4 thoughts on “In Case You Missed It, Some Parts of Google *Didn’t* Grow Last Year”

  1. Can you please get access to the same stats for Yahoo…
    to make a comparison. It would be interesting to compare their news and maps to Google’s.

    Also, could you get some stats for YouTube, to compare their growth to Google Videos’ decline.

    Interestingly, Google took the video link off the homepage
    just for the holidays, and replaced it with the drastically declining Shopping (products)

  2. The change in Google product search is interesting, but not surprising, as they appear to be attempting to bury that feature together. At one time it was ‘froogle’ but it was renamed to ‘goolge product search’. I believe even for a brief moment they removed it from the more link. However, I can’t say this is a bad thing, as the results are not very good, and never have been. I do wonder why they’ve avoided this potential market place, as one would assume the potential referrer revenue could be quite substantial, if it performed well. I suppose that the potential for conflict of interest / results may have steered them away from that market. Either way, it’s a disappointment, as the sheer volume of data goolge has could be quite beneficial to actual product search. Think of all the variations of product search’s you could create;
    product news, blog reviews, pricing info, where to buy.

  3. I am most surprised by the 268% growth in igoogle. It appears that this surge in popularity may be a sign of a continued desire for more personalized services. On the opposite side of the spectrum, Google Product search seems to be floundering. This too caught my by surprise, because it would seem more likely that with a 20% growth in Google web search, an increase in product search would seem to come hand in hand – yet this is certainly not the case. I’d be interested in seeing Yahoo’s stats as well to see if the patterns are the same.

  4. John,
    I was just at an event with a staff member from Google who tells me that ComScore has some of their numbers wrong. I’d double check on these.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *