Comments on: Ask.com Will “Continue to be a Great Search Engine”

By: NewSunSEO

NewSunSEO — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:57:27 +0000

Well said Lisa, I have to agree with you and Danny on this one. Ask needs to get their stuff together before anouncing anything in the future.

By: Rosalind Armelia

Rosalind Armelia — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 16:26:43 +0000

Why Women’s site? It’s not wrong at all but why make the limitation?

Anyway, saw this site : [link removed; no it doesn't appear to be from Ask] – is it from Ask.com? Anyone knows, please?

Thank you.

By: Seomotion

Seomotion — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:01:48 +0000

Thanx Andy for great info.

By: SitePoint Blogs » Ask.com: We’re Going To Be The Best

SitePoint Blogs » Ask.com: We’re Going To Be The Best — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:52:40 +0000

[...] This seems to have fueled the rumor mill, and combined with the recent layoffs, has placed a big question mark over whether Ask.com’s new strategy is a good one — a predicament that has had Graham putting out fires ever since. [...]

By: Lisa Barone

Lisa Barone — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:14:49 +0000

I have to say, I’m 100 percent with Danny on this one. I don’t buy any of this new spin they’re trying to pull. They weren’t misquoted the first time around. I’d rather they just pull the whole engine and let Diller buy his yacht already. It turns my stomach listening to the lies and re-marketing.

If the first story was “wrong”, Gary Price would still be at Ask. So would Patrick Crisp. It’s over. As is my support for that company.

Ask will still technically be a search engine in order to help all those poor married women find pumpkin pie recipes. However, they won’t compete and they’ll never be interesting. They’ll just linger on in the background doing nothing, no longer aggravating the CEO that never wanted them.

By: Jordan McCollum

Jordan McCollum — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:49:00 +0000

Is Ask doing a spin job? OF COURSE. How could they not? I think that Safka messed up in explaining their new direction—I mean, he left us thinking that they were going to be iVillage+Yahoo Answers—and they’re having to do a lot of clean up. At the same time, they can’t come out and publicly say, “Yeah, sometimes he’s an idiot.”

But this article isn’t really about what I think; it’s about what they told me. I did ask about what Safka said; I got a very political answer (which is why it’s not in the article) that stopped short of saying that he was misquoted or taken out of context. But in that answer, Graham emphasized that they’d still be a search engine.

It was a clarification that we needed to hear and I hope that they don’t change their minds about this again any time soon.

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:39:00 +0000

@Danny – kind of reminds me when Yahoo said this: http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2006/01/yahoo-content-to-be-googles-fo otstool.html

By: Danny Sullivan

Danny Sullivan — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:35:05 +0000

And Jordan, no offense — I love the work you do. I just think Ask is doing the serious spin job here on a lot of people.

By: Danny Sullivan

Danny Sullivan — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:34:11 +0000

Heh, won’t hold back. I think Ask went WTF! we’ve just devalued our search engine and is in panic mode. Put it to you this way — none of the naysayers I know of have been contacted about how it was all wrong. ‘Cause we wouldn’t believe it? Maybe. And seriously Andy, if you think Ask were staying in the game, don’t you think you’d have gotten a tickle about the new direction before the — hmm — shit hit the fan? I mean NOW you hear from Ask after they talk to the AP, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal rather than those pesky little elitists blogs, after it turns out those blogs probably are calling it straight. Yep.

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:30:53 +0000

@Danny – don’t hold back, what do you really think? Ask wouldn’t be the first to backtrack, then again, it wouldn’t be the first time that AP, Reuters or WSJ quoted something out of context either.

By: Danny Sullivan

Danny Sullivan — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:09:05 +0000

Seriously, I can’t believe people are falling for this. AP was wrong? Oh, so Reuters and the Wall Street Journal didn’t hear it right too? Or is it more that Ask said after the fact, uh oh, and now is running around playing damage control. Honestly, I don’t think they know what they want to do, at this point — and given the competition, that means they’re deader than ever.

By: Is Ask.com catering to Woman? (and what’s wrong with that)? « The Analytics Guru

Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:48:29 +0000

[...] Is Ask.com catering to Woman? (and what’s wrong with that)? So Ask.com wants to sell Woman’s Clothing – go all at as a Woman’s Portal? I know it was a misunderstanding – and I’m having fun with it – see a post in Marketing Pilgrim with Ask.com reassuring us they Will “Continue to be a Great Search Engine” [...]

By: NewSunSEO

NewSunSEO — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:57:46 +0000

Hello Andy, this was an excellent write-up. With everything being google this and that Ask is still sticking with it.

By: Jayson

Jayson — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:19:38 +0000

Truly was a great write-up. It’s good to hear that Ask isn’t giving up on men

I think going after what they’re good at might be a nice strategy – as mentioned it isn’t always good to be everything to everyone. In addition, from what I’ve experienced, women (part of their core audience) talk and if they like something they’ll let you know.

By: Jordan McCollum

Jordan McCollum — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:54:53 +0000

Aw, shucks. Thanks, Andy!

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:53:54 +0000

Did they announce a Pulitzer Prize for blogging, because that was a great piece of journalism. Nice work on the interview!