5 ms·

About the AOL announcement (2005)

handpickednames 8y ago
Google SERP with banner ads (2019): https://twitter.com/glenngabe/status/1098939747018461184 https://twitter.com/glenngabe/status/1098939747018461184
currysausage 8y ago
Google to Invest $1 Billion for a 5% Stake in AOL Companies to Collaborate on Online Video Offering and Make More AOL Content Available to Google Users (http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2005/12/time-warners-aol-and-google-to-expand_20.html http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2005/12/time-warners-aol-and...) Wow, I really didn’t remember!
- jobigoud 8y ago
  At that time Google Video was a decent alternative to Youtube.
ninedays 8y ago
> There will be no banner ads on the Google homepage or web search results pages. There will not be crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up all over the Google site. Ever. How times have changed. https://mashable.com/2012/08/28/google-homepage-ad https://mashable.com/2012/08/28/google-homepage-ad https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-breaks-promise-banner-ads-search-results https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-br...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- nkozyra 8y ago
  Never say never. Or alternately, go ahead and say it, nobody really cares.
- benhoyt 8y ago
  To be fair, there aren't "banner ads" on either the Google homepage or the search results pages. Neither are there "crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up". There are definitely ads on the search results pages, and they take too much vertical space IMO, but they're text and small images, not flashing and tacky stuff.
  - gcb0 8y ago
    completely depends on your definition of "crazy". I mean Google used to show ads for a particular drug if you searched for suicide methods that would call for such drug.... that's pretty crazy in my book. also most of the deal was about video ads. just take a look at YouTube.
  - modzu 8y ago
    well yes, the genius is that the ads on the google page are virtually indistinguishable from actual results. is that better or worse?
  - TagAsDelusion 8y ago
    to be fair when someone says 'to be fair' the next words typed sure as fuck ain't.
- duxup 8y ago
  I feel like they did do some of that, although the spirit of what they're saying remains true to some extent.
- rossdavidh 8y ago
  Well, compared to the rest of the internet today (including mashable that you provide a link to), they are wayyyyyy less flashy and graphical. I wish the rest of the internet was a clean as google's homepage.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
robk 8y ago
This was important at the time. AOL's ad inventory converted VERY well and it was very strategic to keep it out of the hands of Microsoft/Bing and Yahoo, both of whom were serious competitors (on hindsight this was where they were actually beginning to diverge and hit their maxima). In the two sided ads marketplace this was critical to have the most and the highest-quality inventory to bring more network effects w/ advertisers getting good results. The investment was terrible but I suppose they just wrote it down as a $1b fee to keep Yahoo off of AOL.
- bmurray7jhu 8y ago
  Google sold back it's 5% stake in 2009 for $283.0 million. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/companies/28aol.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/companies/28ao...
- richardhod 8y ago
  minor correction: Bing didn't exist then; it was created in 2009.
Zecar 8y ago
> Biased results? No way. Providing great search is the core of what we do. Hahah, crazy to think this is how Google used to be.
rekshaw 8y ago
I was more surprised with how archaic the word "webmaster" sounds today.
chasing 8y ago
"Our goal is to organize all of the world's information." Funny how this seems much creepier in 2019 than it did in 2005...
- jlarocco 8y ago
  Yeah. In 2005 I had no idea they meant "personal information". Although in 2005 maybe they hadn't even realized yet.
  - endofcapital 8y ago
    They didn't have any clue. Back in 2005 personal data and access logs and analytics was considered a chore, you'd delegate the annoyance of log rotation to some sys admin or helpdesk intern and generally purge all data as quickly as possible because storage was expensive. Occasionally someone would make a cool tool that parsed htaccess logs and gave you a neat visualization or something, but that was it. Literally nobody tracked anything on the internet. It almost seems like fiction when I type it out now.
NelsonMinar 8y ago
Note this is the 2005 deal. The 2002 ad deal with AOL is probably the single moment that defined the business success of Google, the moment when the AdWords product took off and became the unstoppable juggernaut. I'm still impressed with Google's executive team, particularly Salar, that the deal worked even better than we could have hoped. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/business/technology-aol-shifts-key-contract-to-google.html https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/business/technology-aol-s...
londons_explore 8y ago
The writing style is really different in Google blog posts today. It really shows how the blog post passing through PR, legal, etc. review makes it bland and almost meaningless.

Google SERP with banner ads (2019): https://twitter.com/glenngabe/status/1098939747018461184 https://twitter.com/glenngabe/status/1098939747018461184

currysausage 8y ago

Google to Invest $1 Billion for a 5% Stake in AOL Companies to Collaborate on Online Video Offering and Make More AOL Content Available to Google Users (http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2005/12/time-warners-aol-and-google-to-expand_20.html http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2005/12/time-warners-aol-and...) Wow, I really didn’t remember!

jobigoud 8y ago
At that time Google Video was a decent alternative to Youtube.

ninedays 8y ago

> There will be no banner ads on the Google homepage or web search results pages. There will not be crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up all over the Google site. Ever. How times have changed. https://mashable.com/2012/08/28/google-homepage-ad https://mashable.com/2012/08/28/google-homepage-ad https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-breaks-promise-banner-ads-search-results https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/24/google-br...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
nkozyra 8y ago
Never say never. Or alternately, go ahead and say it, nobody really cares.
benhoyt 8y ago
To be fair, there aren't "banner ads" on either the Google homepage or the search results pages. Neither are there "crazy, flashy, graphical doodads flying and popping up". There are definitely ads on the search results pages, and they take too much vertical space IMO, but they're text and small images, not flashing and tacky stuff.
- gcb0 8y ago
  completely depends on your definition of "crazy". I mean Google used to show ads for a particular drug if you searched for suicide methods that would call for such drug.... that's pretty crazy in my book. also most of the deal was about video ads. just take a look at YouTube.
- modzu 8y ago
  well yes, the genius is that the ads on the google page are virtually indistinguishable from actual results. is that better or worse?
- TagAsDelusion 8y ago
  to be fair when someone says 'to be fair' the next words typed sure as fuck ain't.
duxup 8y ago
I feel like they did do some of that, although the spirit of what they're saying remains true to some extent.
rossdavidh 8y ago
Well, compared to the rest of the internet today (including mashable that you provide a link to), they are wayyyyyy less flashy and graphical. I wish the rest of the internet was a clean as google's homepage.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

robk 8y ago

This was important at the time. AOL's ad inventory converted VERY well and it was very strategic to keep it out of the hands of Microsoft/Bing and Yahoo, both of whom were serious competitors (on hindsight this was where they were actually beginning to diverge and hit their maxima). In the two sided ads marketplace this was critical to have the most and the highest-quality inventory to bring more network effects w/ advertisers getting good results. The investment was terrible but I suppose they just wrote it down as a $1b fee to keep Yahoo off of AOL.

bmurray7jhu 8y ago
Google sold back it's 5% stake in 2009 for $283.0 million. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/companies/28aol.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/technology/companies/28ao...
richardhod 8y ago
minor correction: Bing didn't exist then; it was created in 2009.

Zecar 8y ago

> Biased results? No way. Providing great search is the core of what we do. Hahah, crazy to think this is how Google used to be.

rekshaw 8y ago

I was more surprised with how archaic the word "webmaster" sounds today.

chasing 8y ago

"Our goal is to organize all of the world's information." Funny how this seems much creepier in 2019 than it did in 2005...

jlarocco 8y ago
Yeah. In 2005 I had no idea they meant "personal information". Although in 2005 maybe they hadn't even realized yet.
- endofcapital 8y ago
  They didn't have any clue. Back in 2005 personal data and access logs and analytics was considered a chore, you'd delegate the annoyance of log rotation to some sys admin or helpdesk intern and generally purge all data as quickly as possible because storage was expensive. Occasionally someone would make a cool tool that parsed htaccess logs and gave you a neat visualization or something, but that was it. Literally nobody tracked anything on the internet. It almost seems like fiction when I type it out now.

NelsonMinar 8y ago

Note this is the 2005 deal. The 2002 ad deal with AOL is probably the single moment that defined the business success of Google, the moment when the AdWords product took off and became the unstoppable juggernaut. I'm still impressed with Google's executive team, particularly Salar, that the deal worked even better than we could have hoped. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/business/technology-aol-shifts-key-contract-to-google.html https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/02/business/technology-aol-s...

londons_explore 8y ago

The writing style is really different in Google blog posts today. It really shows how the blog post passing through PR, legal, etc. review makes it bland and almost meaningless.