google are not buying lok ....

No Google are not buying Looksmart .... A poster suggested (elsewhere), that was what I was trying to promote!! Far from it!!

< Google buying Look?????? Did you have a few too many last night ??? >

LOL !! This was a question intially asked of me, by Mikey_ ....... I clearly answered in the "negative", it's plain to see.

< You say "On the surface, it would seem one of the most logical things, Google should do." Now c'mon thats a bit much. You're basic reason is that Google have more money than sense. Blind Freddy could tell you Google have no reason to buy Looksmart. Sure $100 odd million is spare change to Google, but what would they be buying? 181 vertical sites? >

To me, it's plainly "logical". And I'll explain, why. And I will take you through this, nice and slowly, ok?

Looksmart's FindArticles.com (ATM) is showing listings within Google US, of ........ (or, references/links, to this site.)

about 33,500,000 for Google US.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=FindArticles&btnG=Google+Search

And, Google Australia has about 18,500,000 for findArticles

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=findArticles&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Millions of articles, contained in Looksmart's F/A's (and naturally, it's 181 Verticals) are indexed within Googles results, for that FindArticles' search term. They (this treasured & much sought after content) have been provided to Looksmart from many newspaper/magazine publishers & media Co websites.

< By the way how come you continually post links to Google search results. How come you are not posting links to looksmart search results? Particularly when you continually refer to NWS buying a stake in a search engine. >

It should (by now) become obvious to all, that the FindArticles "brand" is being assisted by Google's results, & that in effect Google helps "users" find Looksmart's Verticals, from a search conducted, on Google! Google will actually 'drive' many, many "eyeballs", (from a search conducted on the above newspaper/magazine publishers & media Co websites) to Looksmart's Verticals, for answers to their 'item of interest' or, a topic they may happen to have a passion for.

Looksmart is NOT a site that is designed to start a destination from. It won't be promoted as one, either. CEO David Hills quickly realised that the BIG portals had almost 90% of all (initial) search enquiries, so it was 'fruitless' to try and "take them on". Publishers & media Co's also understood, that a web search conducted on their sites would "drive" their own users (off their very own sites, &) out into the 'fairyland' of cyberspace. But they need a basic search the web facility, on their sites. He sat down with by now, these panicking publishers/media Co's and explained a plan, that by using Verticals, & by sharing content within the Verticals, effectively "users" to ALL their own sites could not only be "shared", they would then stay longer within this suggested "network", bouncing from one "partner's" site, off on to another!!

How? - By simply installing a search button that automatically directs a user to Vertical results contained in Google.. (etc)...

Lets search (on Google) for fishing .... You may enjoy the pastime? So, (effectually), a "FindArticles on Fishing" search gives us these results, both in the US and here in OZ.....

Whoops!! Google have 1.4M results, to choose from. And look at those Looksmart properties sitting up nicely, on page one!!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=FindArticles+on+Fishing&btnG=Search

And Google Australia has 1.57M listings to select from. Again, note the 1st FIVE results !!!!

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=FindArticles+on+Fishing&btnG=Search&meta=

Now, I've chosen "commercial fishing" from within the Google US results, & we are now in the Looksmart "fishing" Vertical!!

http://www.looksmartfishing.com/p/search?qt=Commercial+Fishing&tb=art&qf=free&x=0&y=0&vcat=cat4

Every article leads a searcher, (user) back to the content "origionator's", own site .....

And every step of the way can be "contextualised" with ADS to suit the interests & pockets of users!!! And it is only in it's infancy ....... Now tell me why NWS wouldn't want to be a part of this "universal" application, process? And you laughed at, & suggested Google would be wasting $100M of their "spare change" to buy Looksmart?? Hey, whilst there is the $2-billion-a-year Australian local-search market to 'capture', how much do you feel the "world" market will be worth, in a few years time?

Cheers !!

:)

LC