Google has always been more an adversary to traditional Madison Avenue advertisers than a friend. But with economic woes looming, there aren’t too many companies with growing advertising budgets. Google is on track to spend nearly $2 billion this year on sales and marketing, yet it’s offline advertising budget is estimated to be only $20 million a year. A story in today’s Wall Street Journal suggests that Google might be overcoming its distaste for traditional forms of advertising as it grows into a global brand. Excerpt:
But there are signs that the internal debate is causing Google to shake-off of its reluctance to advertise. The search giant has recently held discussions with several Madison Avenue agencies, including Wieden + Kennedy and the boutique firm Taxi New York, about new efforts to promote some products, according to people familiar with the matter.
But does it really need to do that? Google’s success is predicated on the fact that traditional forms of advertising are less effective than paid search, contextual, and other, more measurable, online ads. Google is already considered to be the 10th most valuable brand in the world, and it got there without spending money on TV, print, or radio advertising. It got there by weaving itself into the daily habits of nearly anyone who uses the Web. Google markets itself through its products.
That’s not to say there is not the occasional billboard for GOOG 411 (it’s free 411 service), or that it won’t co-brand products such as T-Mobile’s upcoming G1 Android phone. But as far as moving towards splashy TV or magazine ads, that could actually hurt Google’s brand. Fortunately, as the article notes, founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin “remain cautious and have pushed back against some ideas they believe are inconsistent with the company’s image.”
The best thing Google can do is to continue to eat its own dog food. As it pushes into radio, print, and TV advertising with new approaches, it should test its advertising systems with its own ads. And selective ad campaigns to promote new services that have yet to gain traction is not a bad idea. (I’d love to see an ad campaign for Google Docs along the lines of the “I’m a Mac/I’m a PC” Apple ads). But launching an indiscriminate offline ad campaign would be counter to everything Google stands for.
I agree! Google is the king of online advertising and that’s the future. I don’t think anyone with a computer and online access that hasn’t heard of or used Google before.
Free grammar lesson for someone who’s writing for a living.
It’s => it is
Its => possessive for it.
For example:
yet it’s offline advertising budget is estimated => yet it is offline budget is estimated
it’s free 411 service => it is free 411 service.
I agree they have massive brand awareness without a doubt, however maybe they are thinking that they need to reach out and explain why there are the number one on the Internet. I think a TV Ad explaining that a barber shop or dry cleaning business can advertise for ten bucks a month, (or whatever), and get new customers by using Google to target local markets with geo-targeting.
There is a lot Google does and not everyone knows how they can use Google.
Cheers – Eric
Their business is based online…therefore the bulk of their advertising should probably remain online. Obviously they have already decided that they want to advertise more aggressively offline so there must be a reason for this, possibly the market is beginning to reach maturity?
The big difference now, though, is that they’ve ceased to be an exclusively web-based company. Perhaps there’s no reason to advertise a website with traditional ads, since useful sites have a way of floating to the top on the internet, but consider, for example, the G1.
Most people don’t know what a mobile OS is, much less that Google has created one. That information has to be disseminated quickly, while the phone is still current, and to everyone, not just those who thoroughly research their phone choices. You have to throw it in people’s faces, and traditional advertising is just the medium for that.
The marketing mix is important in every marketing strategy, the key is to find the ideal “mix” in Google case the offline share is only 1%.
There is no “bad media”, there are bad marketing mixes.
I think is a very clever strategy.
In my opinion google will enter all online field with their services. As long as it help more people it will be good (or goodle?)
They’re no longer a start-up so they need more channels to reach out to mainstream users, especially to promote their other non-search services.
More channels is absolutely right. best advice is in the blogs. great article from smitra came out yesterday.
quote:
“we have seen a lot of companies in the VERTICAL DOMAIN–SEARCH ENGINES, ad networks, social media. But the integrated user experience I envisioned–Web 3.0 = 4C+P+VS (content, commerce, community and context plus personalization plus vertical search)–still eludes.”
“personalization, my cornerstone concept for Web 3.0, languishes.”
http://www.forb...03vertical.html
I feel they need to focus on offering personalized niche multichannel strategic vertical location based offerings. “It is very hard if not impossible” for them to do because it does not fit in with there algorspam and adspam system they are founded on.
Billboard advertising is nonsense for a company like goog.
http://www.kill...locator-network
AdvertismentLocator.com
Google’s going around universities at the moment advertising their google apps platform to students. I’m sure that although they don’t go through traditional paper/tv ads, they get stuff out through word of mouth and making appearances, etc.
More advertising has already begun for Google, they are somewhat agressively taking out AdMob ads for pushing mobile services:
http://kaiyzen.com/?p=220
And outside of apple/hp/dell Google is one of the top product placement sponsors amongst tech companies.
As @byron mentioned, PR is really their primary marketing method. When they are in full swing we can hardly go 72 hrs without some announcement regarding the Big G. Does the $10 Million Android contest and $30 xprize sponsorship come out of their marketing budget?.., Probably not, but it is meeting the same purpose as taking out a billboard for Goog411 just targeted at a different audience.
This would be a great place for Google to advertise their Mobile Search: http://ecomb.org/ecoart.html . The Eco Art Gallery by the Sea. This non-profit is raising money for beach cleanups by having corporations run their logo on beach-front litter bins. The advertisement coincides with designs submitted by local artists. If you’re from Google and you’re reading this, please consider this goodwill opportunity.
they dont need to spend more. if you do not know who google is you live in a cave
spending money on advertising after you’re a Google, Microsoft, Coca-Cola, or McDonalds is just throwing away money.
Unless you’re specifically endorsing a new product within your company, it does nothing. everyone already knows who you are. the only useful advertising is if they somehow don’t know what you do (new menu item, new software suite, new drink flavor, new social app)
That’s not really true, it would only work if you had no competition. Microsoft just started their campaign to counter the growing number of Mac users, and there is a constant battle between Coke and Pepsi for market share; neither side could go without advertising for an extended period without realising a significant drop in sales.
我去年也建议过谷歌中国投放户外广告，不过他们只在广东投放了
google branding , is too importent ,i don’t think they will do outdoor
I think YES Google should advertise MORE of what it does, around the globe, Still the un connected DO NOT KNOW what google does, including stuff like free email, and email from your mobile, and maps on mobile, this has to be told to the masses.
In the US and Outside the US specially in the Developing markets like India, Pakistan Middle East etc.
I agree that Google should be very selective about how/what/if they advertise in traditional media such as television or print. I can’t think of a single time when I found out about a Google product through a traditional advertisement. It has always been either through word-of-mouth or from reading about it online.
Google recently stopped by the ASU campus on their “App To School” bus tour. It’s neat to see how more and more of my fellow Sun Devils are starting to use Google Apps to manage their schoolwork and school life.
I think this has been a brilliant move on the part of Google. It seems to me that habits formed in college will likely stick with a person for a large portion of their lives. Google is creating tens of thousands of Gmail, Calendar, Sites, and Docs users every semester. Focusing on getting the word out to the college crowd will prove to be one of the most important things they can do for the future of the company. (Oh, and college kids don’t read the newspaper or watch television commercials. Lots of them don’t even watch TV now that Hulu and other Internet TV sites are mainstream.)
As far as resorting to traditional “brand” advertising, I don’t see this as providing any long-term benefit for Google. Brin and and Page are wise to be so cautious. Advertising has to go beyond making people laugh and making people feel good about how wonderful your company is. Advertising has to invoke action on the part of the customer.
If they can focus on keeping their existing customers happy and continually improving their existing products and services, I don’t think they will ever have to worry about taking out a double-trucker in the New York Times or dropping millions of dollars on a Super Bowl® commercial.