However, for our own internal analysis, I made the observation that “isn’t capitalism wonderful”? There are so many self-correcting mechanisms. Just when you think Google is going to run away with the game, some dose of reality hits. For every excess, there is an unmet need; for every glut, there is a scarcity. And not every solution fits every need, and so old and new competitors alike get a second chance.

The facts beyond this trivial point of vue (mine of course) are that Google supremacy had let them to send a lot of negative signals to the surfers and the whole websites owners whatever field, domain and categorie it could be.
The proof is simply by taking a quick look of the emerging google wanabees, for sure less strong, often not so mature, probably not going to survive , but after all, more and more specialized, accurate and promising.

Google is probably if not surely getting the Microsoft syndrom, and have waived a bunch of pretty good warriors that will for sure end to be part of the business.

And this is good for the market, but also for the people who are on the quest of unbiaised search and query results.

Doug is right when he says the it stands to reason that even in a period of ad-spending stagnation, Google could continue to grow by capturing marketing market share, but I bet that it will not be in the same config anymore.

When David says that more old-style advertisers are piling in to use them – with banner ads and less in context related campaigns trying to interrupt the conversation, I also agree, but would temper this by
daring to say that websites, publishers and other media will have to test and test again, alterning the formats (banners, contextual ads, embeeded app and so on) even in the structure of their estate which can be broad.

Anyway, this is a trivial statement, but I can’t ignore the fact that neither Google, Yahoo, AOL nor MSN have succeded to dominate foreign markets like Central Europe, Russian Federation and CIS, and the more promising Indian and Chineese.

Some say this will actually evens out because it will reduce accidental clicks and increase profits for the advertisers…who will then spend more on advertising since their ROI is increasing. So we’ll see soon how that works out…

It’s ridiculous their stock is judged at all on how many clicks they get through Adsense. Isn’t the important factor how much revenue has come in and profit they’ve made?

If there are less clicks on google ads that may be because the environment is adapting by learning that clicking on these ads rarely comes as a result of a network of trust.

And more old-style advertisers are piling in to use them – with banner ads and less in context related campaigns trying to interrupt the conversation.

The ads are often turning into broadcast events in something that is a networked medium.

It’s not enough to know that the overall CTR is down. What we need to know is on what kinds of ads it is down.

It stands to reason that even in a period of ad-spending stagnation, Google could continue to grow by capturing marketing market share.