a little glamour to the Googleplex.

While not a casting director by trade, but having actually covered the Google (GOOG) geeks off and on since its earliest days, I feel that I might have nailed the casting, below, for a smattering of the more-visible execs from the company, then and now.

I could not get to everyone–no Silicon Valley frenemies at Apple (AAPL), no VCs, no giant parade of former Googlers now at Facebook–but please feel free to add your own suggestions.

Thus:

CEO Eric Schmidt/Philip Seymour Hoffman (uncanny!):

Co-founder and President, Products Larry Page/Zachary Quinto (keeping the Spock ears):

Co-founder and President, Technology Sergey Brin/Tom Cruise (in crazy jumping mode):

SVP, Product Management Jonathan Rosenberg/Jim Carrey (need we say more?):

SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer David Drummond/Denzel Washington (even more uncanny!):

VP, Search Products & User Experience Marissa Mayer/Reese Witherspoon (separated at birth, right?):

VP, Product Management Susan Wojcicki/Maggie Gyllenhaal (because, let’s be frank, both deserve more notice):

VP, Engineering Andy Rubin/Dick Costolo (he’s not an actor, but he plays one at Twitter; also uncannily uncanny!):

VP, Engineering Vic Gundotra/Stewie Griffin (pretend the gun is a smartphone and it will all make sense):

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google. (And I will leave the casting of Megan to others, although I did lob in a call to Angelina Jolie’s people.)

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100823/boomtown-casts-the-google-movie-youre-welcome-hollywood/feed/ 8 http://allthingsd.com/20100106/will-nexus-one-be-a-hit-maybe-but-not-every-google-launch-lands-well/ http://allthingsd.com/20100106/will-nexus-one-be-a-hit-maybe-but-not-every-google-launch-lands-well/#comments Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:05:38 +0000 Drake Martinet http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=31541 Google has finally rolled out a slick-looking mobile phone called the Nexus One–not just a phone but a superphone!

But the search giant hasn’t confined its ambitions to mere hardware and software design. It also wants to reinvent the way the mobile business works.

Heady stuff, but then, Google (GOOG) has already reinvented some industries (ask the old search engines) and is helping reorder others (ask any newspaper publisher). 

The flip side: While Google does launch lots of stuff, many of its products are now on the shelf with other dusty tech curios.

Below are a few of the choicest nuggets in our newest slideshow. Some are first-place finishers, while others had to be killed off and turned into mulch for Google’s organic garden.

---

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100106/will-nexus-one-be-a-hit-maybe-but-not-every-google-launch-lands-well/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091208/a-couple-of-google-geeks-sitting-around-talking-about-search-video-interviews-with-gundotra-and-singhal/ http://allthingsd.com/20091208/a-couple-of-google-geeks-sitting-around-talking-about-search-video-interviews-with-gundotra-and-singhal/#comments Tue, 08 Dec 2009 14:00:41 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=21668

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Here’s the video of interviews BoomTown did with the two Google execs most responsible for the rollout of its real-time search and other new mobile search features announced yesterday.

That would be VP of Engineering Vic Gundotra and Google Fellow Amit Singhal, who is known as the master of ranking algorithm and search quality.

The smooth-talking Gundotra and the jumping-bean Singhal make an interesting pair of nerdish bookends, but are essentially pushing the same idea that Google is as innovative as ever.

Along with Google (GOOG) VP of Search Products & User Experience Marissa Mayer, the pair unveiled the updates at an event the search giant held in Silicon Valley.

Here is the video of the interviews (and here is another video I did at the event):

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091208/a-couple-of-google-geeks-sitting-around-talking-about-search-video-interviews-with-gundotra-and-singhal/feed/ 1 http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-search-event-twitter-myspace-and-more/ http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-search-event-twitter-myspace-and-more/#comments Mon, 07 Dec 2009 18:08:53 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=21592

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Right now, BoomTown is sitting right behind the very affable Jason Hirschhorn, chief product officer of MySpace, who is here to make one of the many partner announcements with Google at its “search event” in Silicon Valley today.

I also ran right into Twitter’s Biz Stone at the coffee stand. He is also here to talk about the new features Google (GOOG) is adding to its search repertoire, although he is remaining mum until the program starts in five minutes.

It’s about real-time search, of course, given that the partners visiting today are all real-time search folks.

The confab–being held at the Computer History Museum near the Googleplex HQ–is essentially Google’s rejoinder to last week’s event by Microsoft (MSFT), which announced a bunch of new features for its Bing search service, including mapping updates.

Of course, because it is Google, the sound system rocks, the food is better and it is more overproduced than “Dancing With the Stars.”

10:13 am PT: The event is opened by Marissa Mayer, who runs search products and user experience for Google.

And it takes exactly 13 seconds for there to be a classic Silicon Valley buzzword. Modes! Translation: It is how we use the Web.

Mayer is outlining Google’s key components in the future of search. Along with modes, they are media, language and personalization.

“We are a company that likes to launch early and often,” she said, adding that Google has launched 33 search innovations in 67 days.

In other words, take that, Bing. Oh, dear, giant Google just boasted about its innovation cred and is apparently a little worried about weensie Bing.

10:18 am: Mayer welcomes Vic Gundotra, VP of engineering, who will talk about mobile search.

He begins by noting that no one knows where all the new innovations in computing will lead, much as no one got the Gutenberg press way back in the olden days.

Professor Gundotra then launches into a computing history lesson, with stops at Moore’s Law (better, faster, cheaper) and how one understood all the zillions of computing connections that would occur.

The “missing ingredient,” noted Gundotra, is the cloud.

Next, he moves to a demo to show where Google is headed. Gundotra nails a voice query on an Android phone about President Obama at the G8 Summit with the French president. Everyone cheers.

Gundotra now tries to top himself with a Mandarin query for McDonald’s in Beijing. He sticks it.

He then announces support for the voice search on mobile devices for Japan, bringing up a Japanese speaker.

One voice query is a very long one for a favorite restaurant in Tokyo near the Google office there. Does Google find it? Of course Google does.

“Our dreams at Google go way beyond what you just saw,” says Gundotra, who opines on a real-time interpreter on the phone. Of course, he demos the interpreter, which he said will show up sometime in 2010.

It works, again. Natch! These are big-brained dudes here at Google, so don’t mess with them.

10:30 am: Gundotra moves to locations, which he says will be a key element of future versions of Google search. You know, Red Sox comes up in Boston, data appear for nearby stores for digital cameras.

He shows off the “Near Me Now” feature, which is kind of like those many Apple (AAPL) iPhone apps, like Yelp. It explores stuff nearby. It will be available on Google mobile maps for Android right away.

Next, he announces a Google Labs project called Google Goggles, which takes pictures of something and then identifies it. I have seen this kind of thing in a lot of labs at various tech companies.

Gundotra, who is a slick dude at presentations, uses the example of being a wine expert without being one. He scans a wine bottle and then Google quickly shows info on it.

Oooooh, aaaaaah.

Gundotra uses the service to identify a Japanese landmark successfully.

Someday, he predicts, your phone will be a “mouse pointer” to the world.

10:42 am: Back to Mayer, who talks about media relevancy in search. Google Fellow Amit Singhal is the man on deck.

“What we’re going to announce today is one of the most exciting things in my career,” said Singhal, who first launches into a short history of information flow.

Campfires, more Gutenberg! Also some pictures of old Google servers. I feel so educated; plus, Singhal is pretty funny for a supergeek.

Now, he gets to the news: “We are here today to announce Google real-time search.”

The demo is launched and it shows news scrolling as it is produced. “This is the first time ever,” enthuses Singhal.

It looks cool, but reminds me a lot of old tickers that used to be in the newsroom at the Washington Post. You know, the kind of newspaper that Google is often accused of killing off.

Irony alert! I wonder if that will scroll up soon.

The scrolling also includes Twitter updates. One tweet by Googler Matt Cutts about the Google real-time search launch showed up immediately.

The latest results will be available on the search options and in preferences and will also be hyperlocal and mobile on the iPhone and Android.

“Real-time search becomes incredibly powerful, since it shows you exactly what you need in your geography,” said Singhal.

Singhal is a font of news. He also announces that Google Trends is moving out of the labs and will also show real-time results.

He launches into the “how” of how Google did all this. Well, it was really, really hard, said Singhal, because there are a badillion real-time pieces of data out there to analyze and render.

And which company, with its massive computing power, can make this relevant and hand over the info quickly? Three guesses, and the first two don’t count.

Recap: Real-time search, latest search option, update option, mobile real-time search and Google Trends in the real-time world.

“At Google we will not be satisfied,” said Singhal, until Google can get you info at the speed of light.

11:07 am: Just to stick a true fork into anything Microsoft could come up with, Mayer comes back up and announces Google’s Facebook, MySpace and Twitter partnerships as part of the launch of real-time search.

Facebook will be sending in public feeds and MySpace is providing all of them, as is Twitter.

Google now has eyes and ears, says Mayer. When it gets a whole body, get ready to run for your life.

Q&A time!

The first question is about whether Goggles could have facial recognition. Gundotra says Google could do that, but will not until the privacy issues are worked out. Operative thought here: Google is capable of doing this. Eek!

The next question is about advertising opportunities in these new features. Singhal does not really answer, but says businesses will develop.

The next question is about how much content Google is crawling. Answer: About a billion pages a day.

Gundotra adds that the first launch is only available on English-speaking locales. But it will move into other languages next year.

What about spammers taking advantage of real-time search? Oh, says Singhal, they will get a beat-down from Matt Cutts, who is in charge of spam-killing at Google.

Wouldn’t that make a good reality show? “The Spam Hunters!”

About questions on real-time partnerships, Mayer said Google wanted to be comprehensive.

Mayer will not disclose the details of any financial payments for these real-time feeds. Of course, Google is paying up.

And now a question about whether Google will limit development on non-Android phones. “Absolutely not,” says Gundrotra.

At last, a zinger question: Do you feel that Google will be responsible for the death of journalism and doesn’t that make Google a scary black hole of, presumably, evil?

Awkward!

Singhal casts about for an answer, which is mostly about bringing info to users, which is not an answer.

“It’s really about user empowerment,” he says. Uh-oh, we’re doomed!

Mayer jumps in nervously to shoot this meme down and says Google is about facilitation and not decimation.

The PR dude onstage also throws in the boilerplate about Google sending gazillions of clicks all over.

But the point is made: Today Google–which owns universal search–just made its big move in real-time search.

The next question is about the difference between Google’s practice of wanting people off the page and onto the Web and Microsoft Bing’s focus on topic pages of rich information.

Mayer is sticking with quick on and off for Google.

And what about junk information on the silly side that comes with more real-time search, like dead celebs who are not dead, or really untrue information on important issues?

It’s a hard problem, says Singhal, who says Google is working on it.

What about disabling the real-time updates rather than just being able to turn them on and off. Nope, says Singhal. Mayer notes that this may change.

But the truth is: With the big search giant jumping in, real-time search is most definitely here to stay.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-search-event-twitter-myspace-and-more/feed/ 8 http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-confab-at-10-am-pt-searchtastic/ http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-confab-at-10-am-pt-searchtastic/#comments Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:23:54 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=21561 Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

BoomTown will be motoring the MINI–top up, it’s pouring rain here!–down to Silicon Valley this morning to liveblog a “search event” that Google is holding at the Computer History Museum.

Last week, Microsoft (MSFT) unveiled some new features for its Bing search service, so turnabout is fair play for Google (GOOG).

Lots of news is promised, which is likely to mean a bunch of new features, partners and more to be announced (perhaps yet another acquisition or two?), showing that the search giant can keep innovating from its lofty perch.

Included in the event will be Google VP of Search Products & User Experience Marissa Mayer, VP of Engineering Vic Gundotra and Google Fellow Amit Singhal, who is known as the master of ranking algorithm and search quality.

Liveblogging begins at 10 am PT, with video to follow.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091207/liveblogging-the-google-confab-at-10-am-pt-searchtastic/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20091204/google-to-hold-an-anything-bing-can-do-we-can-do-better-search-event-monday/ http://allthingsd.com/20091204/google-to-hold-an-anything-bing-can-do-we-can-do-better-search-event-monday/#comments Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:28:25 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=21465 Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

Google answered BoomTown’s blatantly begging plea to call, write or just say hi after I was inundated with news about Bing search from Microsoft (MSFT) this week–emailing yesterday about a “search event” to be held Monday in Silicon Valley.

It will be at the Computer History Museum, and the PR minion who wrote me (see email below) noted “there’ll be lots of news.”

News? Well, you don’t have to ask me and my Flip twice!

Included in the confab will be Google VP of Search Products & User Experience Marissa Mayer, VP of Engineering and Renaissance man Vic Gundotra and Google Fellow Amit Singhal, who is known as the master of ranking algorithm and search quality.

Already, I feel dumber than a box of hammers. But, can I resist? Of course not!

Sources tell me the event is for unveiling a wide range of feature updates to the Google service, probably to take some of its search innovations out for a showy walk around the park before Bing sucks up all the PR oxygen.

Here’s the note I got:

Hey Kara,

Hope you’re doing well. Wanted to check in quickly to see if you or someone else from ATD might be interested in attending the Google search event being held at the Computer History Museum on Monday. There’ll be a lot of news, as well as an opportunity to speak with execs like Marissa Mayer, Vic Gundotra, and Amit Singhal. Would definitely be worth your time.

Let me know if you’re interested and we’ll get you signed up.

Now, if Yahoo (YHOO) would only throw a look-at-me-too search event soon, it will be a trifecta!

Until Monday, please enjoy a video of one of my favorite musical scenes and songs–mostly due to the line, “You couldn’t give me a lesson in long-distance spitting!”–from the movie version of “Annie Get Your Gun,” sung by the perfect Betty Hutton and Howard Keel:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091204/google-to-hold-an-anything-bing-can-do-we-can-do-better-search-event-monday/feed/ 7 http://allthingsd.com/20091124/whats-really-behind-the-rupe-a-dope-with-google-and-microsoft-here-are-five-possibilities/ http://allthingsd.com/20091124/whats-really-behind-the-rupe-a-dope-with-google-and-microsoft-here-are-five-possibilities/#comments Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:34:29 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20656

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

There certainly is a lot of noisy swirl of late around the escalating fight between Google and some traditional media companies over content online.

The loudest voice in this fight has clearly been News Corp. (NWS) kingpin Rupert Murdoch, who seemingly has not met a television interviewer of late he did not regale with tales of Google’s nefariousness.

Part of what he is saying is surely justified–it’s definitely a crisis for the news business.

And in Murdoch’s mind, the blame should largely fall on Google (GOOG), which he believes is profiting from expensive content others have created and that the search giant is not paying for to such a warped and massive degree that it makes a mockery of fair use.

In Silicon Valley style, Google defends itself by saying it sends valuable Web traffic to News Corp. and other sites, so perhaps a hand-written thank-you note is really the proper response.

That missive is definitely not in the mail from Murdoch, who instead has sent a series of poison-pen letters to Google.

Most notable is that he has threatened to “de-index” at least some of his content assets–which are not insubstantial–from the now-inevitable crawlers sent out by the search giant.

These are, of course, vintage tactics from the Global Media Mogul Playbook: Causing a public hubbub and spooking perceived enemies by threatening drastic action and implying dire consequences, while simultaneously dealmaking behind the scenes.

Trying mightily to make the stakes more dramatic, News Corp. has pulled Microsoft (MSFT) into the fray as a possible white knight–if you live long enough, you do see it all–for publishers.

Under this scenario, the software giant would fork over some sum of money to get News Corp. and perhaps other key content companies, such as Associated Press, exclusively and prominently featured on its Bing search site.

The reward, presumably, would be increased searching on Bing for the stuff consumers could now not find on Google.

BoomTown reported earlier this week that, in fact, Microsoft was unlikely to hand over any kind of king’s ransom to publishers.

As I wrote:

While a spate of reports has Microsoft execs girding the globe offering gobs of cash to content companies to block Google and favor its Bing search service, sources close to the situation caution that it is extremely unlikely that the software giant would pay giant sums for that pricey privilege, which many inside the company think will not help it gain much search share.

“While there is a lot of mutual interest, it’s doubtful Microsoft is going to pay to ‘rent’ a corpus of content that it does not own,” said one source close to the situation. “The economics are not there for anyone.”

In other words, this wrestling match is not about whether Google or Microsoft will serve up links to content online, but about how much–or not at all–they are willing to pay for doing so.

So, what’s really happening here? Here are five possibilities to consider, each of which is true in part:

1. Murdoch really means it.

In this scenario, Murdoch and others, like AP’s Tom Curley, truly believe that Google–like that creepy salt-seeking alien from “Star Trek”–is sucking the life out of the media industry by making bank from its news content, but not giving back nearly enough in return.

Of course, a lot of these companies have willingly done distribution deals with Google over the years.

But now they don’t like it because the increasing money being made by Google, even as their revenue has suffered, has developed into a growing problem.

Which is simply this: There is a lot more money to be made in searching for content than in making content.

This realization has to shake content czars like Murdoch to the core, but it is indeed the situation they find themselves in.

Murdoch makes a fair point in that journalism costs money to make and it used to have a solid economic system under it until Google and others on the Web disaggregated it wholly.

Thus, online aggregators become “tapeworms,” as The Wall Street Journal Managing Editor Robert Thomson quipped.

Thomson also, on a recent panel at the Web 2.0 conference, said to Google’s front page head, Marissa Mayer, that she “unintentionally encourages promiscuity.”

Ouch. That remark, which was was quite striking if you were there to hear Thomson say it, said volumes more.

(Full disclosure: News Corp. owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

2. Murdoch really means to create a lot of confusion, in order to shake down Google.

Well, it would not be the first time Murdoch and many others of his ilk have used public sharp elbows and saber-rattling to get what they want.

Except in this case, the algorithm experts over at Google know precisely–down to the tenth decimal–how much linking to News Corp. makes for them.

And it is not much, especially when looking at the vast sea of data Google serves up.

Its money-making is widely dissipated, from searches for vacation information to mapping to car-buying to health. While news-finding definitely is part of the mix, it is not at the center of the Borg.

Ironically–and oddly left out of this debate–it is Yahoo (YHOO) that has a lot of power in this arena, with massive content sites that shoot traffic all over the Web (including to this site).

But, what Google cannot and never can quantify–although I have seen co-founder Larry Page try once or twice–is the impact of public perception on the company, which has slowly morphed from being a benign, brightly-colored digital, librarian-like helper to a scary, answer-to-no-one, evil-doing monster.

The company’s growing influence over what people see and do not see on the Web is palpably frightening to publishers, advertisers and anyone who wants to be digitally discovered.

Bad luck for Google: Creating and then attacking bogeymen is a Murdoch talent, bar none.

3. Murdoch really means to create a lot of confusion, in order to shake down Microsoft.

Also obvious is the full-scale obsession Microsoft has with Google. While the software giant’s execs try to hide it, their panic over the success of Google has been tough on the once dominant tech company, which has struggled in the Internet arena.

Worse still, Google rakes in the dough, while Microsoft, um, does not.

Finally, this year, Microsoft has created–with no small amount of much needed innovation–Bing, a laudable effort that is starting to show some traction.

While Bing still has a very small market share compared with Google–by a factor of seven to one–it definitely has some momentum.

And, after much turmoil, Microsoft finally did a deft and relatively inexpensive deal to join with Yahoo in a search and advertising partnership to give them both more heft, which will surely help matters.

More important, one of the ways Bing has differentiated itself is via product innovations and intense focus on search niches, such as health.

In this topic area, for example, Bing has struck a not-expensive content licensing arrangement with the Mayo Clinic in order to better feature content.

This is smart business and offers consumers something better and different.

But overpaying big media publishers for the same thing, even if they de-indexed Google at the same time, is not smart, unless it is for really niche things like special financial information.

And even then, there are so many other sources of information out there, it would not take Google long to mount a similar offering, even in the face of some kind of OPEC of News consortium.

Even more–how much do consumers love OPECs of any kind? Not much!

Sources at Microsoft agree:

“If it was everyone, that might become interesting. But even that has issues, since Microsoft is not interested in having exclusive news for a temporary period of time by overpaying for it. It’s essentially a marketing expense, and there are a lot better ways to spend that money to win market share than giving it to publishers.”

Finally, Microsoft has been to the Murdoch party before too, having been part of talks to fold News Corp.-owned social networking site MySpace into Yahoo, had Microsoft prevailed in its attempt to acquire it.

Microsoft missed that pricey bullet and might be more inclined to grow Bing the old-fashioned way–via innovation, marketing and product improvements–rather than just using up too much of its energy trying to mess with Google.

4. A deal will be made.

My not-too-surprising prediction is that in the end, News Corp. and others will probably strike some kind of lesser deal with Microsoft–although it will tout the heck out of it–while taking some of its content behind a pay wall and thereby de-indexing it from Google.

More damaging would be if AP, which actually provides the most used news content online, removes its links completely from Google, because–unlike the premium content from other publishers–this is the bread and butter of consumer usage of content.

As to promotional material or links to television shows and movies from publishers like News Corp.? Well, it would seem the most self-destructive form of pique to remove those links from any of the top search engines.

That said, even if it really pissed me off for publishers to do so, I would probably switch to another search engine to find information on “Glee” if forced to. That’s how much I love those singing kids and Jane Lynch!

Finally, Murdoch has also threatened to challenge the fair use doctrine–which allows others to use copyrighted content within limits, as Google and many others do (such as this site).

While some think that is a bridge too far, it might be Murdoch’s best argument of all. Why should Google make a fortune on the content of others, even if only listing it? Doesn’t the sheer volume of what the search giant vacuums up make its reliance on fair use as a defense pretty ridiculous?

You can be sure Murdoch has his many lawyers and lobbyists all over this one, as does Google.

5. The truth is out there.

In perhaps his most strident television interview, with his Sky News Australia service (which you can see below–oh, the irony–on Google’s YouTube), Murdoch said about those who use Google to find News Corp. content:

“They don’t suddenly become loyal readers of our content. We’d rather have fewer people coming to our Web site but paying.”

That really is the honest truth in all this hubbub: Murdoch and other publishers have to find a way to get a some pool of dedicated online readers to pay enough to be able to then provide them with content that will keep them coming back for more.

That’s a business that Google truly cannot help or hinder, really.

And more to the point, it is also a business that Rupert Murdoch does seem to know a thing or two about.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091124/whats-really-behind-the-rupe-a-dope-with-google-and-microsoft-here-are-five-possibilities/feed/ 10