Will any company ever be able to compete effectively against Google in the search market? Microsoft is trying, and spending a lot of money in doing so.

But Steve Ballmer might want to have a chat with IAC's Barry Diller. That's because Diller, who spent close to $2bn buying Ask.com in the belief that it might one day compete with Google, has come to the conclusion that Google just can't be beat in search.

Yesterday, he effectively pulled the plug on Ask.com as a traditional 'search engine'. According to Diller, "We've realized in the last few years you can’t compete head on with Google."

Doug Leeds, Ask.com's president, elaborated in his comments on the announcement:

[Google has] become this huge juggernaut of a company that we really thought we could compete against by innovating. We did a great job of holding our market share but it wasn’t enough to grow the way IAC had hoped we would grow when it bought us.

Going forward, IAC will outsource a greater portion of search to a partner whose identity is confidential and refocus its own efforts on Q&A. It may have a decent niche opportunity there, as Search Engine Land's Danny Sullivan notes.

But the implications of Ask.com's departure from the 'search engine' market are significant, even if its market share wasn't. Those implications are particularly important to Microsoft, which has focused much of its Google strategy on finding a way to compete with Google in the search market. That's because Microsoft's strategy in search is essentially the same as IAC's was: innovate, and if you innovate well enough, they will come. Sure, Microsoft is much bigger than IAC, and has arguably done a lot of things right with Bing, but will that really matter?

Microsoft's Ballmer should be concerned about the likely answer to that. More than a few of IAC's post-acquisition Ask.com 'upgrades' bear some similarity to some of the upgrades Microsoft has been rolling out on Bing. Even when those upgrades (or 'innovations') are well-received, it's relatively easy for Google to copy what it likes. Case in point: Google's new Instant Preview is little more than Google's version of something Ask.com has been offering for a while now. Pragmatically, Google is so dominant that it has the luxury of piggybacking on the R&D investments other search engines make.

Which highlights an inconvenient truth for Microsoft and other would-be search competitors: innovation and product are only two parts of the equation in competing effectively in this market. And they're not the largest. Google's brand, scale and market share give it advantages that will make the Mountain View behemoth tough to dethrone, let alone compete with in any meaningful way. That doesn't mean companies shouldn't try, but as Diller finally recognized, as lucrative as search is on paper, there are far better digital investments out there to be made.

Patricio Robles

Published 10 November, 2010 by Patricio Robles

Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.

2641 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (4)


Gabriele Maidecchi

Google has gained so much momentum over its years of total dominance that I doubt anyone can realistically rival with it, unless they majorly screw things up or the economic model worldwide changes dramatically. That's kinda the reason behind Yahoo! demise, so it's not like it never happened, but things now are very different. And Google itself is really different.

over 7 years ago



That is sad news indeed.

I think the next decade will see such differing and varied means of web access there will be alternatives that make search engines as we know it redundant. If Google cannot keep pace, they will go the Yahoo way!

over 7 years ago

Jonathan Beeston

Jonathan Beeston, Director, New Product Innovation, EMEA at Media & Advertising Solutions, Adobe

Great piece Patricio.  No doubt for me that Google's greatest asset is its brand.  That was built initially by word of mouth and then PR, which has made it incredibly strong.  Unless Google throws that away somehow (privacy issues, maybe) I can't see how any one else can realistically compete.

Perhaps Microsoft's recent integration of Facebook data in their search results might shift a few percentage points of market share.  Its certainly the most interesting bit of innovation out there right now. 

However, in my opinion I think the whole search paradigm has to change for a credible threat to Google's dominance to appear.

over 7 years ago


Raja Saggi

Barry's comment is generally true, but not just in search. The technology market tends towards dominance by a single organisation, especially where consumer or business investments hinge on support and interoperability concerns - witness databases and operating systems. Any change in the status quo is a result of market disruption. As Jonathon Beeston above alludes to, Facebook could be highly disruptive in search, given time. Unlike the other features that Google can quickly emulate, social data is currently only available to Facebook and it's partners. Search as a technology has a switching cost approaching 0, and when a credible competitor appears, change will be swift.

over 7 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Digital Pulse newsletter. You will receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.