why the look moel is flawed

the following table highlights how the LOOK model is flawed.


"Growing our ad network. Total paid clicks for the second quarter of 2006 were 87 million compared to 80 million in the second quarter of 2005. On a year-to-date basis, total paid clicks were 161 million in 2006 compare to 163 million in 2005. In the second quarter of 2006, our average revenue per click (“RPC”) was $0.10 per click, compared to $0.12 per click for the second quarter of 2005. On a year-to-date basis, our average RPC for 2006 was $0.11 compared to $0.13 in 2005. Our average RPC declined as we added a low priced Run-of-Site advertising product in the third quarter of 2005 which helps us generate revenue from our ad network more quickly. We continue to eliminate low-converting traffic to improve traffic quality and optimize traffic flow from our distribution network partners."


2005 - 163,000,000 clicks @ $0.13 = $21.19 Million
2006 - 161,000,000 clicks @ $0.11 = $17.71 Million

The table shows lower CPC,Higher TAC costs and lower revenues generated by its search revenue products.

The balance of LOOK revenues are now made from licensing which have a slower growth rate then search revenue.

The data displays the facts in raw terms and why the LOOK model is losing traction and is a flawed model