Voices.com CEO David Ciccarelli is crying foul at part of Google’s new radio ad product, which is in beta testing with select Google Adwords customers. Through partnerships with hundreds of radio stations, Google will offer customers the ability to bid on radio spots, and target ads by geography, station type, listener demographics and time of day.
But Google isn’t stopping at the sale, placement and tracking of radio spots. They are also assisting customers in the process of creating the ads themselves. The overall product looks very similar to what Spot Runner (mentioned here) is doing in the television space. From a recent CNET article on Google Radio Ads:
Google is also testing a program that will link up inexperienced radio marketers with professionals who can help them create a radio ad. Google Audio Ads beta tester Richard Swezey, executive vice president of Santa Monica, Calif.-based Bedlounge.com, said he is using that program, which Google called an “ad creative marketplace,” to get help in creating a radio ad to sell portable recliner pillows.
“Within 12 hours of submitting the bid, we got back a completed ad based on relatively scant information,” he said. “For a first shot, we were blown away by it.”
The minimum price for a bid is $100 and his bid was $300, Swezey said.
It’s that last bit that has Ciccarelli up in arms. Voices.com has been helping to match advertisers with voice talent and ad production for the last couple of years. He claims the Google ad product is nearly identical, although he hasn’t seen it yet and has nothing to go on but the CNET quote above. But he also says that for the last couple of months traffic to the site from Mountain View (where Google is headquartered) has gone through the roof, accounting for about 5% of total voices.com traffic. He’s suggesting that Google has scoured the voices.com site to figure out what to copy in the Voices.com business model.
Most people will tell Ciccarelli to suck it up and not complain about this. Copying is just flattery, after all, and there’s nothing he can do about it besides try and innovate faster than Google can (See YouTube).
And something else that needs to be considered is the possibility that Google hasn’t bothered looking at Voices.com at all. The core product was developed by a company that Google acquired a year ago called dMarc, which is still located in Newport Beach, California, about 350 miles south of Mountain View.
It’ll be interesting to see what people think about this in the comments.
Hmmn…whatever happened to the “Don’t be evil” motto.
Better try and sell voices.com to google before you are put out of business alltogether.
Maybe Voices should start putting together some radio ads for themselves…
Well Michael , what i think is , this post is not going to enhance your relation with Google PR team , that’s for sure:)
Well..isn’t that how journalism is supposed to be…open and honest.
Cicarelli needs to wipe away his tears and deal with the real world.
Business models and strategies are copied on a daily basis. I’m not saying that Google is guilty - I’m saying that this is not an isolated case.
Business moves fast, especially in the online world. If you don’t have a competitive advantage, barriers to entry, necessary relationships in place, or some sort of differentiation point, then expect to be slaughtered.
Instead of crying to TechCrunch, he should be figuring out a way to solve this challenge.
Good luck Dave.
Cheers,
Aidan
It looks like Google’s finally run out of ideas and started just copying people outright, if not blatantly stealing their ideas.
Do people really expect any better from a company which derives most of it’s revenue from spam websites, which runs roughshod over the legal system across the globe, which protects drug dealers and child traffickers, and which censors the press not just in China but *IN THE WEST*, including the US and Belgium?
Grow up, people. Even MS was never this bad, and it took almost 2 decades for it to reach its worst. Google accomplished that in just 8 years.
What makes this any different from search or email? Welcome to the real world.
It looks like Google’s finally run out of ideas and started just copying people outright, if not blatantly stealing their ideas.
Whose idea did Google steal exactly? To make it easy for local advertisers to meet their target audience? To have an auction arena where people can bid for services?
Business models are copied every day - you have to be able to compete on execution as well as strategy. However, the universe is definitely conspiring against you if Google is the copier.
google just finding another way to put a dollar in their pocket!
Jorge, you’re right to criticize Google for all of the evil it is doing in the world, but it is only fair to point out that Google is also doing incredible good for democracy promotion, civil and human rights, etc.
I won’t detail the myriad ways Google is building real-world solutions for, and inspiring, dissidents and social movements across the globe, but they are very real.
We already had a warning from Blair’s spokespeople about how uppity bloggers are being audacious enough to actually demand that the UK government serve the people instead of the corporations. This is just one example of one government that has been pushed by regular people - using Google technology - to speak out against their government and influence policy. Hard evidence may still be a long time coming, but Google’s ability to let regular working-class citizens have a voice (Blogger) - and have that voice be found by other regular working-class citizens (search) - is scaring the shizzle out of governments across the globe, and keeping their internal political police (e.g. the FBI) busy monitoring and attempting to suppress dissent at alarming and ever-growing levels.
The verdict is not in yet, but seeing the Blair folks so publicy and violently crap their knickers makes me think there might yet be something to this “organize the world’s information” thing.
links:
BBC Article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6155932.stm
One blogger’s thoughts (I suspect I’m not on this person’s side for most stuff, but his essential points in this post are well-taken):
http://mreugenides.blogspot.co.....mands.html
he we have a top government strategy official expressing his dismay at the internets, saying in effect, “We’re f*cked. We need to get back on top of this thing. These dummies are too stupid to know how to govern themselves, and they’re demanding that we actually do our jobs and not be criminals - this has to stop.”
Well, our leaders can often get away with being racist in talking about how the people of [insert name of invaded country here] are too stupid to govern themselves, but methinks the good people of Britain will not take this counsel so well. I’m not sure how Americans will take it, if and when an American political strategist is dumb enough to publicly point out that the internets are working.
Because of companies like Google, Mr. Taylor has a big problem on his hands. Look for governments around the world to continue to fight Google and the internets and their own populations by trying any trick in the book (Google vs. US Government on ‘net neutrality’) to stop this freedom/democracy-promotion effect that Google is helping to create.
The net neutrality debate was never just about corporations trying to make a few more bucks - it was about restoring things to their original order - rich people get their message out easiest, lowly citizens cannot be heard. Governments and the super-rich work together to achieve their goals, and they don’t like being bothered by ‘the rabble’ - pesky citizens. If you think net neutrality and myriad other schemes to control us are going to go away, I have a bridge to sell you. We have to remain vigilant.
“It looks like Google’s finally run out of ideas and started just copying people outright, if not blatantly stealing their ideas.”
I’m sure Google’s idea of going into *search* was an original one. I’m very positive they didn’t copy it from, say, a company named Yahoo.
Glad to see that Google is doing something with this concept!
A year ago, I completed work on a system that did basically the same thing but for streaming radio.
You could target ads locally or nationally, create ads using a variety of rich-media tools and then bid for target audiences based on exposure. The system worked and we had the backing of one of the largest players in national radio but alas, the product is still in beta limbo.
Product can not be patented. You can’t say I have patented Cone Icevream , nobody else can buy. Or I invented Search Engine no one can create another. The ingenuity of Googl eis in figuring out the business model and building a scale through its financial muscles which can not be matched by the originator.
Basic Science can not be patented.
There’s been a lot of great advice in the comments and I thank you all for it.
Truth is, we’ve been working harder than ever to build value for our stakeholders and establish our foothold in this market. Simply put, Google’s move has only turned up the heat a few notches.
Yes, we’re protective of our IP and will continue to do more to ensure that our business remains rock solid.
From our point-of-view, we believe that the awareness that Google will bring to the industry will be a win for our company.
An interesting patent worth looking into relevant for this arena is US Patent 7,085,732 that discusses:
“An online trading system for conducting an advertiser initiated auction for the placement of an advertisement in a media, such as printed publications, billboards, radio, television, videos, network portals, web pages, and the like.” The provisional was filed in 2001.
The inventor looks to have a related business - a bit of research and leg work would likely pay off.
http://www.patentmonkey.com/PM.....85732.aspx
“The core product was developed by a company that Google acquired a year ago called dMarc…”
I think there are really two technologies/offerings at play here 1) the audio ad targeting system and 2) matching advertiser demand to voice talent. The first was in fact acquired thru dMarc, but as far as I can tell, the second piece was not part of the dMarc stack, and given the internet traffic, it could certainly indicate some ‘imitation’ was happening.
The reality is that there’s not much Voices.com can do about this. Just like the small ISV’s who were put out of business by Microsoft, this fate will befall many Internet companies at the hands of Google. Sure, Google could have integrated with Voices, or even created an open API to plug into any contractor marketplace, but in that case it’s more difficult to ensure a simple seamless user experience. Yes, I realize this is similar to the argument MSFT used as it added ‘features’ to Windows, and killed off the small ISV; however, no one can argue that it’s easier to ensure a better user experience if you own the whole process.
Besides, Google is developing is a two sided market, creating the demand with the audio ad service and linking that demand up with the talent to create the ads. Voices.com only provides one part of this; is it Google’s fault for wanting to keep both sides of this market, especially if generating the demand for these services is a bigger problem than creating a clearing house to match up talent with said demand (does anyone even know how many contractor marketplaces are there on the web today).
I’m looking forward to Google making these audio ads available for any publisher of a podcast; do you honestly think they purchased this ad platform just for radio? When was the last time a radio asked you for your age, gender or zip code?
I can understand the Voices guy feeling paranoid looking at all those hits from Google. But, it’s silly to say Google’s stealing anything. It wouldn’t make much sense to put together a radio ad-sales system without providing a way to get copy produced in the package. How many ways are there to do that? Google is smashing the old advertising system and creating new business for radio. A startup’s major risk is that some bigger company will add its product to its operating system. Is this evil? I say, when it was MS, and the operating system was closed, yes it was. But when it’s Google competing in the Internet marketplace, no. It may not be “fair,” but it isn’t evil. I think some segments of the geek tribe are way too quick to slap on the Evil sticker.
Google is a publicly traded corporation. The legally mandated top priority of a publicly traded corporation is to deliver value to its shareholders. Google culture began a slide into the Wall Street mainstream the day it went public. Please, people, grow up a little bit and stop discussing this “evil” nonsense. It’s just marketing, like “the real thing” or “I’m lovin’ it” or “just do it.” (rolls eyes) The questions you should really be asking yourself are more like: “How long will Google continue to produce delightful products?” or “How long can Google remain a fulfilling place to work?”
This model is akin to Google’s ongoing experiments with auctioning ads in magazines, newspapers, and other print media; and has the same set of little-recognized or appreciated drawbacks . . .
Let’s ask ourselves: Once advertisers have become comfortable with using radio–thanks to Google’s easing of the path to its implementation via this new platform–how long will they continue to pay more for these radio ads than they would be paying if they placed the ads themselves?
Unlike an ad system like paid search; which due to its complex structure (among other barrier-to-entry factors) obviously can not be replicated by individual advertisers; placing radio ads is not that difficult. Especially once you’ve done it a few times.
The bottom-line question then is this: How long will companies pay a 25-100% or more premium (due to auction competition) over radio stations’ everyday ad rates for the sake of having Google be their middleman–even with them supplying the talent and writing the ad (which two services radio stations already provide for free)?
Fact is, companies like Voices, Bid4Spots (which is a much more attractive approach for advertisers than Google’s platform), and the 100’s of other value providers within this marketplace have little to worry from Google’s new offering.
Any advertisers spending more than $500/month on radio spots–as will be the case with the Google print program–will never embrace such a system.
…a final thought…
How many airline tickets would we buy from Priceline…once we realized that we were paying more than what the airlines themselves were charging for the same exact flights?
I am totally in the “suck it up” crowd. Your barrier has to be larger community, lead in the market place, etc… if you don’t have it, you don’t have it. You can’t blame Google for building an add-on service that works with where they are going with radio. And… We use another matching site for work called Voice123, and sites such as Guru.com have been around a long time, matching talent with work. So, not a leg to stand on here, me thinks.
I imagine that if its a large enough market for Google to go after, then its probably a large enough market for a couple players.
Voices.com has a great domain, solid tech, and from the looks of it a fairly large user base.
Also, let’s all keep our pants on until Google releases whatever it is they are doing in this space.
I wish David & Voices.com lots of luck.
Obviously the writers have not heard of either Voice123 or Bid4Spots, both in business around the same time as dMarc or earlier. It’s called business. Welcome to America.
To Voices.com I say: If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em!
He could do something about it if he has a patent…Isn’t it also possible that Google was just checking out the competition? Not a bad idea in my opinion - not to steal ideas, just to know what you are up against.
One important point that is missed by Google:
It takes a lot more than copywriting and voiceover to create a radio ad that works great.
It isn’t about sounding pretty. It’s about getting results. Isn’t that the point of accountable advertising?
Never seen so much whining about evil and what not
Its called ‘research’ folks.
Anybody ever tried voice ads? Will there be some voice adsense soon? I wish I could use voice adsense on my site soon.
-Mike
Tech Tutorials: http://www.hotcoding.com
I have been writing and recording voice ads for websites for a few years. This is NOT new, it’s just new to Google. They’re ALSO trying to copy something that http://www.Bid4Spots.com has already done quite well.
BIG John Small
http://www.GreatRadioAds.com