4 ms·

doesn't 15% less time in gmail = 15% less ad clicks for google from gmail? ok it's not a 1:1 correlation, but I'm sure there's some kind of relationship. there

doesn't 15% less time in gmail = 15% less ad clicks for google from gmail? ok it's not a 1:1 correlation, but I'm sure there's some kind of relationship. there's an intrinsic conflict of interest - the more you make the app convenient to the point the user doesn't need to interact with it as much, the more you hurt your ad revenue. (that said, I'm sure a dip in revenue from gmail isn't going to end google)

Seth_Kriticos 16y ago
How much time people spend on the site is just one part of the calculation. See, this feature is something that makes GMail very attractive, which results in a high user influx and loyalty. More users, more views. Additionally the web interface of the GMail is made so well, that I for instance stopped using my IMAP synced local eMail client, effectively watching their ads more (not really, I'm ad resistant, but I'm exposed).
dkokelley 16y ago
Then again, remember that Google's objective with their original search home page was to get users OFF of their page as quickly as possible, and they did this by streamlining their engine and serving the most relevant content. In Gmail, the most relevant content are the "priority" emails. I can think of a few ways in which users spending less time in Gmail can earn more revenue for Google both directly in the Gmail client and in the long run across all Google products.
izendejas 16y ago
You also have to realize that you're training Google's algorithms to better understand the things that matter to you, so that even though you spend less time reading emails, now they can target ads better, leading to more clicks (and higher bids due to better targetting).
edanm 16y ago
Google doesn't usually consider such things when making their interfaces better. At least according to them. Google was asked when they rolled out Google Instant what impact it has on their ad revenues, and they said something like "it won't bankrupt us, but other than that we don't worry about it when improving thing for users". By the way, you want an interesting example? Think of the "I'm feeling lucky" button - a search option on their frontpage which completely bypasses any ads. How much lost revenue has Google experienced because of that one small button? Yet they still keep it.

Seth_Kriticos 16y ago

How much time people spend on the site is just one part of the calculation. See, this feature is something that makes GMail very attractive, which results in a high user influx and loyalty. More users, more views. Additionally the web interface of the GMail is made so well, that I for instance stopped using my IMAP synced local eMail client, effectively watching their ads more (not really, I'm ad resistant, but I'm exposed).

dkokelley 16y ago

Then again, remember that Google's objective with their original search home page was to get users OFF of their page as quickly as possible, and they did this by streamlining their engine and serving the most relevant content. In Gmail, the most relevant content are the "priority" emails. I can think of a few ways in which users spending less time in Gmail can earn more revenue for Google both directly in the Gmail client and in the long run across all Google products.

izendejas 16y ago

You also have to realize that you're training Google's algorithms to better understand the things that matter to you, so that even though you spend less time reading emails, now they can target ads better, leading to more clicks (and higher bids due to better targetting).

edanm 16y ago

Google doesn't usually consider such things when making their interfaces better. At least according to them. Google was asked when they rolled out Google Instant what impact it has on their ad revenues, and they said something like "it won't bankrupt us, but other than that we don't worry about it when improving thing for users". By the way, you want an interesting example? Think of the "I'm feeling lucky" button - a search option on their frontpage which completely bypasses any ads. How much lost revenue has Google experienced because of that one small button? Yet they still keep it.