WSP1013

comScore 1, Google 0

comScores limited sample site (2 million people) versus Google's more robust data (Google Analytics) give the competitive advantage to Google in the long tail. The long tail continues to account for the majority of online media with the portals share on a continual decline. Add to that Google's DoubleClick acquisition and you are basically saying a company that uses outdated sampling techniques will be able to out play a company with huge competitive advantages. Sorry but I think the stock is down for a reason and when the stock options of the employees are upside down, they risk the departure of their best talent to another firm in the online advertising market. comScore is expensive and does not cover enough sites.

I don't know what will happen to comScore or their stock but I recall a similar situation with Yahoo back in 1999. They used people to create an index of sites and then another player entered the market and was able to build a much larger index of data. This other player in the market was Google. They will do the same thing here. Why would a media buyer want to review metrics that are sampled from 2 million people when they can review metrics that are processed on the web server side through Google Analytics by 2 Billion people? Which gives you a more real picture of traffic on the internet?

Why Does Social Media Fail to Generate Revenue?

Why report big revenue on a property that has a huge class action lawsuit brewing. I think Mr Schmidt might be showing a poker face and playing down the Video Portal's revenue potential until the waters clear. Smart move IMO.