Google introduces keyword bidding ... a move too far?

Google quietly announced it was opening up keyword bidding on its search engine last Friday.

The move has angered agencies and advertisers who have accused the internet giant of abusing its market dominant position and ignoring their interests in an attempt to bolster its ad revenue as it comes hot on the heels of the company's first decline in paid advertising clicks.

Advertisers and agencies argue it will allow companies to 'piggyback' on their brands, eroding decades of marketing investment.

The policy has been running in the US since 2004 but will not include Europe when it is implemented in the UK from next month. Is Google right to open up keyword bidding in the UK?

I think Jason has hit the nail on the head. Google's success is based on delivering the best search results quickly and efficiently without taking money from advertisers to appear higher up in results like Yahoo does. I'm surprised they've done this. It will alienate the agencies and who knows possibly internet users down the line. 

It seems like a move by Google to increase revenues.  However it will ultimatley back fire in the longterm.  Yes, they will make short-term financial gains from brands cross bidding on other brands, however without the effeciencies brand terms bring, PPC costs will rise and it will become less cost-effective, which will mean businesses removing spend into better performing channels

it may not have an impact on what a customer clicks on (searched for brand or competitors), but it will push up the bid price for previously cheap brand terms due to competition!

 

It will allow the market to grow as opposed to seeing the big brands have a bigger share of the market if small to medium sized businesses can ride on the coattails of the bigger ones. Surely only a good thing for consumers.

Boo Hoo! It's not fair!!
Get real. How is this move any different to you thinking you are going into the Supermarket to buy Heinz baked beans only to come out with Crosse and Blackwell because they were on special offer?
As long as our advertising copy and our landing pages conform to all the relevant law and advertising standards I don't see the problem - give the consumer a bit of credit, they know what's going on.

Having spent months getting the brand of well known car brand trademarked, with Google taking forever to make it happen and throwing up reasons why it couldnt happen at every turn, it just means that the UK team dont have to worry about it any more, getting it sorted with the US. However, in this space, the 'smaller companies' idea doesnt work. It just means all the manufacturers will start bidding on each other's terms, to the point they dont bother, so Google loses out. You cant disparage a rival brand on TV, so how come its ok in search. "Why buy brandX when you can have a brandY with better MPG" Just becomes a peeing contest

This act screams greed from Google. All is fair in love and war when Brand X gets more shelf space in the supermarket or more air time on TV if they pay the price. The customer in those scenarios are expecting to be faced with choice. Online a user looking for Brand X and gets back brands K, F, U and C - how is this relevant? Relevancy is the one consistent criteria of Google's algorithm - now they are playing gorilla. Shame on them.

This act screams greed from Google. All is fair in love and war when Brand X gets more shelf space in the supermarket or more air time on TV if they pay the price. The customer in those scenarios are expecting to be faced with choice. Online a user looking for Brand X and gets back brands K, F, U and C - how is this relevant? Relevancy is the one consistent criteria of Google's algorithm - now they are playing gorilla. Shame on them.

Googles POPULARITY is due to its simplicity and relevance YES

Its SUCCESS especially its business success is due to its clever monetisation of its popularity

 

I'm pretty sure you got brands K F U & C in the wrong order there !

 I think it's too early to draw conclusions. Only after testing within the new eco system will you be able to say anything conclusive about this measure.

A person going to Google and types in 'Nike' is very determined and knows what he or she wants. An ad from a competitor is unlikely to change their mind. 

Secondly, the advantage is still with the brands. Competitors are allowed to bid on their brand name, but can't use the name in the ad copy. Which makes it less relevant for the both the end user, as well as Google's quality score.

So click prices will be driven up, that's a given - but will it become a long term strategy? I doubt it will be for big brand name owners, but I'm sure plenty of affiliates will manage to make money out of it.

Btw, I'm not arguing whether or on Google is right on this - just trying to bring a bit of balance to the debate.

was mostly a storm in a tea-cup. Look at the major brands, there are no major squatters. Also, it was pretty similar before the change. Google were pretty useless at removing brand bidding competitors. I have spent many hours on the phone to my account manager trying to stamp in that there was no legitimate reason for brand X to bid on my terms. It's just easier for me now, I have to accept it. Need to find something else to monitor...... ah, Affiliates! L