Seeking Alpha

LookingConfident's  Instablog

LookingConfident
Send Message
Longstanding investor in Looksmart (and a 69 yr old ex-tradesman), who has a passionate interest in the problems of newspapers along with their success in all their monetisation attempts made, on the web. For the "times are indeed, a changin", I feel. [17th of Aug, 2011 - Print media... More
  • An RTB Global OPEN Marketplace 'Handling' Up To 100 Billion 'Events' Per Day! 69 comments
    Aug 25, 2012 9:27 AM

    (I've added a further ppps today - see it below)

    Not to be confused with Google Product Listing Ads that have been Available To All Advertisers since late 2010, it's possible that a newer pay-to-play model is now evolving. Where CPA targeted ads become available across a ONE 'frictionless', RTB global marketplace.

    (click to enlarge)

    According to this (July 23rd, 2012) article - Flexible Reach for Google Display Network-Google has recently added the "Display Network" tab into the AdWords interface to make it easier for advertisers to manage their Google Display Network (GDN) campaigns. (The GDN or, Google's Display Network is a large network of publishers who are running Google AdSense or selling inventory to DoubleClick Ad Exchange, another Google subsidiary. From The New York Times to CNET, Google's Display Network stretches across millions of websites.)

    Google has introduced another feature to manage GDN campaigns: "flexible reach". - A new function that Google hopes to enable users to target their campaigns more efficiently than was previously possible with "broad reach" and "specific reach" at campaign level.

    And as advised in this posting, Google is planning to eventually replace "broad" and "specific reach" with "flexible reach".

    The QUISMA GmbH Blog (a GroupM Company), in a more recent post, tells it's readers that Yahoo has moved into the Microsoft AdCenter.

    (GroupM ='s WPP)

    "Since recently in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland and in several other European countries, SEA campaigns for the search engines Yahoo and Bing are managed over the Microsoft adCenter."

    Keyword based, it seems very much like Google's own offering, to me.

    "The additional keyword options allow an even better campaign management"

    At Yahoo (so far) it was only possible to choose between "standard match" and "advanced match". With the adCenter, advertisers now having three options: "exact match", "phrase match" & "advanced match".

    Maybe Google (Yahoo) and Bing will ultimately 'settle' on use of just a one "flexible reach" and/or, "advanced match"? Or (for Bing/Yahoo), will it be "BROAD MATCH", as is suggested above?

    Complying with European Privacy Laws:

    It's not surprising that adnologies GmbH (another GroupM Company) describes itself as being a Company that connects agencies, advertisers, networks & publishers by providing stand-alone products like DSP, DMP, Ad Serving, Data eXchange, SSP, dynamic creative and dynamic video that fully integrate into the first end-to-end data-driven advertising platform.

    A German-based company and with German-based infrastructure we are bound to & comply with the strict German privacy laws. Our technology is by design based on this law securing our European clients with a leading position in contractual data processing.

    LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com/company/adnologies-gmbh)

    It was (SEL's) Pamela Parker's advice in an article on Jul 23, 2012 that there were Units Resembling Product Listing Ads Appearing On Bing that then prompted my following comment to her article:

    ........My initial 'thoughts' are that these type Ads may well be associated with the much "higher paying" (and what are keenly sought after) CPA type - that are provided by and exclusive to, the Looksmart marketplace. As are, the Google PLAs??

    The comment was quickly DELETED. Why? http://tiny.cc/ataxhw

    "Win-Win" for Advertisers and Publishers

    As Pamela Parker has pointed out..marketers would likely be pleased by the introduction of such a unit at Microsoft Advertising/Bing since the Google PLAs have been very successful. RKG's own recent research indicates that PLAs drove 15% of non-branded clicks on Google in the second quarter, but at a 23% lower CPC than comparable text ads.

    Through a ONE independent Looksmart global marketplace (where major search engines can come together) advertisers get to seemingly spend more - with publishers themselves (ultimately getting to) receive more in payments, with such type targeted ads already proving to be so popular.

    That integration (of) Search and Display

    We've been told within LookSmart's Rejection of PEEK Investment's Unsolicited Tender Offer that among its assets is LookSmart's market positioning as a:

    • Scalable search advertising platform for ad networks;
    • Independent ad network able to integrate Search and Display and deliver an efficient marketplace for advertisers and publishers; and, an....
    • Independent ad network able to deliver high quality traffic to advertisers and high value advertising opportunities to publishers.

    And...

    That: LookSmart is well positioned to capture the market (for the) integration (of) Search and Display and the global opportunities for an independent integrated online advertising platform. (Read it)

    Shareholders were also told in a conference call following Q2 results, that Looksmart's technology was now capable of 'handling' up to 100 billion 'events' per day within an OPEN, independent Marketplace.

    Always an opinion. Stay tuned!

    LOOK: On Aug 3: $0.83 Down 0.07 (-7.67%)

    LC

    ps; August 5.. Peter Kafka, who speculates (on Yahoo's Strategy) may want to consider my above scenario as a 'done and dusted'?

    "The company [Yahoo!] was considering a number of options, including one that would have involved handing over big chunks of its display ad serving to Google."

    pps; How interesting!

    Create keywords
    Traffic ads/keywords to search engines

    < Create keywords

    A keyword is a word or phrase that relates to the products or services you want to advertise. ....... When consumers type keywords into search engines, the search engines return your ads in the paid search listings.

    The keywords that you create for a given ad group are used to target your ads to potential customers. For example, if your company offers loans, you can submit 'home mortgage' as a keyword in your DoubleClick Search ad group............ When a search engine user enters 'home mortgage' in a search, your ad could appear next to the search results.>

    support.google.com/ds/?hl=en#topic=1220600

    Supported engine features

    [ Microsoft] adCenter features in DS

    Click the links below to see the Microsoft adCenter features that DoubleClick Search supports, unsupported features, and any available workarounds.

    support.google.com/ds/bin/answer.py?hl=e...

    ppps; Pamela Parker (Aug 24, 2012) refers to what I feel are associated with the soon to be coming - an "integration of search and display" as just being. ..."typical AdWords ads"

    (click to enlarge)

    Pamela Parker's SEL full Story:How Facebook "Sponsored Results" Search Ads Aren't Like AdWords At All

    Disclosure: Long LOOK and excited!

    .

Back To LookingConfident's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (69)
Track new comments
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    pps; How interesting! (See Hyperlinks in the above Instapost)

     

    Create keywords
    Traffic ads/keywords to search engines ›

     

    < Create keywords

     

    ........A keyword is a word or phrase that relates to the products or services you want to advertise. ....... When consumers type keywords into search engines, the search engines return your ads in the paid search listings.

     

    The keywords that you create for a given ad group are used to target your ads to potential customers. ......For example, if your company offers loans, you can submit 'home mortgage' as a keyword in your DoubleClick Search ad group............ When a search engine user enters 'home mortgage' in a search, your ad could appear next to the search results.>

     

    http://bit.ly/O3Bnfm

     

    Supported engine features

     

    AdWords features in DS

     

    adCenter features in DS

     

    Yahoo! features in DS

     

    [ Microsoft] adCenter features in DS

     

    Click the links below to see the Microsoft adCenter features that DoubleClick Search supports, unsupported features, and any available workarounds.

     

    http://bit.ly/OXWPUm

     

    LC
    .
    7 Aug 2012, 09:04 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Bing & Google do not use CPA ads in their search results.

     

    In fact Google is closing the free Product Ads Listing and replacing it with the new CPC product listing ads. Bing uses various feeds on a CPC basis.

     

    Bing has powered the Yahoo marketplace in the US for a year and in the UK for a few months.

     

    You are confused about the matching options used on the various platforms - presumably because you don't use them yourself. I do.

     

    Microsoft Advertising has always used 3 matching types - Exact, Phrase, Broad. Yahoo used Standard & Advanced.

     

    Google Adwords uses the same matching types as Microsoft.

     

    Google Display network is the renamed content network and has more features to manage the process - but it is the same network and is still CPC. There are more features to manage reach as it is not purely keyword based but also site and category based.

     

    Microsoft Bing does not have a display network and so this is not applicable - it doesn't need "reach" match types as it is keywords just as Google Adwords doesn't have the "reach" match type on the search network.

     

    You really don't understand how these CPC networks operate now - they have evolved and reading snippets of info from news sources and narrative does not give you enough knowledge of how they really work.

     

    You can't learn about what is going on by not being involved - you can only know by using these services day in day out.

     

    Its called applied knowledge.

     

    You are just using guesswork based on what you read and extrapolating lots of diverse scenarios about what "could" happen.

     

    Well its not happening now and so making up things from this info means you are operating in a parallel reality about the industry - make no mistake it is not what is going on and where the roadmaps of these engines are going.

     

    The industry is moving to more CPC rather than CPA - it is the only model that makes serious money for the engines across all verticals. That is where it is at and where it has always been.
    7 Aug 2012, 09:23 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    <The industry is moving to more CPC rather than CPA - it is the only model that makes serious money for the engines across all verticals. That is where it is at and where it has always been. >

     

    Microsoft advise:

     

    "Performance Display campaigns run across our network of safe, quality inventory from Microsoft properties such as MSN and Windows Live, to partner and trusted third-party sites. You pay only for what you want: actions, clicks, or impressions."

     

    Yes.."You pay only for what you want: actions, clicks, or impressions."

     

    http://bit.ly/NikuNk

     

    vis-a-vis ...DoubleClick Search.

     

    LC
    7 Aug 2012, 10:53 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    For example there is a massive debate in the industry about the role of display ongoing - and will it survive?

     

    You have to understand where the money is - large advertisers and agencies have a pot of cash for display, SEO, PPC, remarketing etc.

     

    What is happening is that the display budget is being moved to remarketing - which means that remarketing is becoming the new display.

     

    But that also means there is a coming together of remarketing and PPC - it is becoming an extension of keyword based PPC.

     

    It also means that CPA is becoming marginalised - and that is what the industry is saying, CPA is dominated by big cashback and voucher publishers and the longtail affiliates are being squeezed out.

     

    That means overall CPA is declining and in effect moving to other charging models such as CPC or tenancy or sponsorship.

     

    CPA is not the model of the future, display isn't either. The hybrid model probably isn't either. It all normalises back to CPC - and that is what is going on.
    7 Aug 2012, 09:38 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    <For example there is a massive debate in the industry about the role of display ongoing - and will it survive?>

     

    Where are you coming from? Seriously?

     

    It may be news to you, that:

     

    ........"RTB revenues flowing to display advertising will rise from $1.6 billion in 2012 to $6.8 billion in 2017. Expressed as a percentage of total display ad spending, that’s a rise of 22 percentage points, from 12% of this year’s estimated $14 billion to 34% of 2017′s estimated $20.1 billion."

     

    http://bit.ly/MMSCQL

     

    And this report is only talking about North America, saying that it’s mostly a U.S. phenomenon. Hellooooo?
    7 Aug 2012, 11:32 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    These things you mention in your post you say it like they are new.

     

    All these things have been around for ages - we have already moved on from the integration of display and search, it has been like that for years.

     

    It is like you have just discovered this - well that shows you aren't in the industry.

     

    We all discovered what you talk about - about 3 years ago.

     

    And Looksmart just announcing display capabilities is (to quote a phrase) - like shutting the door when the horse has bolted.
    7 Aug 2012, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    < These things you mention in your post you say it like they are new.>

     

    Then, you need to tell that to the author's of those (most) recent articles who I have quoted.from. Including WPP/Group M's QUISMA GmbH Blog, for starters...No?

     

    You are completely disregarding a ONE Open (frictionless) marketplace that can be provided by Looksmart's capability of 'handling' up to 100 billion 'events' per day.... Globally. Nothing new about that, I guess?
    7 Aug 2012, 11:01 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Again, you misquote.

     

    That RTB article is talking about real time ad tech percentages - not display.

     

    It is about the technology powering online ads not display at all.

     

    You really don't understand the online ad market at all. You don't work in it and you don't work with any of the technology or platforms. And you don't understand what the tech speak means and therefore make absurd futuristic comments about what Looksmart and/or any other ad company is really doing.

     

    I work in the industry and have done for 12 years - I work at the leading edge of this technology and work with many agencies and attend many conferences and speak to thought leaders in this game.

     

    You don't, but speak like you do. That is disconnected from reality and if you can't see that then thats your problem.
    7 Aug 2012, 11:48 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    You can't learn about this industry from articles and press and bits and pieces - you learn from people in it by talking and cutting through the stuff that is in the public domain.

     

    I am in it and you aren't listening - you never even thought, "hold on, do I really know whats going on - this guy has worked with Looksmart and works in the industry maybe he knows at least a little bit that I can use?"

     

    No you quote from sources from people you don't know talking about technology you have no experience of and then you create a new reality from that.

     

    If you don't work with the stuff that you talk about or speak to people that do or listen to them, then how do you know anything?
    7 Aug 2012, 11:54 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Oh, and Looksmart being able to handle a billion events per day.

     

    I developed a retail datawarehouse in 2000 in the Uk that did handled the same volume.

     

    So yes, nothing new there - maybe they upgraded the servers?
    7 Aug 2012, 11:56 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    <Oh, and Looksmart being able to handle a billion events per day.>

     

    Try, ONE HUNDRED billion 'events' per day? Was the actual number that the Looksmart CEO told the shareholders within the CC. I guess you could develop that too? You could probably go ahead and construct the infrastructure for a global marketplace while you are at it, I can only imagine?

     

    And with a capability of inter-connecting real time data with search queries from more than one search engine (concurrently), is a far cry from yours and what (I feel) Looksmart's role will be-rather than being able to handle a simple billion events per day in a datawarehouse.

     

    And whilst you have much experience that you talk about, I very much doubt you are or, have been working through Looksmart's platform in recent times. In fact, arbitrageurs (like yourself) were banished when click fraud was detected on or, around or, even before the end of Q4 2011, if my memory serves me correctly.

     

    On this thread you have claimed that:

     

    <The industry is moving to more CPC rather than CPA - it is the only model that makes serious money for the engines across all verticals. That is where it is at and where it has always been. >

     

    And that:

     

    < there is a massive debate in the industry about the role of display ongoing - and will it survive?>

     

    But no comment (as yet from you), after my pointing out that it may be news to you, that:

     

    ........"RTB revenues flowing to display advertising will rise from $1.6 billion in 2012 to $6.8 billion in 2017. Expressed as a percentage of total display ad spending, that’s a rise of 22 percentage points, from 12% of this year’s estimated $14 billion to 34% of 2017′s estimated $20.1 billion."

     

    http://bit.ly/MMSCQL

     

    How could you have made such claims, I ask?

     

    Oh, that's right ...you have posted that ...."You can't learn about this industry from articles and press and bits and pieces"

     

    And on our other comment thread http://bit.ly/MwGuIe you have 'all but' agreed with me that .."the market is clueless - as are the majority of the people in the world."

     

    And yes....

     

    That I am able to 'think' for myself puts me well ahead of those not capable of 'thinking', for themselves and (naturally I would then have to consider myself as being), one of the few un-clueless people.

     

    You say that this doesn't change what everyone else is doing and makes me even more disconnected from the real world. - I'd reply in saying in reply that the 'clueless' in an 'un-real' world (like the market and LOOK's share-price value), will get to 'catch-up', in time.

     

    What 'everyone else is doing' doesn't make it correct and history has had a regular habit - in often proving this to be the case.

     

    LC
    8 Aug 2012, 04:36 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I guess we will just have to agree to fundamentally disagree!

     

    At the end of the day, you see Looksmart as being an integral part of what is going on right now in online advertising. I see them as fading and being at the end of their lifecycle.

     

    We don't even see the basics the same so the only conclusion to be drawn is that whatever will happen regarding Looksmart and it's future - will happen. No matter what we both think.

     

    I for one really do hope they turn it around - I don't believe it is possible with the current directors, but you do so that is fine.

     

    I don't want to see something fail as there are people there with jobs.

     

    I just think with a different management team and better strategy - and reaching out to new partners would reap more rewards than the cash burn that is happening right now.

     

    You mentioned that it is Q3 that would show the results of this new strategy - then lets hope the decline is reversed by then.
    8 Aug 2012, 06:57 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    "You mentioned that it is Q3 that would show the results of this new strategy - then lets hope the decline is reversed by then."

     

    Thank you. - And I've thanked you again in my (today's) instapost, published just now:

     

    < Before closing, I would like to sincerely thank swanson1 for all his (36) Comments that he has made. - But if I can make a point-that it should be clear that Looksmart are hardly going to involve anyone (other than what would be a carefully chosen, select few Big Brands and Agencies), during the Co's "testing" period, no?>

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    LC
    .
    9 Aug 2012, 06:33 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    swanson1 - You've posted:

     

    < .."At the end of the day, you see Looksmart as being an integral part of what is going on right now in online advertising. I see them as fading and being at the end of their lifecycle.

     

    ...We don't even see the basics the same so the only conclusion to be drawn is that whatever will happen regarding Looksmart and it's future - will happen. No matter what we both think.">

     

    How do Looksmart see themselves?

     

    The company recently stated, that among its assets is LookSmart's market positioning as, a:

     

    *Scalable search advertising platform for ad networks;

     

    *Independent ad network able to integrate Search and Display and deliver an efficient marketplace for advertisers and publishers;

     

    and...

     

    *Independent ad network able to deliver high quality traffic to advertisers and high value advertising opportunities to publishers.

     

    ....The Co's Board [also] believes that LookSmart is well positioned to capture the market opportunity of integrated Search and Display and the global opportunities for an independent integrated online advertising platform.

     

    http://yhoo.it/Ng9ALP
    ******
    Why do you find this so easy to dismiss? And isn't it mostly all that I have been saying, over the past few years or, more?

     

    LC
    .
    11 Aug 2012, 03:51 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Google is now offering: ............ "Location extensions, which allow advertisers to show their nearest location and phone number along with a search ad, will now be available in six new countries — Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, India, Sweden, and Taiwan."

     

    http://selnd.com/Rm0HvM

     

    And ..."along with a search ad"? How interesting! (It's only a matter of time, now - is my reckoning).
    29 Aug 2012, 06:12 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    I've just posted the following to BloomReach's wall, over on Facebook. I think BloomReach would make an ideal 'merge', with Looksmart. I have posted before (to Justin Fogarty) but as yet, I've not received a reply as such.

     

    BloomReach: http://on.fb.me/PFf1Bu

     

    Hey Justin. From a TechCrunch article we are told:

     

    < Say you buy search keyword ads for “red sweater”.

     

    ...If someone searching for “red v-neck sweater” is shown your ad and clicks through, BloomReach generates a landing page of the products most relevant to their original search.

     

    It might show red scoop-neck sweaters and brown v-neck sweaters rather than just standard red sweaters. ....... In a pilot program for an education company, BloomLift delivered 15% more conversions and a 50% increase in advertising profits. >

     

    TechCrunch: http://tcrn.ch/S99hlY

     

    This is very impressive.

     

    And with (more) exposure coming from some 5 billion or, more pieces of 'real time' DATA that Looksmart receives daily - this can provide an opportunity of real time ad placements on those same Looksmart's partner SERPs - so I'd imagine that BloomReach may find reaching that (your own Co's) target of becoming a $10 billion enterprise marketing company just that little easier?

     

    Looksmart's independent global marketplace is capable of handling up to 100 Billion 'events' per day. - In combining both technologies, this then truly becomes that, intersection of search and display.

     

    http://bit.ly/MpWYM5

     

    Just saying! (Discuss?)
    20 Sep 2012, 09:51 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I think it is now clear Looksmart will have to delist or PEEK will cause enough problems for Looksmart directors to give in.

     

    I can't see Looksmart going forward as a viable business - the revelations about the CEO and dexline are the start of it, the directors are now open to litigation that ends in jail time - so the game is now fundamentally different. I will of course be willing to be called as a witness and we will work with those guys accordingly.

     

    Don't get excited with your "long look" - it will end in tears.
    21 Sep 2012, 08:49 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Forget all your ideas how Looksmart could fit in with all these new stuff that you blog about - that is totally irrelevant.

     

    Over the next month leading up to the next earnings call it will become clear that the management were hiding information - and are going to be investigated for that, which is in no doubt.

     

    The next earnings call is at the end of October - I will be surprised if Looksmart exists in this format at this point.

     

    From what I have seen Looksmart directors have been engaged in illgegal activities which means that there needs to be an investigation into the company operations.

     

    The company needs to be shut down and any cash sent back to shareholders as soon as possible - as it is the company is wasting 2 million per quarter.
    21 Sep 2012, 08:58 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Just read your above (two) comments and knowing where to start (with a reply) has me in a real quandary. (Where should I start, first?)

     

    From the outset let me assure you that your opinion is entitled (or, should be) as an 'equal', as should mine. We are only expressing opinions after-all.

     

    This is far from being the case (it's clear), as in recent days my posting of my daily 'thoughts' here on Seeking Alpha has been blocked and my Twitter account, has also been blocked.

     

    I am awaiting a further reply from Seeking Alpha. (Two days now).

     

    This situation has been explained in my most recent update to my last instapost I've posted here on Seeking Alpha.

     

    The post in question I am being blocked from publishing is best explained, here:

     

    http://on.fb.me/SaEVuW

     

    To be sure that you are (in fact) able to receive this my reply note to you, I'd really appreciate a short reply back on this thread, before my answering all the points you have made above - and as best as I am able to do so.

     

    Cheers swanson1

     

    LC
    .
    21 Sep 2012, 11:05 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Yes, got the comments.

     

    I appreciate my comments are quite on the edge - but its just how I think it is going.

     

    I have said before you have a better direction for the business than they do themselves - all that potential is not being realised by looksmart at all and I don't believe they are taking the business closer to being an integrated supplier.

     

    You are in effect talking about what they could do with that potential rather than what they are doing.

     

    At the end of the day they are a dead duck because of this - unless they pick up at the next earnings call.
    24 Sep 2012, 08:05 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Like I said (albeit tongue in cheek) - you could make more money by investing in my business - and be part of the new ad business with all the potential.

     

    I know we have healthy discussions with respect on both sides - so i am actually serious, do you fancy investing in my business which is very profitable and is on the cusp of much bigger revenues?
    24 Sep 2012, 08:11 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Thanks for your kind offer, but no - I won't. (I've long placed all my 'eggs' into the ONE .....Looksmart basket.)

     

    I'm a firm believer in the EINSTEIN theory that we are all connected. And that 'if you can think of something' - there's the strong likelyhood of someone much smarter than your-self, that has 'thought' of it, before you.

     

    From my (today's) instapost:

     

    Microsoft to 'introduce' New Ad Units at Advertising Week.

     

    (And are they also [virtually] introducing what becomes access to the long awaited Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL publisher base & ultimately what then becomes, that next step - one - real-time OPEN marketplace?)

     

    http://bit.ly/Qg6dnY

     

    Cheers, mate!!

     

    LC
    .
    25 Sep 2012, 12:00 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Swanson1 ..You may care to pass your comment on my (today's) blog-post on 'search intent' and adMarketplace - relating to what is referred to (by, John Furrier) as being the 'dark social'.

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    LC
    .
    6 Nov 2012, 12:43 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Just seen Looksmarts Q3 figures announcements.

     

    Now I do hope you will now take me seriously about what is happening at Looksmart - I wasn't guessing, I based my forecasts on what I know from working with them.

     

    The losses have widened to 2.7 million - now that is in the quarter where we both disagreed about the prospects of the business, and you said it would show a recovery of all these initiatives.

     

    Well as I said at the time - that the losses would widen and that they aren't doing ANY of the things you imagine them to be doing, they aren't part of the hugely profitable RTB and PPC ecosystem - they are actually one of the guys on the outside.

     

    They aren't working with Google or Facebook or anyone - they are a declining individual that I knew they were.

     

    And - they still only work on CPC - none of this other stuff you think they do.

     

    We can still disagree - however my predictions of a 3 million loss versus yours of a recovery - mine look sensible and realistic based on their actual trading, yours look like fantasy.

     

    A big wake up should be when you see the quote from Jean-Yves where he says they are not happy with this quarters figures and they are looking at strategic alternatives.

     

    They have ditched the idea of developing these new revenue streams talked about in Q2 - and are now looking at saving the business.

     

    Q4 will be more of the same - and they will have to de-list and from there it is a case of stopping this business before it spends all its cash reserves.

     

    It can't be rescued by developing its own products or revenues itself - Jean Yves has said so much.

     

    Its worse than I imagined it would be, but I know they are in discussions with PEEK so maybe there will be a saving grace, but I do see that they will be sold and broken up as a best case - otherwise if they keep trading then within 6 months all shareholder value will have gone.

     

    I honestly think its already gone and I can see nothing returned to shareholders.

     

    Only an incompetent business can make such huge losses with all the opportunities available now to make at least decent margins - which makes me think how bad it is going to get if it is allowed to continue.

     

    I would expect a work from home mom to be able to make a profit buying and selling on the Internet - never mind a million dollar business.

     

    Basically Looksmart are managing to be one of the only online advertising businesses to make losses, never mind massive ones.

     

    Awful, awful and they deserve their fate. And you do for blindly following that. i have given you 9 months warning and pretty much was on the money every quarter with the losses they would make.

     

    Personally, I hope the jobs can be saved but I have already lost all my friends that were sacked or made redundant - so I hope Jean Yves loses his job and is made accountable.

     

    He promoted click fraud, so I am interested in exploring if any ex-partners have the appetite to deal with that.
    14 Nov 2012, 06:16 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Whilst I'm far from happy with how the results have been posted you may not have read my own thoughts on where I feel the company is at?

     

    http://bit.ly/PV4oNY

     

    Incidentally ....How long is it since you 'worked with LOOK', might I ask?

     

    LC
    14 Nov 2012, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    You said Q3 would mark a change in the company's fortunes - I said it would show a widening loss.

     

    It has - up from 2.3 million to 2.7 million is a big loss and a pattern over the year.

     

    The company "is at" where its profits are and where the trend is - no more no less.

     

    The results support what I have been saying - not what you have, and that is really important.

     

    I work with all the RTB, display, and CPC networks - and they all say they DO NOT work with Looksmart.

     

    I worked with Looksmart until 12 months ago - I have friends that work with them until recently.

     

    I can only tell you what I know - and the financial results bear that out to be totally honest.

     

    We can disagree forever - however my version of these events closely resembles the actual financial figures that they are posting.

     

    Yours just talks about potential and what they could do.

     

    I keep saying - yes, but they really aren't and have no system to do that.

     

    I am right, I know I am because I know what they are doing - you just read press releases from related businesses.

     

    The figures show I am right.

     

    At some point you have to stop being "unhappy" with QX results and realise that someone knows more than you and that the trend is not good.

     

    You said point blank that Q3 results would prove that Looksmart new strategies were working.

     

    The Q3 results actually prove that whatever Looksmart are doing is bad - very bad.

     

    So we can disagree all you want, but the figures show a company losing more and more every quarter.

     

    A company that will a) be delisted shortly and b) a company that will be bankcrupt in 12 months.
    14 Nov 2012, 07:20 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    You can wax lyrical all you want about where you think Looksmart is at.

     

    But where it actually is at is losing almost 10 million in a year - with it increasing during the year. And with Jean-Yves saying they are looking at strategic alternatives - uh oh.

     

    You can write blog posts all you want saying where "you think" they are at.

     

    But they aren't "at" where you are at all - no way near.
    14 Nov 2012, 07:28 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    You will lose all your share value in 12 months - simple as that.

     

    Or 6 months given the current trend.

     

    That is why PEEK exists - to try to stop the massive losses and scrap the business.

     

    Which needs to be done sooner before your shares are worthless.
    14 Nov 2012, 07:31 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Or we could put it another way.

     

    In your la la land where Looksmart work with Google etc. (which I am saying they don't) - did that increase or decrease profits?

     

    Did that increase profit in Q3?

     

    Or did losses get bigger in Q3?

     

    Where has the business to go then if you believe what you are saying - surely Looksmart should do better?

     

    And if it is not doing better, just what can make them do better from what you have heard from the management?

     

    Who do Looksmart need to work with to make less losses? Maybe if working with Google & Facebook doesn't work they could partner with KMart? Selling second hand underpants?
    14 Nov 2012, 07:47 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    .."You said point blank that Q3 results would prove that Looksmart new strategies were working. ............ The Q3 results actually prove that whatever Looksmart are doing is bad - very bad. ............So we can disagree all you want, but the figures show a company losing more and more every quarter"

     

    Swanson1 - Do you realise that revenues increased by 8.3% Q/Q? (From $3.6M up to $3.9M)

     

    Do you realise that debtors increased by some $522,000 in the Q3 period? (UP from $1.496M to $$2.018M) That this represents sales in the Q3 period that have not been accounted for in the increased $3.9M revenues the Co declared? (Should improve that percentage gain, if added on to the 8.3%, no?)

     

    Do you realise that $0.6M of the loss incurred is 'once only' stuff that the PEEK Tender Offer has cost the Co, in the Q3 period?

     

    And that when deducting this - plus the $0.2 million in restructuring expenses from the capex (of a stated $4M for the quarter), this $3.2M surely compares favorably with the $3.6M capex of the Q2 period? (Down $0.4m)

     

    Do you realise that RPC for the third quarter was UP slightly?

     

    And that TAC was DOWN 1% from the 61% paid in the second quarter - to now be @ 60%.

     

    Do you accept that Looksmart report their comprehensive income earned as being their revenues (in total), only?

     

    Do you realise that it was almost half way through the Q2 period when the Co announced the return of 'Display Capabilities' to the fold (July 17th) And that Advertisers can (now) buy display advertising on a CPM or CPC basis?

     

    I mean: ...Where else do you think the 8% in increased revenues and the additional $522,000 in debtors (for this Q3 quarter), has come from?

     

    You ask ..."Where has the business to go then if you believe what you are saying - surely Looksmart should do better?

     

    The $0.3M of increased revenues (in this Q3 period) has resulted from what is a notable increase in traffic (as per Alexa) and with the outstanding growth shown (the 7 Day Traffic percentage has risen up from down @ 0.0047% since the day of the announcement, on July, 17th - to now be @ 0.0112% on a past one month basis), and I'm sure this will be reflected in future earnings. Capex will hold at the present levels, is what I feel.

     

    http://bit.ly/HDwBit#

     

    Swanson1 ....Here's hoping that what I've explained to you above (as fact), and what are the realities of this Q3 report, may help you understand this business that much better.

     

    LC
    .
    15 Nov 2012, 03:05 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    I also feel that we can only assume that things are 'on the level'. That (in itself), is a real concern.

     

    http://bit.ly/U1Pk1s

     

    Oh ...and you can't help bad luck! :)

     

    http://bit.ly/HDwBit#

     

    And it seems like select Facebook advertisers may well already be trialing Looksmart's marketplace?

     

    Upstream Sites

     

    Which sites did users visit immediately preceding looksmart.com?
    % of Unique Visits Upstream Site
    8.88% google.com
    4.84% easycashesfinder.in
    4.75% discount-find.in
    4.65% topmarket-search.com
    4.36% shopguidefinds.com
    4.33% answerherefinders.in
    4.16% nixxie.com
    4.10% busines-search.in
    2.32% yahoo.com
    1.45% facebook.com

     

    Downstream Sites

     

    Where do visitors go after leaving looksmart.com?
    % of Unique Visits Downstream Site
    15.75% google.com
    3.34% easycashesfinder.in
    3.31% topmarket-search.com
    2.99% discount-find.in
    2.92% shopguidefinds.com
    2.86% answerherefinders.in
    2.76% busines-search.in
    2.67% yahoo.com
    2.15% nixxie.com
    1.90% infomash.org

     

    http://bit.ly/HDwBit#

     

    LC
    .
    16 Nov 2012, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Quite frankly yes I realise all that you have mentioned.

     

    I have also realised that the business has made a $2.7 million loss on revenues of $3.7 million.

     

    No matter what they are doing that loss has got bigger and shows they do not have a hold on costs and revenue.

     

    In simple business terms they are beyond incompetent - and have been since they lost their arb clients.

     

    The fact that you are defending that financial statement says to me that you are completely removed from reality - those figures are doomsday figures.

     

    I wish you well, I thought even those figures and the statement from jean-yves whould scare you into listening, but if not that is fine - I am very happy to pick up the scraps from the end of the business.

     

    By the way the 1.45% facebook thing is a massive "clutching at straws" thing - trust me that is the result of facebook offer publishers linking to Looksmart nothing more nothing less.

     

    It is not a trial or test or anything - even if it was it is so small that by the time it gets any bigger the business will be bankrupt.

     

    To be fair we can argue the points forever, however my argument is more realistic. In 12 months at this burn rate the business is bankrupt.
    16 Nov 2012, 06:58 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    More realistic, you write? Let's see.

     

    You continue to accentuate the $2.7 million loss (for Q3) in spite of the fact that $0.6M (PEEK), $0.2M (restructuring expenses) and with $0.4M (capitalization of internally developed software), all represents some $1.2M of that declared loss.

     

    Plus the fact that you have also 'side-stepped' my mention of the 8% in increased revenues & that additional $522,000 in debtors (earned in that Q3 period), that effectively then ($1.722M), makes the quarter a lot less unprofitable - - and even slightly below $1M......(Yet, Q/Q cash is shown as dropping from $20.2 million down to $17.6 million ='s $2 .6M)

     

    We would both surely agree that Looksmart's entire business from this point in time - is dependent on advertiser networks' traffic had within the AdCenter marketplace. (The ad network I feel, will shortly be sold. And please don't discount Facebook as being a potential buyer)

     

    It is also clear (or, should be) that both the 8% increase in advertiser networks' declared (comprehensive income) revenues - plus that additional $522,000 'parked' in the debtors- has only resulted since half-way through Q3- and only after adding or, what effectively was a return of display capabilities to the fold -on July 17th.

     

    To get a full appreciation of what has happened at the half way of that Q3 period - and as to exactly what is now occurring in this Q4 period, you will need to check the two traffic charts posted at the bottom of this instapost, here: http://tiny.cc/xbzwnw

     

    And Facebook? http://tiny.cc/gp0wnw

     

    I hope for your sake swanson1, you are now starting to get a better idea of the picture?

     

    LC
    17 Nov 2012, 06:10 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Commenting on the results, Dr. Jean-Yves Dexmier, Chief Executive Officer, said, "We are discontent with our performance and results in the third quarter. The Special Committee of the LookSmart Ltd. Board of Directors continues to seek and evaluate indications of interest and other strategic alternatives."

     

    Gone is the previous stuff about all the developments and positive talk about the the future - now its about the indications of interest and strategic alternatives.

     

    Where is the results and pushing on from the last quarters statement?

     

    I said they would make this loss - you said they wouldn't.

     

    They did - and so my evaluation is right, yours is wrong.

     

    You make several excuses, but at what point is it crap - well now we are at that point.

     

    At what point do you consider it to be a good quarter - Jean-Yves has said he is disappointed. You should be too.

     

    At the end of the day they will be broken up or just disappear and cash re-distributed - the company is now dead and not viable.

     

    Unless you think a good business loses nearly as much as it earns in income - maybe thats why we are in such a deep recession because people like you support pathetic businesses like this.

     

    Being a moron keeping hold of stock where the company is worse than a local shop selling shoes sums up bad capitalism - I am all for making money and building businesses, but idiots investing and supporting bad businesses wrecks the system for all of us that is why we are in this mess.

     

    You are part of the problem and I find you offensive with your bizarre arguments - and I hope you lose a lot of money from the demise of Looksmart as that is justice, you haven't listened to anything I have said you are the expert. Good, and I hope you fail - I won't lose anything at all no matter what happens - I hope you lose all your share value.
    17 Nov 2012, 08:16 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I am de-registering from this site now and don't want to have anything to do with it again.

     

    Yes, you will probably be smug and create several instablogs spouting a load of crap about how Looksmart actually are looking good - maybe linking a load of heresay with facebook etc.

     

    But fine, live in your own world - lose it all, and I will be gloat make no mistake.

     

    Unfortunately, I have to say you are 68 and your age sums up your understanding of internet business - absolutely way off how it is, you really are an amateur and it is cringeworthy reading what you post, your are an internet advertising idiot. You haven't got a clue about how it works, you read stuff but don't understand any of it - you are a complete muppet.

     

    Anyone can have an opinion - fair enough, however your opinion is worth nothing as you have no experience whatsoever in this industry. Me, I have worked for 12 years at the top end with all the players - mine is therefore valid without any debate.

     

    What I know about the inside workings of Looksmart and other PPC companies you do not - I can't say anything about what I know as it is confidential, but I do know what is going on and have good internal contacts.

     

    You don't, you read press releases - you are on the outside and are an opinionated idiot.

     

    You haven't once thought "hello, this guy might have some info to help me with my very important investment".

     

    No, you keep spouting like an expert - well, I know more than you, I know how well the business is doing 45 days into the Q4, do you?
    17 Nov 2012, 08:24 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    "First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they attack you and want to burn you. Then they build monuments to you." - Mahatma Cote

     

    And again, Facebook?

     

    You probably know that in 2006 Looksmart's (then) CEO David Hills did announce that Facebook had leased Looksmart's AdCenter.

     

    < Here’s a statement from LookSmart’s PR contact, Carmella Lyman. "It's my understanding that the deal is still on." We’ll let you know if CEO, David Hills, adds anything else.>

     

    http://bit.ly/SWeuLI

     

    Me? I'm hanging around - just in case you are wrong, ok?

     

    LC
    .
    18 Nov 2012, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    2006? Get real, forget that statement - that is 8 years ago, you need to understand how much things change month by month.

     

    Hang around, that is laughable given the fact Looksmart is now losing almost the same value as its income.

     

    It wasn't before - but it is now.

     

    You are going to lose every penny you invested - if you think it is still viable then fair enough, but it isn't and a sensible person would prepare for the worst case scenario.
    19 Nov 2012, 07:50 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I once licenced MSN tech for my business - that was 12 years ago - that is not relevant now, just as what Looksmart used to be is not relevant.
    19 Nov 2012, 07:52 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I have been asked to talk about tier 2 at the next ad tech and webmaster conference, it is fair to say that I will speak about Looksmart as a pile of crap network.

     

    I fully intend to make people aware how bad Looksmart are.

     

    You don't know how much influence I have - however recently I have found I have loads of influence.

     

    I will destroy Looksmart as a viable tier 2 - no problem at all.

     

    And I love it that my piers are asking for advice.
    19 Nov 2012, 07:59 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I will make sure Looksmart is seen for what it is - a fraud network. And I will prove it and leave it open for advertisers on the Yahoo network to claim back fraud traffic from Looksmart.
    19 Nov 2012, 08:02 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Hi swanson1 ...... < 2006 - that is 8 years ago >

     

    HMmm? It's still only 2012 and not 2014, no?

     

    And yes, it's taken that long to "build" what is essentially a global infrastructure of 'trusted' partners on both the buy and sell sides of a defined ecosystem. That, in bringing all the 'essentials' together, has taken such time. (Even Rome itself wasn't built in a day, ok?)

     

    And ...will you be doing a video of your presentation, I wonder? (That shouldn't cost you too much for you to organise, surely?)

     

    < I will destroy Looksmart as a viable tier 2 - no problem at all.>

     

    You (of all people) must realise by now that with Programmatic Buying or, more specifically - the RTB element of it - is purely based on buying targeted audiences or, individual users, all in real time. And that this is to be conducted concurrently in the many multiple markets across the web on a 7 day/24 hr basis. (And much-like the Windmill Theatre, it will never close.)

     

    Looksmart's independent role (that I feel is the conducting of an "intent based" marketplace -thus that need for the "ability" to handle the up to 100 Billion 'events' per day), will see revenues grow exponentially as partners that have already been 'cut-in' and are patiently in waiting - - so to speak (large search partner publishers, other smaller publisher networks & yes, social) are then, all interconnected into one marketplace.

     

    Now check the 'reach' growth since the beginning of the Q4 period.

     

    http://bit.ly/HDwBit#

     

    swanson1 .....The Looksmart that you once knew and dealt with (you were a littler 'heavy handed' in the click department, I gather?), is far from being the business that Looksmart now conducts.- And in your talking to your "peers" about Looksmart as being a tier2 ad network will see them almost all want to throw you off face of the nearest pier. So I sincerely hope that you can swim?

     

    LC
    .
    19 Nov 2012, 09:30 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » That last paragraph, again....

     

    The Looksmart that you once knew and dealt with (you were a little 'heavy handed' in the click department, I gather?), is far from being the business that Looksmart now conducts.- And in your talking to your "peers" about Looksmart as being a tier2 ad network will see them almost all want to throw you off the face of the nearest pier. - So I sincerely hope that you can swim? :)
    19 Nov 2012, 10:53 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    How do you know Looksmart is different?

     

    The losses show it isn't.

     

    All I can say is that over the past 12 months the losses have been huge, really huge - and are increasing rather than decreasing.

     

    At this burn rate the business has 12 months.

     

    The statement from Jean-Yves has ditched the talk about new initiatives and developments within the business and talks about looking at interested parties and strategic alternatives.

     

    That is obvious talk about saving the business via a sale or the PEEK offer - that is clear.

     

    That in itself says that the business is dead and the management can't stop these losses - which they have proved in the financial statements.

     

    Make no mistake the alternatives are not for the business to continue.

     

    Are you seriously saying that making as much losses near enough in revenue after 12 months that the business is viable.

     

    Not at all - and it isn't. You can talk about RTB or any other stuff but the facts are in the figures.

     

    They really are - if you can't see it then that is crazy.
    20 Nov 2012, 08:04 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    < You can talk about RTB or any other stuff but the facts are in the figures.>

     

    !st things 1st! And, re; RTB....

     

    It was half-way through the Q3 period when Looksmart announced (on, July 17th) the addition of display advertising capabilities to its roster of performance-based search marketing offerings.

     

    Which means that:

     

    "Advertisers can buy display advertising on a CPM or CPC basis, and leverage the full power of LookSmart's managed services team to manage real-time bidding, and deep campaign optimization.

     

    [And that] Existing search network advertisers will benefit from having historical campaign performance data, which will enable LookSmart campaign managers to quickly optimize display campaigns towards performance goals.

     

    Advertisers can also buy display only, and benefit from LookSmart's historical platform data to get rapid results."

     

    This means that ....... the existing advertising base (advertisers, as @ July 17th), can immediately take advantage of historical data to target audiences with a high probability of conversion - in having access to the majority of exchange inventory.

     

    That announcement: http://tiny.cc/wtp3nw

     

    This was the start (or, an extension) or, the addition of eCPM type buys (or, was it on a CPC basis?) to CPC/CPM impressions (yes, both are performance type based on 'user intent'), and as are now being made available to a (limited) number of those 'trusted' advertisers - that the company had, on 17th of July.

     

    I took a snap-shot of Traffic within the marketplace, on that day. here are the details:

     

    Tues, July, 17th - Announcement Day (Trailing).

     

    Estimated % of global internet users who visit looksmart.com:
    Reach % Change
    7 day 0.0047% -10% Change in Reach % over the trailing 7 day period
    1 month 0.0057% +0.9% Change in Reach % over the trailing 1 month period
    3 month 0.00521% +11% Change in Reach % over the trailing 3 month period

     

    And here are the latest (Alexa) percentages that you may concede, compare very favorably with those above.

     

    Estimated % of global internet users who visit looksmart.com:
    Reach % Change
    7 day 0.0140% +34% Change in Reach % over the trailing 7 day period
    1 month 0.0118% +22% Change in Reach % over the trailing 1 month period
    3 month 0.0095% +67% Change in Reach % over the trailing 3 month period

     

    http://bit.ly/HDwBit#
    *****************
    < "Are you seriously saying that making as much losses near enough in revenue after 12 months that the business is viable.>

     

    ABSOLUTELY!

     

    I mean, Q3 (in real terms) had an increase in revenues Q/Q of some $300,000 + an additional $522,000 in debtors - that I've pointed out or, some $0.82M more than Q2 - clearly due to the re-introduction of CPM or, CPC type impression buying - since 17th of July.

     

    It may be the case that (even) more "trusted" advertisers have been introduced during this quarter - my reasoning is and as can be seen, that the 7 day % number of 'visitors' (to the AdCenter marketplace) has RISEN from a low of 0.0047% (on 17th July), to now show - as being UP to a very impressive 0.0140% !!! (Nov. 18th)

     

    That is a rise of 0.0093% or, a rise of 198% and it's STILL rising! A full month of December, is still to come. If you don't understand what this means, I am not about to explain it to you.

     

    You continue to accentuate the $2.7 million loss (for Q3) yet I had explained the reality' of that "loss (declared), that you seem to have taken with a grain of salt.

     

    I'll post it here (below) , once again. .

     

    You have a scant regard (for what is virtually a completely new area of business), for what is an effective increase in the Co's advertiser network's comprehensive income revenues (Q/Q) by some $0.82M or, by 24.8% (advertiser network's comprehensive income revenues was $3.3 million in the second quarter of 2012) and quite frankly, it truly mystifies me. And you think this is bad?

     

    And what is it about Looksmart advising it's advertisers of having access to the majority of exchange inventory - that YOU don't seem to understand?

     

    I had posted the following, previously - that:

     

    You continue to accentuate the $2.7 million loss (for Q3) in spite of the fact that $0.6M (PEEK), $0.2M (restructuring expenses) and with $0.4M (capitalization of internally developed software), all represents some $1.2M of that declared loss.

     

    Plus the fact that you have also 'side-stepped' my mention of the 8% in increased revenues & that additional $522,000 in debtors (earned in that Q3 period), that effectively then ($1.722M), makes the quarter a lot less unprofitable - - and even slightly below $1M......(Yet, Q/Q cash is shown by the Co, as dropping from $20.2 million down to $17.6 million ='s $2 .6M)

     

    We would both surely agree that Looksmart's entire business from this point in time - is dependent on advertiser networks' traffic had within the AdCenter marketplace. (The ad network I feel, will shortly be sold. And please don't discount Facebook as being a potential buyer)

     

    It is also clear (or, should be) that both the 8% increase in advertiser networks' declared (comprehensive income) revenues - - plus that additional $522,000 'parked' in the debtors- has only resulted since some-way through Q3- and only after adding or, what effectively was a return of CPM type display capabilities to the fold -on July 17th.

     

    TRAFFIC

     

    Now check for your-self (once again), what has happened since the Q3 period and as to exactly what is now occurring in this Q4 period, @ Alexa - here: http://tiny.cc/xbzwnw

     

    < "The statement from Jean-Yves has ditched the talk about new initiatives and developments within the business and talks about looking at interested parties and strategic alternatives.">

     

    When considering "the facts" of what is happening (and, as I've shown you), it's hardly fair for you to describe it all, as Jean-Yves ditching talk about new initiatives, surely?

     

    Its clear (or, should be, by now) that talks about looking at interested parties & the 'strategic alternatives' are at a sensitive stage and the reason why "silence" was applied, in handing down the Q3 results.

     

    The next announcement should see the advice of a sale of the ad network. Anything else (a merge with any of a few other 'pure-play' intent based businesses), will be a huge bonus for shareholders.

     

    Incidentally. The PEEK "offer" is (and always has been) a "joke". But you never know what these fucking crooks are liable to get up to, eh?

     

    LC
    20 Nov 2012, 10:35 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » From my above post, swanson1....

     

    #... Its reasonable to assume that more "trusted" advertisers had been introduced during this quarter-after the Co's July 17th advice - that CPC & CPM impressions could be bought in real time and......... with Looksmart telling advertisers that it's marketplace now has access to the majority of exchange inventory...#

     

    Yes. For that integration (of) Search and Display

     

    Shareholders have clearly been told within LookSmart's Rejection of PEEK Investment's Unsolicited Tender Offer that among its assets is LookSmart's market positioning as a:

     

    *Scalable search advertising platform for ad networks;

     

    *Independent ad network able to integrate Search and Display and deliver an efficient marketplace for advertisers and publishers;

     

    And....

     

    *Independent ad network able to deliver high quality traffic to advertisers and high value advertising opportunities to publishers.

     

    Plus...

     

    Shareholders were also told in a conference call following Q2 results, that the Co's technology was now capable of 'handling' up to 100 billion 'events' per day within an OPEN, independent Marketplace.

     

    Read on:

     

    < Unstructured Data In Use Today

     

    Advertisers today can take advantage of unstructured data targeting in several ways. Here are some examples:

     

    .......Keyword Level Search Retargeting − Impressions are targeted to users based on the individual term searched. - Just like in search marketing, bids and ads are adjusted for the search terms based on performance. >

     

    http://selnd.com/Qbf5Mm

     

    The Author: Frost Prioleau is the CEO and co-founder of Simpli.fi.

     

    http://bit.ly/TcGGu6

     

    .............with Looksmart telling advertisers that it's marketplace now has access to the majority of exchange inventory......HMmm?

     

    LC
    .
    21 Nov 2012, 05:12 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I can't be bothered to read all that rubbish you have written - I really can't.

     

    You don't understand Alexa and domain reporting whatsoever.

     

    Looksmart use a different domain to redirect their traffic through - all their PPC traffic goes through a cleaning domain (not Looksmart.com, only an idiot does that on tier 2 ppc)

     

    So that completely negates your whole argument about where they get their traffic from!!!! But you are an expert (idiot).

     

    I know the domain - because I was an advertiser - you don't so you know nothing, literally nothing.

     

    I repeat, whatever they are doing they made a loss of nearly 80% of their income, and have done for 4 quarters.

     

    You can list all the crap that Looksmart is doing - but all Jean-Yves said in this quarter was:

     

    Commenting on the results, Dr. Jean-Yves Dexmier, Chief Executive Officer, said, "We are discontent with our performance and results in the third quarter. The Special Committee of the LookSmart Ltd. Board of Directors continues to seek and evaluate indications of interest and other strategic alternatives."

     

    He didn't talk about new developments or any of the other stuff he did last quarter. He is talking about a rescue package - clearly. He isn't talking about a RTB marketplace and growth with new products - like you are.

     

    If you can't see that direction then you are so stupid it is actually a joke.

     

    At the end of the day Looksmart is in deep trouble and if you can't see that then I can only say that I will gloat when the announcement that they have been taken over and run down. However I can imagine that even when Looksmart has been shut down you will still be talking about how they are the next best thing to RTB or PPC or any other thing you don't understand!
    22 Nov 2012, 08:47 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    The fact you haven't listened once to what I have been saying (and others) - especially with my hands on experience - is quite shocking and must sum up what you are like as a person.

     

    You have consistently acted like an expert when others that have more experience have tried to give you advice.

     

    You didn't listen once, and became crazy defensive and write essays about Looksmart.

     

    At the end of the day you need to understand my motivation - I was merely trying to give you a bit of heads up and access to more info that you were privvy to.

     

    You didn't appreciate any of it. That is why I am personally pissed off with your attitude when I was only trying to give you real insight.

     

    I wasn't wrong either was I - I said they would make losses every quarter and you said they wouldn't.

     

    What else could I say to make you listen?
    22 Nov 2012, 08:53 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Anyway, what will happen now is that looksmart will delist - PEEK will take control and cash reserves will be distributed amongst shareholders.

     

    Now the road may be rocky but that is now what will happen - what you do to minimise your losses is your own decision.

     

    Or PEEK doesn't take control and you will still get peanuts for your shareholding.

     

    Either way with the shares at $0.75 you are looking at a dead duck that if you don't sell shortly then there won't be any buyers.
    22 Nov 2012, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    You appear to be losing the plot (I feel), swanson1.

     

    <........"Looksmart use a different domain to redirect their traffic through - - all their PPC traffic goes through a cleaning domain (not Looksmart.com, only an idiot does that on tier 2 ppc) - -I know the domain - because I was an advertiser - you don't, so you know nothing, literally nothing.">

     

    Your biggest problem (clearly) is your lack of understanding that the Looksmart ad network is not the same - as Looksmart's (exclusive) 'intent-based' global advertiser network. It may surprise you to learn that there are these TWO separate parts to the business conducted by Looksmart. Since back in the days when you (as a long time ago, past customer) were once dealing - with one of them.

     

    Re; Looksmart.com

     

    You are in total denial of the Co's July 17th announcement with the Co advising of the addition of display advertising capabilities to its roster of performance-based search marketing offerings. - - - And that by leveraging performance data from its search network [tell me the main players of the search network, swanson1 - - that provide access to billions of daily search queries], the LookSmart's display offering will enable advertisers to buy display advertising on a CPM or, on a CPC basis-with access to the majority of exchange inventory, extensive first party data and a broad range of third party audience segments that (now) allow for targeting audiences or, individual impressions on an impression by impression basis.

     

    Read of it, and learn: http://bit.ly/WE5i4i

     

    Incidentally, nothing would surprise me as to what has gone on with the use of those re-directions - while the above advertiser network has been painstakingly built..

     

    You could do me a big favour and PM me back that domain that you your-self, once worked with.

     

    Thanks in anticipation.

     

    LC

     

    ps; I'll be posting about TRAFFIC in my next instapost. Now, doesn't that excite you?
    .
    22 Nov 2012, 10:11 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    You misunderstand me, I am saying that you are incorrect in speculating on Looksmart traffic sources based on alexa stats on their main domain name.

     

    They use tracking domains to redirect traffic through just like Google, Yahoo and Bing do - thats fine and understandable.

     

    I am saying you can't derive how Looksmart interact with other sites and networks based on looking at the Looksmart domain on alexa.

     

    You are giving opinions about Looksmart strategy based on alexa data based on the Looksmart domain - I am saying that is what an amateur would do.

     

    The Looksmart network is a series of deals with other networks - not their own, that is what I am saying - it hasn't been painstakingly built as you imply.

     

    You haven't got a clue what is going on at Looksmart product or network wise - I do, I work with people that use Looksmart directly and I use other tier 2 networks that feed their advertisers into their publisher base.

     

    I know exactly what is going on at Looksmart - I know how they generate revenue and what sites they do and the relationships they have with other networks.

     

    The fact that TAC are lower than 50% is a massive problem - you can't pay decent publishers less than 80% share, Google and Bing themselves pay me more than that share on better paying advertisers.

     

    Looksmart has lost all good publishers because they have squeezed the margin they are willing to pay - they should be paying 70-80% but are paying less than 50%.

     

    That is fact, and why Looksmart is so desperate for money.

     

    The fact remains that all Looksmart revenue is derived from other networks using their sources via a feed-in agreement - NOT via direct Looksmart advertisers.

     

    Looksmart as an advertising business is dead - I know this as fact. It has a set of very poor publishers sending out huge numbers of low value clicks.
    23 Nov 2012, 06:54 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I am saying I know this business intrinsically, inside out - and I work with every player in tier2 and know everything about what Looksmart are doing currently and have done in the past.

     

    I am saying I know what I am talking about.

     

    You clearly don't believe that to be the case and would prefer to read a few press releases.

     

    Excellent attitude if you have shares in the company - just me but I would really not be so defensive and dismissive if my investment rested on it, I would probably want a dialogue and try to find out more information.

     

    I probably wouldn't write long essays about how great the company is and what great things they are doing.

     

    I would probably listen and treat someone like me as a valuable resource.

     

    But thats just me, maybe not listening and engaging in realistic conversation is just overrated.
    23 Nov 2012, 07:00 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Hi swanson1 ....

     

    I hear you in regards to Alexa. But it's difficult if you continue along in our discussion in (your) simply 'cherry picking' pieces of what I post in reply. - I mean... It was just a few posts back, you replied, with this?

     

    "I can't be bothered to read all that rubbish you have written - I really can't."

     

    ......For starters, how about you answering me on a number of issues by telling me of your own position in regards to them -- that you haven't quite made clear to me (as yet), in you replies.

     

    Would you care to comment on my own understanding (one, that I have put to you so often), that the Looksmart ad network (and, that I feel will soon be sold-I've linked below) is not the same as the Looksmart (exclusive) 'intent-based' global advertiser network. (Marketplace)

     

    And could you possibly confirm with me or, not if you (yourself) fully realise that there are (in fact) these TWO distinctly separate parts to Looksmart's business.

     

    http://bit.ly/S0U1qf

     

    LC
    .
    23 Nov 2012, 09:37 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Secondly....You post:

     

    "The fact that TAC are lower than 50% is a massive problem - you can't pay decent publishers less than 80% share..."

     

    Why have you stated this, as fact? From the (November 13, 2012) LookSmart Third Quarter 2012 Results

     

    < Traffic acquisition costs (TAC) for LookSmart's Ad Networks were 60% in the third quarter of 2012, 54% in third quarter of 2011 and 61% in the second quarter of 2012.>

     

    http://bit.ly/QAVeb3

     

    And thirdly, why do you think they are saying "ad networks", in the above?

     

    LC
    23 Nov 2012, 11:15 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    .In relation to TAC (@ 60% in Q3), I'd venture to say that the bulk of it is being paid to those search engines - - who are now providing the billions of search queries to Looksmart (in RT and, on a daily basis), for advertiser to target 'user intent' from, and that's again .... all in real time.

     

    swanson1 ...Question 4

     

    What does all this mean to you as told within LookSmart's Rejection of PEEK Investment's Unsolicited Tender Offer (when the Co says), that among its assets is LookSmart's market positioning as a:

     

    *Scalable search advertising platform for ad networks;

     

    *Independent ad network able to integrate Search and Display and deliver an efficient marketplace for advertisers and publishers;

     

    and, an....

     

    *Independent ad network able to deliver high quality traffic to advertisers and high value advertising opportunities to publishers.

     

    They add that the Board believes that LookSmart is well positioned to capture the market opportunity of integrated Search and Display and the global opportunities for an independent integrated online advertising platform.

     

    http://bit.ly/V3aleA

     

    I guess this will help you a lot with my initial question, put to you.

     

    LC
    24 Nov 2012, 01:11 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Yes, fair points put through there.

     

    Firstly, I was incorrect on TAC as you have mentioned - but it is so far off a decent share for tier 2 that it can't ever get the good publishers - it has to be 70% minimum and over 80% for high volume. They have all long gone elsewhere - where the minimum CPC is $0.10 - which is way above Looksmart's average.

     

    Those TAC are paid to their publisher networks which are mostly toolbar, adware and similar businesses like AdOn, TrafficVance etc. They aren't Google or Bing.

     

    Yes there are two sides to the business, but served on the same network - just trying to maximise the value of the impressions - so it isn't a different publisher network, except from working with other RTB networks downstream.

     

    But the ad network has no value to be sold as it is simply a mashup of other networks - they are simply a distribution hub.

     

    The quotes you mention are old - it's as simple as that, any statement before this current Q3 is invalid and I think Jean-Yves proved that in his statement saying they are looking at the strategic alternatives. They are not looking at organic growth anymore.

     

    Forget those statements before this - they aren't current or relevant.

     

    The losses are so heavy that they aren't going to realistically turn it around no matter what they do. Time has run out and that is where they are at.
    24 Nov 2012, 07:40 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Look at it this way - say they post a 2 million loss Q4 which is a decent 20% ish reduction in losses.

     

    However it is still 2 million - and they will still run out of cash in 12-18 months based on that.

     

    The hurdles to get this business working as a viable outfit are massive - and to me the only sensible option is to shut it down.
    24 Nov 2012, 07:45 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    The thing is I can get my traffic cheaper via other networks direct rather than going to Looksmart who all they now can do is feed into those networks.

     

    Tier 2 is mature now, all the clever advertisers go where the profit is - all arb players are not allowed to go to Looksmart as they are on the blocklist, however going to the good traffic sources direct makes more sense and money.

     

    For example why not go to 7Search direct, who have great quality traffic and who Looksmart feed your ads into. So you go to Looksmart and get your ads syndicated into 7Search - why do that, just go to the source for cheaper?

     

    Well thats what we are all doing - hence the decline in looksmarts performance.

     

    That is the problem - and why Looksmart isn't going to make it.
    24 Nov 2012, 07:51 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    "[Looksmart's TAC] is so far off a decent share for tier 2 that it can't ever get the good publishers - it has to be 70% minimum and over 80% for high volume.
    They have all long gone elsewhere - where the minimum CPC is $0.10 - which is way above Looksmart's average."

     

    Do you consider both the Google and Yahoo O&O & both their publisher networks as being tier 2?

     

    And Looksmart's Average Advertising Network RPC for Q3 of 2012 was $0.066. A rise Q/Q - This sum represents only 40% of the total commission Looksmart receives and an averaged metric for paid clicks/impression that is reported as being comprehensive income, AFTER the 60% TAC is paid. (Do the math, swanson1)

     

    This means that the CPC (based on the above) was ~ $0.1650 and that's some 65% better than your 'elsewhere' - that you advise, pays a minimum CPC of $0.10.

     

    Both Google and Yahoo love this-because for their own advertisers and on their O&O sites, they actually receive a payment from the buy side (b4 the spend then reaches Looksmart's marketplace) and from the sell side, where they receive all of $0.99 from Looksmart.

     

    You really need to totally forget you ever heard of the term 'tier2' in regards to Looksmart's new CPM/CPC offering - as in buying both audiences (@ scale) and in targeting certain select users - it is all about the individual user who is showing 'intent' who's is being found in real time - - across the total publisher base, within Looksmart's exclusive marketplace. OK? (In some cases already, that's adjacent to search results - the SERPs or, wherever they next 'land' within the publisher base, so to speak.)

     

    Is how I'm seeing it all. You clearly see it different.

     

    Gee, this sure looks like being quite a number of replies coming up, maybe.

     

    LC
    .
    24 Nov 2012, 09:23 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    "Those TAC are paid to their publisher networks which are mostly toolbar, adware and similar businesses like AdOn, TrafficVance etc. They aren't Google or Bing."

     

    HMMm? I have just proven to you why you are so wrong in continuing down this road and in having such a blinkered view. OK?

     

    "Yes there are two sides to the business, but served on the same network - just trying to maximise the value of the impressions - so it isn't a different publisher network, except from working with other RTB networks downstream."

     

    That's until Looksmart sells it's ad network, you mean.

     

    THEN, Looksmart's unique and fully independent marketplace becomes so important to advertisers. Especially when the likes of Facebook (a certain starter in the 'user intent' marketplace) have a need to find an 'entry point', besides needing separation - One that can appease both it's own advertisers, who will then be finding a 'user intent' target on Facebook at a fair & equitable price - when competing with other advertisers for the same impression.

     

    "Forget those statements before this - they aren't current or relevant."

     

    They were made as recent as July 17th 2012 (in reply to PEEK) and are the very essence of what Looksmart are now about.- Again, you clearly can't see this as being so.

     

    "Look at it this way - say they post a 2 million loss Q4 which is a decent 20% ish reduction in losses."

     

    Re; your statement on losses - I'll declare right here & right now, that a return to profitability for this Q4 period, looks very likely to me.

     

    Gee ...I've just completed queries in your 1st 2 replies already!

     

    LC
    .
    24 Nov 2012, 09:37 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    .."The thing is I can get my traffic cheaper via other networks direct rather than going to Looksmart who all they now can do is feed into those networks."

     

    Looksmart are just about 'over' arb players like you. Your type will be destined to always be small-time players in tier 2 distribution plays.

     

    "For example why not go to 7Search direct, who have great quality traffic and who Looksmart feed your ads into. So you go to Looksmart and get your ads syndicated into 7Search - why do that, just go to the source for cheaper?"

     

    swanson1 - When are the 'pennies going to drop' for you and others, I wonder?

     

    Yes, Looksmart will be finding individual impression on the likes of 7Search, but on a real-time CPM/CPC basis & dealing only in search intent targeting. (Again- In some cases already, that's adjacent to search results - the SERPs or, wherever they next 'land' within the publisher base, so to speak.)

     

    "Well thats what we are all doing - hence the decline in looksmarts performance."

     

    And where you are destined to be or, until your advertisers 'wake up' to both your middle-manning type-- and that there's way much better value in 'intent' buys.

     

    Looksmart (effectively) are cutting out the middleman and as and when they roll-out 'the daddy of them all' - and capture the market opportunity by integrating Search and Display (globally) - with the exclusive selling of value- with those user intent based ads placed along-side the very same SE's SERPs of those who're providing Looksmart (exclusively), with that RT search intent data - it's then swanson1 my friend, that you will never in a life-time witness anything like the 'rags to riches' story, that Looksmart is destined to become.

     

    Okey Dokey? - LC
    .
    24 Nov 2012, 10:06 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    Just like to clarify a few of my interpretations, swanson1. Be sure to understand all this.

     

    < This means that the CPC (based on the above) was ~ $0.1650 and that's some 65% better than your 'elsewhere'>

     

    Looksmart's stated Average Advertising Network RPC for Q3 of 2012 was $0.066. -This is clearly a revenue number that's calculated, after the averaged TAC of 60% has been paid. [Total paid clicks for the third quarter of 2012 were 55 million x's $0.066 ='s $3,630,000] and from this Advertising Network comprehensive income received, TAC is then paid. - http://bit.ly/UUucXe

     

    < Both Google and Yahoo receive all of $0.99 from Looksmart. >

     

    This 'typo' is clearly wrong. As it is meant to be, $0.099c that is paid for the (keyword/s/keyword phrases) 'search intent' as received, and off the stated 'averaged' billable impressions or, clicks.

     

    It's very important to note (and it is my own reckoning, only), that the Co is getting 20% of an advertiser's winning CPC or, CPM charge.

     

    This means that the remaining 80% is being paid direct (and that's from the advertiser), to the publisher. In this exercise, it's paid to both Google and Yahoo.

     

    Now if that $0.1650 (Looksmart's retained $0.066 and the $0.099c paid in TAC) represents just 20% of the 'averaged' billable winning bid /CPM component or, impression cost - it would mean that the 80% that Google and Yahoo receive direct will have been some 4 times that amount or, $0.66. The search engines actually (including your stated 7Search), get to handle 90% of the billable click amount.

     

    This then makes the 'averaged' winning CPC or, CPM for targeted 'intent based' audiences or, individuals (as are found in Looksmart's exclusive performance marketplace), a total of $0.8250

     

    For impressions or, winning (CPC) clicks had on publisher pages that are not from their own O&O sites, both Google and Yahoo then pay their respective publisher network partners, from this above total.

     

    Believe it or, not?

     

    LC
    .
    25 Nov 2012, 04:09 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Your posts are bizarre - Looksmart does not work with Google and Yahoo, there is no "winning bid". You have made some seriously invalid assumptions based on bits and pieces of press releases.

     

    As stated - Looksmart is an ad network with a set of publishers (normally the ones that can't work with Google & Yahoo) that includes syndicating their ads to other tier 2 networks such as 7Search.

     

    There is no cross syndication with Google & Yahoo - no matter how much you talk about it - it does not exist.

     

    Looksmart earned an average of 0.06 ish per click from 55 million clicks - on their publisher network. That gave them the revenue that is in the filing.

     

    There is nothing else at work - no extra income, no winning bids, nothing.

     

    Coming up with complex relationships that boost revenue per click etc. is just bizarre - weird even.

     

    It is what it is - the figures are basic - X amount of clicks, X amount of revenue per click.

     

    It really is as simple as that and you are wasting massive amounts of time implying anything else.
    29 Nov 2012, 09:13 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    And the 0.66 is not calculated after TAC - that is not how PPC networks report figures - just look at Google or Yahoo.

     

    That is the amount they earned per click - simple as that.

     

    Whatever other weird calculations and extrapolations are just strange and not based on reality.
    29 Nov 2012, 09:15 PM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    And just to clarify - Looksmart DO NOT work with Yahoo and Google and don't earn any income from them.

     

    You may believe that to be the case - but it is NOT. Looksmart are on the blacklist of working with both Yahoo and Looksmart - in fact they are the only tier 2 to be on that blacklist.

     

    I know that to be fact.
    29 Nov 2012, 09:19 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    "Looksmart does not work with Google and Yahoo, there is no 'winning bid'. .....You have made some seriously invalid assumptions based on bits and pieces of press releases." - - "Looksmart DO NOT work with Yahoo and Google and don't earn any income from them. .....You may believe that to be the case."

     

    I've got news for you swanson1. -

     

    It was on August 24, 2011 @ SES when Looksmart's Benoit Vatere (VP of the Distribution Network) clearly described how Looksmart is not only a search network but that it now operates to buy intent .....

     

    Listen [here] to what LookSmart's Benoit Vatere had to say in an interview with @WebmasterRadio at SES SF: http://bit.ly/pcRKQs

     

    Benoit Vatere (who deals with the publishers), tells all that Google and Yahoo are both looking for bigger margins.

     

    You really do need to 'get you head out of the sand' and have a listen to this:

     

    [On Search Queries]

     

    ......"we are touching these users through search queries, a good indication of intent ....how can we follow these users"?

     

    He says he's "dealing with the publishers" ....to get 'that good traffic' ..,,,,,..it's complex..."where the eye-balls are".. "how do we follow those guys..the users." ? [Its clear]

     

    [From search] "Google and Yahoo are looking for bigger margins"!!

     

    "......through "key-word" search... search, display, social and mobile, video...different ways of touching the user .. we follow users showing search intent....... image, rich media ..yes ..we are getting into this... we....position ourselves to the OPEN market..."

     

    ...."we are looking at the IP ... the individual user ..........but we do watch for IP's with 5 or, 6 clicks....building a quality score"

     

    Video?

     

    [Vatere says] "Google helps [us] a lot with this, with video.. we have same standard as Google has .. it's easy for them to get it to us... "

     

    "we [Looksmart] have search, display, social (Facebook & .... ) and mobile video .. different ways of touching the user.. we follow users showing search intent... image, rich media ..yes ..we are getting into this.......we want to position ourselves to the OPEN market..."

     

    "We are taking advertisers on. on a CPA [CPC] basis. .......We own this network.. We know this traffic...we take all the risk with them."

     

    Asked about Size? (Note 'explicit search [search traffic]')

     

    Benoit Vatere says in reply: .... "we have about 3 billion queries per day, includes explicit search (search traffic), domains traffic, E Mail, 'in text' as well, close to 4000 publishers focusing on quality."

     

    As a long term shareholder swanson1 ... Should I be taking notice of Looksmart's VP of the Distribution Network or, you? Being a person who has no idea of any of this-as has been explained to you, above!

     

    Or, is Looksmart's Benoit Vatere simply making these claims, that you consider are similar to other 'invalid assumptions' that I've based - from Looksmart's conference calls or, Company press releases.

     

    LC
    .
    30 Nov 2012, 01:01 AM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » swanson1...

     

    You do make a valid point with: "And the 0.66 is not calculated after TAC - that is not how PPC networks report figures."

     

    From what I had posted-here's the necessary changes, I've made:

     

    Looksmart's stated Average Advertising Network RPC for Q3 of 2012 was $0.066. -This to me is clearly a matrix type calculation. [CPC+eCPM] And a revenue number that's calculated, after [which] the average TAC of 60% has to be paid out to those search engines providing the search intent associated with all billable paid clicks or, eCPM impressions had.

     

    In fact, I had stated that:

     

    The total paid clicks for the third quarter of 2012 were 55 million x's $0.066 ='s $3,630,000 & from this total coming from the Advertising Network comprehensive income received, TAC is then paid.

     

    http://bit.ly/UUucXe

     

    Discuss further, s'il vou plait? :)

     

    LC
    30 Nov 2012, 01:38 AM Reply Like
  • swanson1
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    Fine, you are the expert and know all about the business and everything. I certainly am not, just was trying to give you more info that you didn't have access to as you are on the outside - you don't want to take that on board and want to be defensive, that is completely fine by me, I don't care.

     

    I have overstayed my welcome, good luck with all of the Looksmart stuff and I hope it works out for you.
    30 Nov 2012, 07:25 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    It has nothing to do with being a (so called - your words) "expert" but more to do with what Looksmart's Benoit Vatere (the Co's VP of the Distribution Network) has to say.

     

    And you simply want to disregard this?

     

    LC
    .
    30 Nov 2012, 08:00 PM Reply Like
  • LookingConfident
    , contributor
    Comments (848) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » .
    ......"We believe the Mozilla news brings greater attention to the need for an ecosystem-wide solution, which preserves the bond between consumers and the content they rely on and trust, and, furthermore, ensures the best value for advertisers."

     

    Story: http://bit.ly/YzjqvF

     

    Upstream Sites

     

    Which sites did users visit immediately preceding looksmart.com?

     

    % of Unique Visits Upstream Site
    10.89% google.com
    3.92% yahoo.com
    1.96% 7search.com
    1.27% local.com
    1.20% facebook.com
    1.14% findbest-games.net
    1.01% ihavenet.com
    0.82% statmyweb.com
    0.76% bing.com
    0.76% miva.com

     

    Downstream Sites

     

    Where do visitors go after leaving looksmart.com?

     

    % of Unique Visits Downstream Site
    11.81% google.com
    3.55% yahoo.com
    1.81% 7search.com
    1.74% monstermarketplace.com
    1.74% nixxie.com
    1.68% facebook.com
    1.35% leaseweb.com
    1.29% siteadvisor.com
    1.03% bing.com
    0.97% infolinks.com

     

    Interesting.

     

    LC
    .
    25 Mar 2013, 05:55 AM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

More »

Latest Comments


Posts by Themes
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.