Deniz's Microsoft adCenter

1.) You are Doug Stotland. What approach (or approaches) do you favor? Why?
It is clear that Microsoft is a strong name which is well-known almost all over the world. Since they have an advantage of this name, it may be more effective for any campaign to use this brand name. So if I were Doug Scotland I would favor to choose the leveraging the current services of Microsoft or expanding the Live Search traffic, rather than a competition or repetition of Google services. First of all as I mentioned before Microsoft is already a brand. When we examine the world population net searching behaviors (exhibit 2) it is clear that the first impression on people s mind is Google. Relevant to this Google has a good impression for the advertisers to reach the target mass. However similar to Google s brand recognition Microsoft has also its own popularity by its services like MSN, Windows Live and windows Live Messenger, Live search.. Instead of imitate Google s model they may use their own name by developing their current system. For this reason as mentioned in the case Natala Menezes’s “differentiation” idea related to demographic targeting can be a good way for the company. Besides this ‘make it easy to reach the sytem’ can be a good way for the new comers. Basically, by taking the advantage of display advertising through MSN (in which Google is not as experienced as Microsoft) can also be an opportunity for Microsoft. Secondly, Microsoft has its credibility for the advertisers. Google has a large scale of advertisers which makes quality control a bit more difficult. Most of the advertisers have complaints about the place of their advertisements on Google site. However Microsoft has the company principles to avoid this bad image. It can be a reason to get some of Google advertisers. Since Microsoft already its credibility and well known services the users (as well as advertisers) already have fidelity to the company. Microsoft can use all these advantages to keep its current status and to obtain the new comers, too. Third of all, Microsoft has a lot experiences than any other company do on computer and internet technology. It is much more open to develop or renew itself. On the other hand Google, even it is also big company it does not have enough experience as Microsoft. Microsoft consumer support system is more reliable than the others. Microsoft can also use its experience and reliability even to support advertisers too.
2.) Suppose Microsoft goes forward with the deal with Digg. Where will adCenter be in 12 months?
Since Microsoft has reputation and reliability in technology a publisher focused on a particular content like technology can be a good choice for Microsoft. Digg.com which is a technology news site and has visitors in technology can be useful for Microsoft. This is why Microsoft has strong relationship with the technology companies; it is easy to recruit the advertisers easily. Comparing to Goggles large but without quality constraints advertisement system can make Microsoft to persuade technology advertisers to add ads on its web site. As soon as they can increase the volume of advertisement it will ease to compete with Google in pricing too. However besides all this advantages the question appears: how will Microsoft will be able to manage the other fields? Since the competitors has a large scale of power.. can it fill the missing parts ? I think the answer of these questions can be related to first question. Since we all know MSN and Myspace are high potential social network systems. In which people spent hours and use for anything Microsoft can enrich the empty parts of ads system by using the advantage of the high popularity of these web sites..