Comments on: Google Pimping Big Ad Spender Trademarks

By: RIchard Srery

RIchard Srery — Sun, 15 Jun 2008 13:16:01 +0000

Google should develop better filters to ferret out such poractice on the part of these people. At present, it only lends to devalue Google.

By: juliemarg

juliemarg — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:45:31 +0000

This practice is one of the reasons I set up my website www.thingsyoushoulddo.com – 5 years ago it was nearly impossible to find a direct link to a hotel like the Del Mar in San Diego or the Mission Ranch in Carmel. When you googled them, all the listings and ads that came up were wholesalers. It annoyed me so much that I set up a website where I could provide direct links to the hotels, restaurants, activities etc. that I recommended.

By: Scaramanga

Scaramanga — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:27:32 +0000

This is not quit the same as a new store setting up next to a successful store, this is more like Joe’s coffee shop setting up next to Starbucks but decorating the store like Starbucks and calling themselves Starbucks.

Sean’s point about this being a Moolah issue is spot on. Only if the threat to the revenue stream is big enough would Google act. It is interesting that Google works with a “white list” for US pharma resellers but not for any other product. Probably because someone at Google has run the numbers on what kind of lawsuit they might expect if someone were to get hold of the wrong drug.

By: Andrej

Andrej — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:24:03 +0000

Explains why Google suddenly decided yesterday to disallow an AdWords ad with the name of a major hotel chain in it. The ad had been running undisturbed for over a year. Andrej's last blog post..Veoh's got guts

By: apBizz : Selected News » Blog Archive » Google finds a new way to make money

Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:02:34 +0000

[...] Google Pimping Big Ad Spender TrademarksMarketing Pilgrim – Raleigh,NC,USAYes, the “do no evilers” at Google seem to be turning a blind eye, lest they disrupt that free flowing revenue stream called Adsense. … [...]

By: ppc guy

ppc guy — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:30:08 +0000

Is this really much different than a new store opening up shop next to or near a rival? Gas stations do it, fast food does it and so do plenty of others. Should Bose continue to sell inferior products because they’re good at marketing instead of a rival offering a better product at a better price?

Just because you show up for a brand search doesn’t mean you’ll get the click, or a sale. Most brand searches are going to get the click and conversion for the brand, but if the brand can’t offer the right product to everyone and another company wants to pay for the sale, they should be allowed to do so. Brands will get between 30-60% of the clicks and their conversion rate will be much higher than any other keywords in their campaign.

The more Google or other search engines manually tweak their results, the worse it is for everyone except the biggest players. Have any of you noticed that more and more searches (even tail terms they’re not bidding on or even relevant for) are showing the big names?

Let the marketplace decide where it’s profitable to advertise.

By: Google Piggyback Ad « Content web et bien plus …

Google Piggyback Ad « Content web et bien plus … — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:34:37 +0000

[...] Mercredi 4 juin 2008 · No Comments Google Pimping Big Ad Spender Trademarks [...]

By: seo guy

seo guy — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:21:09 +0000

I always thought of piggybacking as achieving better SERPs via authority social websites such as Squidoo and then driving traffic back to your landing page. seo guy's last blog post..Should I experiment with online money lending?

By: DeeMX

DeeMX — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:35:42 +0000

I hope what Google’s SERP in the future will not contains from the paid ads only. I like google, but if their serp will’nt meet my search criteria I’m change it on the another SE

By: Sean Maguire

Sean Maguire — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 04:37:02 +0000

@Jayson – I actually thought about that on the ad. But then I figured – I doubt anyone would call from reading this, and if they did – Hey! 70% off!

@iPod – “Wonderful world of adwords”. Interesting choice of words!

@Terry – I agree wholeheartedly. In my mind – it’s trademark hijacking, infringement or whatever else you might want to call it. It should not only be against search engine policy, but also illegal.

By: Terry Howard

Terry Howard — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 01:42:55 +0000

The problem comes in that Google has made it their policy to not allow it, it's in writing, and the courts are on the "big boys" side. You can't say we protect your brand, turn around and profit on doing the opposite and expect to not get an avalanche of suits filed. It WILL catch up to them. By the way, companies spend a lot of money and hard work building their brand and it is not okay to take misuse it, especially when they have registered the trademarks. That's sleazy and actionable, and doing it to a big company doesn't make it any less so. Terry Howard's last blog post..More Lame Biz Stock

By: iPod Touch

iPod Touch — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:13:22 +0000

Glad I'm not having to deal with anything like this for my site. Probably won't have to either for the foreseeable future. This is why I will stick to SEO before venturing into the wonderful world of adwords. John iPod Touch's last blog post..yourgreatestgifts.co.uk

By: Jayson

Jayson — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:06:58 +0000

I say it’s definitely a problem…for the big boys . I don’t see an end in the near future, as you pointed out, it’s financially easier for Google to let the “piggybacking” continue

Did san-antonio-hotels-reservations pay you for the exposure?