Fallows complains that search is not very good at answering sophisticated questions (no kidding) and a Times reporter wonders if Google is worth $300 a share (answer: no answer. From the article: "Is it a price worth paying? Sure, if it really is different this time."
Reader Ed Brenegar writes: This is a year to change the customer relations game. With less commerce happening, presumably, there is more time for interaction. That interaction has to build the relationships...»
Yup, it makes the perfect gift for that officemate or colleague who you thought had everything... including you! If you order here, I promise to sign it, assuming we can figure out the shipping...
You can also buy the audio version here.
Check my book page for more info.
Enter email to subscribe to Searchblog's newsletter:
More coming soon...
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- NoDerivs 2.5 License.
Powered by:
Movable Type 4.24-en
All contents copyright © 2003 - 2009 John Battelle. | Terms of Service and Privacy Policies
Comments
yeah i kind of laughed when i read both of those articles.... Conrad seems to want to compare Google to another dotcom stock, but then says it isnt because it makes a gazilion dollars. But this was my favorite, "The privacy issue could hit" the company, Mr. Pyykkonen said, adding that "advertisers are aware of it" and might not want to risk becoming associated with a perceived threat. As for the stock, he said, "If you don't own it, I wouldn't buy it." He prefers Yahoo and a small paid search company called ValueClick.
Advertisers dont want to be associated with privacy issues?????
im confused, advertisers want one thing to be associated with and it sounds like this, cha-ching!
Leave a comment