Google and eBay Partner for Click-to-Call Ads

bart_scriv writes "A new joint venture between Google and Ebay will expand the advertising reach of both companies and integrate free phone service with web ads. The partnership also puts rumors of a Yahoo/eBay merger to rest. From the article: 'A deal announced Aug. 28 by eBay and Google now appears to put the kibosh on the notion of an "ehoo" or "Ybay" to challenge Google. Instead, eBay signed up Google to provide Web search advertising outside the U.S. And the pair will cooperate on developing so-called click-to-call ads — which let potential buyers click on a link and talk directly to sellers or their call centers — throughout the world. Tests of the ads in the multiyear agreement will begin in early 2007, though neither side revealed specific terms.'"

Comments

Thats not a very good name is it ?

[pklinken]

E-Ho ?

Re:Thats not a very good name is it ?

[nacturation]

Ehoo sounds way better than Goobay.

Re:Thats not a very good name is it ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or Egle.

Oh, wait.

Re:Thats not a very good name is it ?

[dperkins]

I prefer Baygle

Re:Thats not a very good name is it ?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we are expecting "eGle" pretty soon!!

I can see...

[selex]

Patent #56010201920191 pending on this new revolutionary idea under the general patent idea of annoying the customer even more.

Selex

Re:I can see...

[UbuntuDupe]

I believe the way Google's approach differs from traditional "sign me up for telespamming" crap is that with Google, the telemarketers don't get your personal information and they have to route their calls through Google without knowing anything about you, so if you ask to be removed they really can't contact you anymore. Now, if you expect Google to sell out and betray your trust, *then* it could be a problem. (I don't think they would, as they have too much to lose.)

This space left intentionally blank.

[Lallander]

So what is going to happen to Googles proposed online payment system? Can't think of the name at the moment, but wasn't it going to be a direct competitor to PayPal? Is this perhaps a way for Ebay to keep that from happening?

Re:This space left intentionally blank.

[generic-man]

No. Google Checkout is just a credit card processing system. It doesn't let private citizens transfer money among themselves. It doesn't compete with PayPal on all the different levels that PayPal operates.

If anything, Froogle + Google Checkout is a Yahoo! Store killer, but that doesn't sound as sensational when you write tech headlines.

Re:This space left intentionally blank.

[itschy]

So what is going to happen to Googles proposed online payment system? Can't think of the name at the moment [...]

Come on, its google. Of course its called Gpay!

Re:This space left intentionally blank.

[Anonymous Coward]

Google has a lot of people snowed on how they don't compete, but complement (Paypal,Microsoft). Smart guys there at Google!

I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[Anonymous Coward]

- software patents
- block competitors ads but promote your own
- clickfraud
- helping the chinese gov
- lipservice to open source (lots of taking and no giving, where is GFS ? what about MapReduce ?)
- more and more ad hoc services
- less and less good search results

it's time for *real* competition

Re:I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[Anonymous Coward]

lipservice to open source (lots of taking and no giving, where is GFS ? what about MapReduce ?)

What, exactly, are you going to do with services that require 10,000 machines?

That's not exactly something you can build in your basement in your spare time. Ten THOUSAND machines.

IHBT :(

Re:I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[Anonymous Coward]

at least someone has ambition :)

wouldn't this stuff work just fine on smaller sets of machines ?

maybe a large basement eh ?

Re:I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[Anonymous Coward]

regarding clickfraud, I always click on *all* the google ads that I see, then close the window :)
just my little contribution

Re:I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[valen]

  Everytime you buy something made in China, you help the chinese government. You'd hold google to a higher standard ? It's not like they are selling them censorship equipment or anything, just giving people the option of uncensored search, or censored search, and letting them know the censored stuff is censored...which is more than anyone else does.

  They give a lot more than lipservice to open source. 77 million to Mozilla last year, through advertising. GFS and MapReduce is their core business. You want them to give that away ?

John

Re:I've had it with google, from fanboy to badboy

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say that LINUX is their core business, and it's high time that google returned some of the favours that they took. Mozilla and all kinds of other feel good projects are not where google made their stash, and after making untold billions off the back of the open source community it would seem only logical that they contribute in the same field that they take their profits from, and release to the general public some of their enhancements to the linux core.

A google (yep) search for '77 million google mozilla donation' did not turn up any relevant results, could you please let me know where you picked that up ? Or maybe it has been censored ?

I'm not quite sure how buying chinese products comes in to play when we're talking about actively aiding censorship, try to expand on it a bit, poor and brainless anonymous coward that I am.

Every government taxes the produce of their populace, the chinese are no exception in this, but they hardly were the ones to invent this practice.

They are one of the few governments in the world that prefer to completely control what their populace can read about said government (in America that of course only happens when 'national security' is at stake, which is about anything these days but never mind that), the chinese are probably the largest and most visible of these. Again, I may be misinformed, and judging by your low slashdot id you have incredible deductive powers so please enlighten me.

buying products != censorship

For anybody that wants GFS to be open sourced (or map-reduce for that matter) there are two excellent pdf's out there that should get you started, now let's hope that you don't run afoul of any google software patents.

 

All good friends, folks.

[tygerstripes]

Yes, what happened to the eBay/Google scuffle over online payments? It's amazing how the power of commerce can bring net-giants together in a spirit of capitalism and mutual profit, in spite of all their differences and rivalries.

It makes you sick, doesn't it?

Re:All good friends, folks.

[Lemmy Caution]

There's such a misunderstanding of the nature of (most) business competition. It's very much to be expected that two businesses will compete in one market or context and turn around and cooperate in another, and it certainly does not mean that there is no chance for a merger that would end that cooperation. The metaphors of total war notwithstanding, it isn't as if business was about the formation of simple alliances against allied enemies.

Yahoo and Ebay are cooperating in the US market, but Ebay is cooperating with Google in other markets. Microsoft competes with Apple and, to some extent, Mozilla, but goes to some pains to ensure a certain amount of interoperability.

The shorthand version: competition for markets is not the same thing as war. Business-as-war is just a metaphor, and like many metaphors, it doesn't always fit.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[$calar]

I think the bigger question is who will serve up these types of ads anyways? I think the one who is getting the shaft in all of these new advertising models are the content distributors. Why is it their responsibility for the advertising to be a success? I think that Google Ad(non)sense proves this theory. I mean, the types of items that have been advertised on my own site are cheap items that generate small pay backs from click throughs. Why should we have to put up with more crap to earn money on our sites? As for advertisers, it's a paradise despite the whole click fraud bunk. Those are just my feelings.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[tootlemonde]

Business-as-war is just a metaphor, and like many metaphors, it doesn't always fit.

The business-as-war metaphor is certainly less apt for competition as practiced in free markets. However, when national governments take a hand in using competition to pursue national interests then business begins to look like war by other means.

One common example is that governments often use subsidies to lower the price of their products in order to sell more exports in the U.S. with the objective of getting U.S. dollars to strengthen their own currencies.

When governments engage in industrial espionage and ignore patent infringements to benefit their domestic industries, then the business starts to look even more like war than business.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, western nations regularly used their armies to the open up and protect markets in the Far East and Africa for their domestic industry. Wars were fought over trading rights. Some countries in the Far East may have learned a lesson from that national experience in how business is conducted.

Armies crossing international boundries may be outdated because free markets provided a cheaper and easier way of establishing a foreign presence behind an enemy's lines.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[Lemmy Caution]

Your ontology presumes what you conclude, and it is flawed.

You assume that business interests are a subset of national interests, and that simply isn't the case. The relationship between the state and different industries is complicated, contested.

What is "an enemy" in this case? Is Ford doing business in Canada a case of the American state pursuing its national interests behind enemy lines? What is the enemy in the Middle East - is it the governments dominated by people with connections to business interests, or the Islamist movements largely dominated by people outside of those governments?

Governments do try to serve constinuencies, it is true, and pursue certain types of advantage. Really, the state and other apparata are mechanisms by which blocs of interest wield power. Any analysis that sees these institutions are the units of analysis by themselves is flawed from the outset - you really need to check, as I said in the outset, your ontology.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[gstoddart]

Microsoft competes with Apple and, to some extent, Mozilla, but goes to some pains to ensure a certain amount of interoperability.

But you can be assured of the fact that Microsoft only does it to prevent getting hauled in front of more judges to address their abuse of monopoly.

They are doing it legally cover their asses, not because they're being generous. If Apple and Mozilla are still around, M$ can say "See, we have competition". If M$ were to move to block Mozilla from working, they'd probably be facing legal hurdles very quickly. (Though, who knows if the current administration in the US would pursue it.)

Cheers

Re:All good friends, folks.

[Lemmy Caution]

I'm sorry, I just don't buy into the evil Microsoft thing. They are about as unethical as any other software company out there, and, as far as I'm concerned, the software industry is a bit more ethical than most.

I'm not saying that your analysis is wrong, mind you: it's mutual self-interest all around (cooperating with Apple ensures that Office remains a standard product across platforms; cooperating with Mozilla ensures that Windows Live will work across platforms - that benefits them far more than having someone us IE.) But you seem to think that this is something particularly sinister about MS, when it is simply the type of calculation that any successful business will engage in.

My point is that enmity as we usually understand it has nothing to do with the relationships between these companies. It is competition, and more importantly, it is first and foremost a quest for enrichment, and if they enrich themselves more by cooperating than competing in certain sectors, they will cooperate.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[tootlemonde]

You assume that business interests are a subset of national interests

I don't assume it but many countries do. Certainly the old Soviet Union did and there is reason to think that China currently does as well.

In times past, people in power in the U.S. assumed an identity between American interest and business interests. Witness U.S. President Coolidge's statement "The business of America is business" and the statement by the president of General Motors thirty years later "What's good for the country is good for General Motors, and vice versa."

This president of GM, Charles Wilson, later became Secretary of Defense. He and President Coolidge may have had their ontologies wrong but they were in a position to act as if they were true.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[Lemmy Caution]

Those statements weren't statements of standing fact: they were actually attempts to unify national policy with the interests of (some) companies. IBM managed to maintain business relationships with the Nazi regime long after the diplomatic relationship betweeen the US and Germany fell apart; national relationships are very cozy between nations which host hotly competing companies (eg., Boeing and Airbus). French economic policy is torn between nationalistic small-businesses and farmers and multinational corporations (and different groups of consumers, some of whom want locally produced, non-GMO foods, and others who want prices as low as possible.)

Different industries have very different ideal policy environments, too: consider the differences between hardware, software, and content industries regarding DRM and IP.

Re:All good friends, folks.

[mgblst]

You may be right that Microsoft is nor more unethical than other software companies, but this is irrelevant. Microsoft has so much power, that is the problem. They can be as unethical as they want, but if they happen to control the OS and Office market, we have a problem.

I also do not believe that Microsoft produces Office for Apple to avoid the courts - they do it because it is profitable for them, it helped cement Office as the suite, and it gives them some leverage over apple.

Further information

[kripkenstein]

from the press release at Google:

Starting in the near future, Skype will offer its users the option to download the Google Toolbar, to which Skype will add a custom button. The companies will also explore interoperability between Skype and Google Talk via open standards to enable text chat and online presence.

So this collaboration seems like more than just click-to-call. The Skype/Google Talk interoperability sounds intriguing, and might give the low-market-share Google Talk some more standing in the IM world; perhaps this is a reaction to Yahoo and Microsoft, who are getting their IM clients to interoperate.

Re:Further information

[Anonymous Coward]

So is eBay allowing Google Checkout now? I get the feeling that if they hadn't already revoked that ban, that this may just be all about that.

Re:Further information

[tommertron]

I think it's more Google honest attempt to open up all IM and VOIP clients to be interoperable. I think this is really what they're trying to do with Gtalk.

Hopefully one day it won't matter whether you're using MSN, Yahoo, AIM, or Skype, you'll be able to call/IM anyone. Just like now it doesn't matter what email client you're using, you can still email anybody, and how you can call any cell phone or land line no matter which carrier you're part of. IM/VOIP needs to get there.

Re:Further information

[ugotitnow]

check out a news release from VoIP Inc / Voiceone tomorrow and then thursdays release... All of what your asking for is being released in two parts, first the IM platform tomorrow, then the first set of of "universal" calling services on Thursday. You will be able to see the news releases for all of this at: http://wwww.voiceone.com/ and http://www.click4me.net/ also traded as VOII, so will popup on newswire as well. Sorry I cant say too much more (part of the company), but everything, from any platpform PC, MAC, LINUX, AND CELL PHONES, as enabling seemless chat, and ALL being able to make voice inbound and outbound call - including to/from the PSTN.... Also adding functionality for current click-2-call stuff where currently it calls a phone number, to allow it try your IM account first to see if you want to take the call on your IM client, or forward to your contact phone number... some cool stuff coming down the pike....

I was not expecting this

[moore.dustin]

To be honest, I thought that Google would have liked to compete with Paypal on eBay at some point. This probably negates the chance of that happening for a while don't you think? Something could have been written in the agreement, but I would have to guess that Google will not be used to pay for any auctions anytime soon.

It could, on the other hand, just mean that Google never intended to really compete with Paypal within eBay. I think it is good that they are sticking to their guns, which is advertising.

Re:I was not expecting this

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a xoogler, just left last month, but I liked to listen at the water cooler. paypal (suck or not) has marketshare and mindshare. Google checkout is designed for businesses, not c2c. Some professional ebayers have the volume and steady sales that would make google checkout an option, but for part time/occasional sellers, google checkout isn't an option.

That said, google checkout provided good leverage for talks with ebay. We agree not allow c2c for x years (which we don't have any intention of doing anyhow), they pay through the nose.

Re:I was not expecting this

[Grishnakh]

I'm really disappointed by this news. I had hoped that Google would create new payment and auction services to compete directly with eBay. Paypal is horrible, with their ridiculous fees and terrible customer service record, and eBay is turning to crap very quickly with high seller fees which are causing many small-time sellers to abandon auctions altogether, leaving eBay to the mass-market merchants who just sell the same crap as each other at mediocre prices with inflated shipping charges.

I've been on eBay since 1996. eBay used to be (back around 2000 or earlier) a great place to get great deals on used stuff from private sellers who would otherwise throw these items away, give them to Goodwill, or have a garage sale. It was a great place to find extremely obscure items, like small antiques, which someone would like to have but which just aren't worth much money. But now with the terrible fees, compounded with Paypal's fees, all of which go to Meg's huge executive compensation package, it's simply not worth it any more to list a $1-5 item.

I was really hoping that Google would decide to get into this market and provide some real competition for eBay and Paypal. There are some other auction sites out there, and there's also Craigslist, but the other auction sites just don't have the mindshare that eBay has ("why list on Yahoo when everyone's browsing the eBay auctions?"), and Craigslist really quite frankly sucks for finding stuff unless it's something in your locality. Google is large enough and well established with a trusted name that they could step into this market, and with their excellence in software development create an excellent site that could quickly take over from eBay.

Oh well, I guess I'll just have to remember the eBay of the late 90s with fondness as that kind of thing will probably never happen again.

Prank calls will skyrocket

[192939495969798999]

Do you know what a DDOS attack could do to a call center? A switchboard can't handle nearly the volume that a website can, so you could pretty easily clog the phones at any of these centers forever, pretty much, right? I can't wait to see the prank calls that come out of this -- funny for everyone but the person that gets a zillion calls an hour!

Re:Prank calls will skyrocket

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr. Ralsky, the phone's for you...

Re:Prank calls will skyrocket

[Lord_Dweomer]

Hmm...sounds like a good reason for companies to treat us well and not annoy the hell out of us with intrusive ads and unwanted calls. Sign me up!

Does this mean

[ackthpt]

You will get negative feedback on your ads?

eh, who?

Re:Does this mean

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps....eBaygle? Mmmmmm....delicious!

kibosh?

[Anonymous Coward]

oy vey, i had to look that one up even though i could tell what it meant by the context...

This has been done... horribly done...

[Anonymous Coward]

a MLM out there has already done this. Yes, it sucks. They suck. their service sucks. But it's been done. Free PC to phone calls that are ad supported. Done done done. Old news.

Sloth = Evil

[haggie]

This deal sounds like Google being lazy. Hmmm, should we compete with eBay (which would take alot of hard work and sound business planning) or just sign some half-assed deal so we can all get along (zero effort, zero results). Google clearly has changed direction from the former to the latter. Isn't sloth a cardinal vice and thereby evil? Sometimes doing evil means doing nothing.

Re:Sloth = Evil

[humble.fool]

Since when has entering a market with a sound partner been considered "doing nothing", that what I want to know.

GooglePay

[tritonman]

Does this mean we will be able to use googlepay on ebay?

Person on the other end?

[Anonymous Coward]

there better be - Im sick of these automated systems.
Let me talk to a person!

eBoogle!

[chroot_james]

Way better than eho...

Re:eBoogle!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmmm how about eBagle

Great

[rice_burners_suck]

Great, just what we all need... More ads and more telemarketers calling.

Sales Reps

[snard6]

I don't know... The whole reason i do my shopping online is because i DON'T want to talk with people. In fact, most geeks seem the same way, it's much easier to just choose what you want, pay for it, and receive it. I don't think giving me the option to talk to a sales rep is going to boost their sales.

Re:Sales Reps

[danpsmith]

Most places these days don't have real sales commissions, which is a double-edged sword. But it does mean that sales staff will be more likely to tell you the most correct option instead of the most profitable in most cases (unless you are talking about warranties). Seeing as this nation is becoming a giant shopping mall with limited interaction anywhere else and life just a series of transactions, maybe it would be better for you to actually shop with a person instead of a computer. Something less commodifying about it, that is, until they replace the sales staff with a terminal instead.

Take the human interactions while you can get them, because one day they'll all be gone.

Re:Sales Reps

[mgblst]

Yes but the online market has gone beyong geeks, and now includes your sister and your mother, who do enjoy talking to people.

Don'r worry, you aren't forced to talk to anybody.

Eboogle

[dinonion]

Two internet powerhouses combining hopefully something good will come out of this merger. I can definately say that it will help out the communication factors that ebay has with some faulty sellers to all those innocent consumers who lose their sent money and receive any goods. Google's orginization will definatley play a major role in getting all of those faulty vendors under control, or maybe not they are still having some issues with adsense bots putting other companies out of business.

Re:Eboogle

[Grishnakh]

I can definately say that it will help out the communication factors that ebay has with some faulty sellers to all those innocent consumers who lose their sent money and receive any goods.

How will this help with all the faulty sellers on eBay? eBay intentionally doesn't do anything about all the faulty sellers, because it helps their business.

call centres

[doobystew]

Thank God for this! The 4+ per day hassle average from call centres wasn't quite annoying enough, I'll definately be clicking ad links to speak to even more instantly!

Re:call centres

[Grishnakh]

We need more call centers with more sales reps to talk to every time we need to buy something. With all of our manufacturing and engineering work going overseas, we can become a country of sales reps and sell each other stuff all day.

Mexuar

[dean.collins]

Lol, I'm reticent to post this url for fear of the dreaded "slashdot avalanche effect" but here goes.

The problem with the Google technology is it is flawed. You could build the same solution with some old dialogic boards and a rainy weekend. It would have been hot in the 90's but technology has now moved on.

There are a number of vendors out there offering far more intuitive and less intrusive solutions however only 1 has a true clientless offering; www.Mexuar.com is a small but dynamic UK company who have recently launched Corraleta at Astricon in London. (but already has real paying customers who are using it in real world applications).

FYI, whilst we launched at London Astricon 1 month ago and have shipped licenses both in Europe and Australia, the USA launch being held off until Astricon Dallas in 4 weeks time.

Their server side java voip applet is revolutionary, Mexuar Corraleta is the first clientless voip application that can allow your website visitors to speak with you via their ordinary headset, up over their web connection, to the Corraleta server application and then to a real phone on a real desk in your office.

Mexuar Corraleta allows your website vistors to 'dial' via their headset and mic and ask you real time questions and get real time answers via voice all without needing to download an annoying client like Skype(...pftt that was yesterdays technology). Ever want to speak with your website visitors real time?.......now you can with Mexuar Corraleta.

Should you need more info feel free to check out their website at www.mexuar.com however it is still pre-release for the next few weeks.

There is a demo on my website at www.cognation.net/mexuar and anyone looking to implement this technology is free to try it out today on www.cognation.net/contact ......but however be kind and don't "slashdot my server"
Cheers,
Dean

A google ebay killer was never going to happen

[jonwil]

I have no idea of exact figures but from what I have seen when I search on google, ebay has to be one of the top if not the top purchasers of those ads that appear alongside google search results.
There is no way google is going to risk that by launching a competitor.