Tag Archives: Google Ads

September 11, 2025 · 14:11

Beyond the laughter

Yup, we get that, we scream deriving howl of laughter as the expression goes. For weeks I have been saying the setting was one that was merely expanding and people called me crazy (now, there is a case to be made that I am as crazy as any loon gets), but in this case the setting is different. You see (at https://www.hotelnewsresource.com/article138012.html) we see ‘Abu Dhabi Hotel Industry Achieves Record August Occupancy’ and that is less then 24 hours ago. I stand that Abu Dhabi was on a track to break all tourism records and now I am proven correctly. You see, we are given “Abu Dhabi’s hotel industry recorded its highest occupancy rate for August, reaching 79.3%, according to preliminary data from CoStar. The average daily rate (ADR) increased by 10.6% to AED482.32, while revenue per available room (RevPAR) rose by 15.4% to AED382.25. These figures represent the highest August ADR and RevPAR since 2008.” This shows that Abu Dhabi is on the right track and the numbers will impress others even more and within a year, this is merely seen as average. You see, not only is Abu Dhabi building around Yas Island, Abu Dhabi is gaining global population and even as America should have been countering this with their own options. ABC (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-09/australians-with-us-e3-working-visas-hit-with-new-rules/105752706) is now giving us ‘Thousands of Australians living in US face new restrictions on visa renewals’ and the underlying text becomes “The directive, which took immediate effect after it was issued on the weekend, warns visa-holders against the common practice of traveling to countries closer to the US to renew their visas. Some Australians who had made visa appointments in other countries before the change was announced have already had their applications denied at those appointments.” As I said it, it will evoke howls of deriving laughter. It invokes a brain drain and America wants the ‘Americans first’ rule, but when these Americans don’t have the brain power to set this to a workable solution, These people will seek employment elsewhere and that also impacts tourism, because these people will not go back to America for any vacation any day soon. It opens up stages of profit for plenty of places (including the UAE) who is now showing to be a yummy destination for thousands more. You see, the E-3 Visa is limited to 65,000 per fiscal year plus an additional 20,000 for those who have earned a US masters degree or higher. This implies roughly 80,000 people who are now looking for other options anywhere else and they will seek other than American vacation options. 

A rolling stone that starts an avalanche of economic hardship. I wonder how many of them would consider ADNOC, Etihad Airways or the First Abu Dhabi Bank as a worthy employer? Business Intelligence, IT, teaching people all of them are seeking other options I reckon that this will break up a few marriages and then there is the chance that these marriages will all seek a family setting outside of the USA. It would be my idea for the UAE to start poaching these people on an E-3 Visa. They get to pick the cream of the crop and it might be an idea to do this before corporations in the EU figure out the deal they could be having. There is of course the other place (Dubai) and the people at Emirates NBD, DP World and The Emirates Group could see the impact that they could have poaching E-3 visa people. For them they are looking at a pool of people who have been vetted in many ways already and that could be easy picking for them. Of course this is where the evil sneaky person in me is setting the premise to a Google advertisement on browsers and in LinkedIn applications to get people with an E-3 Visa to offer them a way out. I reckon that they might scoop a little over 25,000 worthy employees in under a month. Not a bad deal for the UAE.

It is with great joy that I bring the people the old expression of the grass is always greener on the other fellows grave, or there are a number of expressions that celebrate the additional blunders that the American administration is making. So as I was shown last week that the tourism drain is set to the $60 Billion (I expected this to go to somewhere in the 80-135 billion range, we now see that aside from that, America is now invoking a brain drain of over 60,000 people.

So, not to kick a dog when it is down, this is all the doing of ints own administration and as the tourism articles are saying that Canada is still happy to avoid America, we see that overall nations in the EU, Asia and Commonwealth are basically all avoiding America. I saw last week that for the first time in history China has a more positive appeal than America has. So there is that too.

As I see it, These people could explore their options at https://u.ae/en/information-and-services/visiting-and-exploring-the-uae

Have a great day and try not to be negative over the dumbness of the America administrations. When one door closes another one opens. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Tourism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 9, 2024 · 23:48

Personal perception

It is always funny to see greed and stupidity in one compact package. In this instance I am introducing you to the American department of Justice. The one that will not prosecute Microsoft, the one that hands their economy to China and the one that throws away whatever economic options they have. Hobbled by ego trippers without a clue, chastised by a failing religion, one nation under the league of flaccid atheists. 

Is that clarity enough? In comes the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62504lv00do) giving us ‘Google threatened with being broken up by US’ where we see “The US government is considering seeking the break-up of the world’s biggest search engine, Google, which it accuses of causing “pernicious harms” to Americans.” Really? The US government is accusing Google of “irreparable harm done through evil or insidious corrupting or undermining”? Who is the idiot making that accusation? Lets have a rundown

It was founded in 1998 by Sergey Brin and Larry Page. They released Google search and they were clever they had the IP properly patented. Two clever dudes designed something that Microsoft never considered. Microsoft who was licking the rear end of the CFO’s of the fortune 500 were outsmarted by two students who gave people a system they needed, they handed system the people needed. So in this daytime and age, who would you rather appeal to? 500 persons who think they know it all, or a few million who are happy to be grateful? One implies money, the other gives you clusters of happy workers. In 2010 they improved the search engine making it twice as fast. At that point they had the cornerstone of modern telecom electronics. And  that is when 4G came out. And Google became the power player it is today. The story is a little more complex but this is the gist of it. The power player who proclaimed to be innovating were surpassed by two students who actually were innovative. Apple took the option of letting the innovators be and offered their technology for a large payout. 

There is more to all this, but the lowdown is that innovators recognise other innovators (YouTube) and they came up with Google Ads and in all that time the so called innovators (Microsoft) couldn’t even get close to what Google designed. They failed to offer a decent search engine (Bing) and they had nothing to offer against Google Ads (Microsoft Advertising) they failed 4 times over. And now we get stakeholders to push for breaking up Google. So let’s see how stupid that is.

In 2019 Huawei created HarmonyOS. In 5 years it created a decently worthy opponent to Android. It is now available in 77 languages. Last year it created HarmonyOS NEXT. It allows several smart devices to talk to one another. We can speculate that Harmony OS NEXT is more than a worthy opponent to Google. It will allow Huawei to hand the people in Europe, Africa, Asia and the Middle East with mobile solutions that will be happily accepted in the houses there. That is what the DoJ is achieving. And this is not the first time they are interfering where they seemingly have little knowledge. And for me it could open another door (yay me). 

All this matters because Huawei Harmony OS NEXT will enable seamless interactions among a wide array of device forms, from earphones and automobile head units to smart TVs and mobile phones. Google does this with the devices they have, but until now they had no real competitor, Microsoft was too soft and not enough micro and beside that they are spread too thin. Now that the DoJ is seemingly planning to break up Google Huawei gets a nice clean playing field to promote their brand outside the USA and with that America loses more and more market share. So whatever deceitful claim America makes They are about to be sliced and diced in the mobile industry by Huawei, TikTok (ByteDance) for video and on the electronic field by Tencent. Three companies that have real innovators and the one innovator that needs the space to continue their work is hobbled by “If the DOJ pushes ahead with the proposed remedies – and they are accepted by the judge in the case – it would represent arguably the biggest regulatory intervention in the history of big tech” which hands a clear victory to Chinese entrepreneurs. How silly they are.

As I see it, they are about to lose seven times over with the losses they have and looking at timeline of the innovators, the stakeholders as I personally see it are handing Chinese companies massive victories and I reckon that those ‘siding’ with America will change sides to the Chinese corporations before the ink dries of whatever bankrupt statement America gives the world and with the 35 trillion dollars they have less then 4 years to avoid that and I have no idea what happens to whatever Wall Street will side with. This is my personal perception of what is about to happen. Many will say that I will be wrong and I could be, but there is too much data siding with me and whilst these stakeholders get politicians to side with the need to line their pockets America keeps on losing more and more. 

In 2022, Saudi Arabia signed $4 billion worth of arms agreements with China, including deals for armed drones, ballistic missiles. In 2024 it has grown to $50 billion. This is partially important as I wrote on the 21st of February 2021 ‘How to miss out on $20,000,000,000’ And I was wrong, I stand corrected. Their revenue grew to $50 billion a mere three years later. I saw it coming a mile away and now it is happening. And the DoJ is making it worse. As I see it Google, Adobe, IBM and Oracle are the last of the real innovators and the DoJ is about to hobble one of these four, it will soon be that bad. 

As such, is my perception wrong? It might be, but my presumption has been a lot more correct than it has been wrong. No matter how you view it the entire Google mess is being mishandled (as I personally see it) pretty much from the beginning. 

And now America gives the option for a much larger win to Huawei Technologies. It will not impact  America, but Google is very likely to lose market share on several fronts. There is a much larger loss if Huawei would include TikTok on every Huawei mobile. Should these mobiles come with HarmonyOS NEXT the damage would increase and with their multi sharable sides Apple revenue would also be impacted as well as a loss of revenue to all kinds of accessories. These losses of revenue will hit Apple as well as Google. As I see it a simple creation of imbalance by people who (by my reckoning) have no clue on the internet of things. What a lovely present ego makes for others.

Enjoy the coming day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 25, 2023 · 06:13

A habit is an issue

Yes, that is true, a habit is an issue (when you are not a nun). Yet the first part of any issue is recognising this. And here the CBC comes into place (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/political-advertising-parties-meta-1.6972446) where we are given ‘Some parties have cut back on Meta advertising — but experts say it’s a hard habit to kick’. It is here that we are given “Federal political parties have diverged in their approaches to advertising on Facebook since legislation meant to support the news industry touched off a public brawl between the federal government and the social media giant.” This is fair and there is a lot more (read the article. Yet when we get to “For the real players here who are attempting to really influence voters on a mass scale with real budgets, they’ve just invested so much money into these platforms over the years, they’ve collected so much data, that starting from scratch with something else is not realistic” This might sound seem true, but the overall issue is set into different stages, it is set into an optional stage of imagination versus awareness, awareness versus perception and perception versus reality. Now we have always known that there is a gap between imagination and awareness and for teenagers that gap is massively larger (if in doubt ask Canadians Laura Vandervoort, Blake Lively  and Kim Cloutier). 

The problem is that this difference is massively large with advertisement too, not just photo models. The unspoken problem is that with advertisement that gap reaches a lot more groups, and the more groups are affected (age, gender, social status) the larger the problem becomes. Facebook might have over 3,000,000,000 active members each month, but how real are they?

This is not anti Facebook (or META), I have liked my Facebook for over 10 years, but I have limited use, as I see it is a dangerous place. I have had dozens of fake people trying to interact with me, I see attempt of interaction from places that I have never been to and I do not know anyone who has and for the most I use it to keep people from my past all over the planet informed. That list is dwindling down as over 30% is now dead. Time catches up with all of us. 

You see, the issue isn’t merely time, it is ‘they’ve collected so much data’ and in this data just for the sake of data ends up being a really bad joke. If I have a day of sifting through that mess, I will find all kind of data issues, data verification is no joke and it tends to show that ‘data investments’ tend to be a form of shifty sand and it will drown you. The setting of time is that EVERYTHING evolves, all data collections are based on a stage of hierarchical settings and they change, sometimes twice a decade. Facebook avoided that part and now the wrong people see that as gospel, but that is the most dangerous step of all, relying on the wrong people. In all this the media holder is also a stage we need to understand. Weirdly enough it was a Canadian who did just that. His name is Ryan Reynolds, you might not know him, he was an extra on the X-Files season 2 (I looked it up to be certain). He is into booze (Aviation gin) he likes his football (Wrexham) and he has his phone calls (Mint mobile).

He also sees that media has larger options and through that he is linked to MNTN (https://mountain.com/) as they call it themselves ‘The hardest working software in television’, you see, the stage of creating awareness is just that ‘creation of awareness’ and that is NEVER set to one channel. In that stage I mentioned earlier Imagination, Awareness, Perception and Reality. How much verification has been done. What methods of verification was used? I know, the META presentations are good and every data seeker is getting a hard on (read: boner) on the presented granularity. Yet in it in what some Google Ads people call impressions versus clicks. Not every person that got the impression will click and there is no realistic number to get that, not even a notion of one. Now you can live through impressions and that is OK. I will overlook 97% of all impressed onto me and forget it before I am half a page further. Sometimes I take notice but I do not click. So where do I fit? And I am merely one of many millions. Whatever table or chart I became part of is already incorrect and like me millions fit that bill, so how hard a habit is something to kick when the numbers do not add up?

So there is in the first an option to ‘return’ to television marketing and there are more options, but it does require a different view to data and perhaps the notion of returning to different data is not great and it will give nightmares to this who are faced with it. Yet, when others start questioning the data presented, the data in hand and demand verification. What will they say? META (or Facebook) says it is so? Did you become that much of a teenager overnight? You might want to give Kim Cloutier a call asking her feelings towards the teenage boy population, you might not like the answer, although you might see a reason to invest in tissues at that point. Advertisement goes with the times, we have seen that for almost a century, like Yellow pages, Facebook is facing hard times and they will get harder over the next 3 years, it is the consequence of evolution. Facebook has had a really good time, much better then most, but they either evolve (and meta is trying that too), or they end up fading like the yellow pages did in too many places.  

True data is the just capture of data of an evolving system in motion and it is not a 4K film, it is a snapshot of THAT moment, that is what data has always been. Thinking it is more is the danger, that is the dangerous event we all have to avoid. When someone tries to sell you a polaroid moment stating it could be a 4K scene of Laura Vandervoort and it is not film, but real, you are getting conned and you get what you deserve. An empty hand with data that has no meaning and at that point there will be no meaning, because there is no way to verify the data you have and that was the second trap. The second trap was always verification. Did you really think that the Nigerian prince is real? In march we saw that a record figure of approximately 2.2 billion fake profiles were removed from Facebook. Now, were they all removed from the very moment of creation, or were they found to be fake? If the second is true, how many data tables are they inhabiting? Now consider that a place like Nigeria (just an example) has 215 million people. Do they all have internet? So really, where were these 2,200,000,000 from? Verification is an ugly business that has been pushed to the background where it can be ignored. Kicking a habit starts by knowing you have a problem.

Enjoy the new week.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 15, 2023 · 19:04

When the marketshare is murder

That is the setting and at first I would not really believe it. It sounded correct, but to be honest. I did not think that a place like Microsoft would intentionally target victims, but then there was a second source, the Guardian no less and that’s hen the disgust set in.

You see we know advertisements, we know advertisers, but for a system like Xandr to intentionally target people with gambling problems is a new low, even for Microsoft. This is what the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/15/tab-gamblers-betting-australia-targeted-microsoft-xandr-advertising-database) gives us. The article heads the accusation with ‘‘Heavy TAB gamblers’ among groups targeted by online advertising database’, there we are told “The dataset of 650,000 international “audience segments” was discovered on the website of Microsoft’s advertising technology platform Xandr by Wolfie Christl, a privacy researcher at Cracked Labs. It listed dozens of data providers looking to offer advertisers the ability to reach certain types of people online”, so not only does the law seem unable to deal with drug pushers, now they are enabling a place like Microsoft to hit the internet by ‘gamble pushing’ victims of this event. As such we get “Of the more than 40 categories identified as related to Australian gamblers, the majority were split into subsets related to gambling interest, sport interest or a particular venue: “Gambling at Pub / Club”, “Spring Carnival Punters” and “Online Gaming – NRL”, for example”. I think it gives a new meaning to the slogan “Long may we play”, perhaps it should be “long may we exploit the gamer”, even though gamer is a stretch, the fact that I have seen scores of these advertising on on Apple, my thought might not be too far away from the reality that people face. Then we go into the unknown with “Everything from our location to our purchase history are data points that can be packaged and used to serve advertising, often through the creation of profiles based on assumptions about our demographics or potential interests. But we know remarkably little about how the ecosystem works.” So not only were we served all kinds of BS against Facebook and Google Ads. These same BS servers have no idea what Microsoft with its Xandr is up to? How is that for slow minded investigations? 

Even the excuse was ‘outdated’ and moronic. What we get is “Microsoft said in a statement to Guardian Australia that the document was inadvertently published on its website and was outdated. The spokesperson said Xandr’s data privacy practices were regularly evaluated “to ensure compliance with applicable data protection laws”.” The words inadvertently and outdated are stop words into nothing. The fact that this data existed was wrong to begin with, they were going after a marketshare, the desperate (as I see Microsoft) are so hungry for revenue that they are willing to look the other way in too many cases. I believe it was 10 years ago when I wrote an article with data that Microsoft was uploading xbox data in excess of 20GB in a month. So, why was that? It was also on dates when I never touched a multiplayer game, I checked the data and the amounts and they did not add up. Was that to feed Xandr? Was that to feed other needs? So what would have happened when Microsoft got to complete the Activision Blizzard deal? How much data would Microsoft get access to? I wonder how many people took a hard look at that, because in March that was 368 million gamers and all that data would be going somewhere, would it not? It might be nice for Activision, but I have some hardcore reservations when Microsoft gets involved. And now that we see the accusations by the Guardian, the show changes. The fact that Microsoft would allow to hammer the people with a weakness to gambling makes me wonder how they are getting the other $198.3 billion in 2022 with 6.8% more in 2023. So how many victims did Microsoft approach? All questions, but there is a downside there, the questions should not even exist and that it the disgusting part of this setting. Until today I never thought Microsoft could sink that low, but there is space to think they could do worse and that is an unsettling stage. So where are these high and mighty senators now? They were all willing to grill Facebook and its founder Mark Zuckerberg. Where are they now? Does Satya Nadella have too many friends in the senate? Is that why they think they could avoid this? Inadvertently is not an excuse, outdated is no excuse, that dataset should never have existed in the first place and that is now the larger question. Why was that dataset created in the first place. One source gives us “Xandr is used by 0.8% of all the websites whose advertising network we know”, yet what we need to realise that there are (according to some) 1,986,154,062 websites, even at 0.4% that amounts to 7944616 websites and if even one of them is Yahoo or any media site, the damage gets to be astronomical. But I reckon those senators will gladly pass over those numbers, won’t they?

We get it, advertisements are part of our daily life, but what happens when victims are intentionally targeted on their soft spots? Did you think that through?

Enjoy the week and remember the next gambling advertisement could be a mere click away if you are being targeted by Xandr.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

June 16, 2023 · 20:49

The news I never saw coming

We all have this, we see events. We see impact and we see the fallout of choices. There are no real surprises. Yet Google surprised me a little. First they dump their Google Stadia and through that shed market share, all whilst there is a stage where they also denied themself to billions in revenue. This happens, there is no blame. There are a whole range of corporations who needed to adjust their mission statement, their party line. I get that (in the 90’s not that much). So I was taken by surprise when Al Arabiya gave us (at https://english.alarabiya.net/News/saudi-arabia/2023/06/15/Google-announces-training-for-Saudi-Arabia-gamers-MENA-Gaming-Summit-in-2023) with ‘Google announces MENA Gaming Summit in 2023, training for Saudi Arabia gamers’. So first they dump their Stadia and now they start training gamers? What will they use a PS5, or the Amazon Luna? So when we see “Last year, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince announced a plan to develop the country’s gaming and esports industry, aiming to create 39,000 jobs and boost GDP by $13.3 billion (50 billion riyals) by 2030.” I merely go ‘meh’, they turned me down when they stood to make billions in advance, optionally I would be representing 40% of that revenue in phase 1. I admit that my solution is not much for the Esports category, as such I am not a solution, but indirectly they could be fuelling all kinds of business and the revenue adds up. Still this is not about me, it is about Google. Their training manuals are pretty sic and as such that choice makes sense, yet under what guise are they restarting a gaming initiative after dumping their console? It is not the weirdest question to ask.

And it is also there that some parts are starting to make sense. With “Gaming experts and partners from Google will run training programs for over 250 university students across Ahsa, Abha, Dammam, Jeddah, and Riyadh from September 2023 with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology’s Centre of Digital Entrepreneurship (CODE). The program is expected to cover entrepreneurship strategies, gaming career opportunities, monetisation through Google Ads solutions such as PerformanceMax and AdMob, distribution best practices on Google’s app store Play, storage solution Cloud and video streaming platform YouTube.” It seems to me that the gaming side is merely a sidetrack. The real deal is seen with “monetisation through Google Ads solutions such as PerformanceMax and AdMob, distribution best practices on Google’s app store Play, storage solution Cloud and video streaming platform YouTube” as I see it, this is about advertisement money at ANY expense. How lovely from Google. At present we see the funny money hype through gaming as an advertisement handle. How to maximise on that, which is not the same as gaming. It is at times actually the opposite of it. 

And with “YouTube will offer a workshop at the Saudi Esports Federation’s Gamers8 conference for 50 Saudi-based creators and Esports players focusing on gaming content and channel optimisation, audience development and engagement with the gaming community on YouTube.” I reckon that before long it will become about advertisements pushing through engaging with gamers. I could be wrong, but that is how I am seeing it at present. There is one part I find deceptive, but I could be wrong. With “Saudi Arabia is home to over 22.3 million gaming enthusiasts, many of whom can be equipped to turn their passion or hobby into a full-time career.” I am wondering what the endgame is. You see, Saudi Arabia has 32.1 million people. This statement gives us that 69% of Saudi Arabia is a gamer. That is an uncanny large population. And then we get to ‘many of whom can be equipped to turn their passion or hobby into a full-time career’, I cannot say that this is false, because I have no data whatsoever giving evidence that the statement is correct or false, yet the statement that the larger setting of 69% can be equiped to be professional players implies that there is a massive need for hardware. Perhaps that is true, but it also opens up other dangers for Saudi Arabia. An average gamer and his PC sets the need for an 850 Watt power supply. Now consider that half of that, roughly 15 million will suddenly require 850 Watt for the PC and then we get the monitor and other devices. That is one hell of a power drain. The KSA would need to consider the larger need of 2 nuclear reactors commencing their building within 60 days and there is every chance that if the Google numbers are right, they will come up short long before these rectors are completed. These puppies take 5 years, they can rely on gas or oil reactors for power, but that puts whatever environmental needs they had going on the draft of failure. All that and the largest setting is not even being met. That level of gamer additions and the rest of the nation will face labour shortages, but that is merely me trying to be realistic.

So is there something? Well yes, this does not come out of someones imagination, but I have some question around the numbers and that is merely before we consider another side. You see Statista released in April “Nine out of ten adults in the UAE play video games, and 90% of respondents in a Global Consumer Survey by Statista considered themselves gamers, with 23% identifying themselves as frequent players, meaning they play at least 11 hours per week. In 2023, the UAE’s gaming market is projected to reach over 306 million USD.” As such is the reaction of the KSA regarding what the UAE is giving us and is Google merely the facilitator? I get the 90% bit, I consider myself a gamer, but that is not my professional setting (it was not possible to be a professional gamer when I was young), so they have other professions as it will be in the KSA, yet to be a professional esports person, making it your full time career requires other elements and when you consider these parts the numbers do not add up, not in the frontal version and not in the aftercare (power needs). 

In the end, we will have to wait to see what the MENA Gaming Summit in 2023 actually ends up being. We will see, it will be soon enough.

Enjoy the weekend now starting near you.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 12, 2022 · 19:38

Slappers only?

It is a term from games, it means empty hands only. In gaming it tends to be a pugilist arena. I heard it first with Golden Eye, which is remarkably interesting as the HK model 23 with a silencer is more effective, we add the silencer in case the target is in a library 

We would not want to disturb the readers.

And this all related to? Yes, it started with Al Jazeera who gave us (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/8/9/doj-preparing-to-sue-google-over-ad-market-as-soon-as-next-month) where we see ‘DOJ preparing to sue Google over ad market as soon as next month’. There we are given “The US Justice Department is preparing to sue Google as soon as next month, according to people familiar with the matter, capping years of work to build a case that the Alphabet Inc. unit illegally dominates the digital advertising market” I have issues with this, especially the ‘illegally dominates the digital advertising market’, you see Google INVENTED fair advertisement. The others all made sure that the people, the business and others paid TOP DOLLAR. Take the consideration we see next (I mentioned it before in previous blogs).

Placement, bid and Google price
1 $25 $0.54
2 $20 $0.53
3 $10 $0.52
4 $5 $0.51
5 $0.50 $0.50

So as they would charge the number one bidder $25, that same bidder merely pays $0.54 cents with Google Ads. Before Google Ads this was not an option and there we see the larger stages of Yellow pages, advertisements in newspapers and magazines. These places were racking up massive profits and Google undermined it, giving the people a better deal, as such 99% ran to Google and it caught on, Bing (Microsoft) tried to make it work, they could not, the metrics of Google were vastly superior. So there is no illegal domination, it is domination through superior systems, Amazon had its own system that was on Amazon, yet With Google Ads and Google YouTube, the advertisement world had dug its OWN grave. They slapped the people with bills that were beyond obscene and Hollywood gives us a (highly exaggerated) taste of that in Mad Men and the people are becoming increasingly angry, they are paying for the ego of a few men and when Google Ads becomes the adult player the people switch and the switch en mass. A group of people are now in massive trouble and they cry to every politician they ever gave a nice deal to. The DOJ is involved and we are in this mess now. And we see not one clear explanation of ‘illegally dominates the digital advertising market’, we are merely given a story.

This gets me to the article (at https://techcrunch.com/2022/08/09/the-doj-is-reportedly-prepping-an-antitrust-suit-against-google-over-its-ad-business/) there we see Ted Crunch giving us ‘The DOJ is reportedly prepping an antitrust suit against Google over its ad business’, here we are given “the new lawsuit would focus on the company’s command of the digital ad market. Bloomberg reports that DOJ antitrust lawyers are in the process of wrapping up interviews with publishers after “years of work” that will ultimately culminate in the coming lawsuit” as well as “In 2020, the DOJ sued the tech titan over its dominance in the online search market, accusing the company of “unlawfully maintaining monopolies in the markets for general search services, search advertising, and general search text advertising in the United States.”” This is a lot more to the point and I still have issues. You see we see “its dominance in the online search market” we are not given “Google set out a new look on searching information, they had it made, they patented it and as such they had the new solution for the next generation of computer users”, we are also not given the simple setting that when Google realised a shift, they acted, all whilst IBM and Microsoft ere playing with their dinkey winkey’s pretending to be master of the universe. OK, IBM was going in different directions, but they were still there as well. So these so called captains of industry were asleep at the wheel, but we are not given that, are we? I remember that I voiced the setting of sound-cards in PC’s in 1992. I voiced it to an executive on the IBM trade show stand he merely stated ‘Sir, we are IBM’ and had security escort me off the IBM stand, so where is that wanker now? I reckon making statements that IBM always viewed the multi media market as important. Him and a few others never had a bloody clue. It was merely pretentious ego and it was ‘fake it till you make it’ and now I am here with a dozen of IP solutions, and they? They have little more than their supply of Viagra and stories about their great achievements. I know and should still have emails on the solution now known as Facebook, and I had it 4 years before Facebook. I have seen the folly of these executives and I trust none of them. In the mean time there is Amazon, Google and Elon Musk taking larger strides in the unknown and seeking the new frontiers and those wannabe’s are setting sights on that what is not theirs. And my evidence?

It is seen in “wrapping up interviews with publishers after “years of work”” it took the DOJ years of work, this is not a court-case, I personally believe it to be orchestration for the benefit of losers not unlike Microsoft. To give them a slice of a cake they do not deserve. And that is the problem with America, it only works when a machine driven by the corruptible get their cake too. Even though they are not entitled to it. I saw the daily changes in Google Ads, I saw what was achieved whilst the ones who should be working, were merely leeching. So how is that progress? I run circles around those wannabe’s and I have three systems ready to go (one too depending on Meta, so there are risks) in a world where I should not matter, I am the one with the IP, and that is the station where Google has to go to court. I wonder if it ever amounts to anything. The media wants their slice of beef and as they are hurting to become irrelevant, they are happy to see Google bite the dust, but why are they biting the dust? Because they never understood what was coming and when they woke up the train was already a station further. That is the actual setting, but I reckon that we never get to see that part of the equation. I wonder what happens when 4Chen shows my IP and these wannabe’s they are now seeing billions in IP become public domain, I would really like to see the faces of those wannabe’s who realise that it is becoming public domain and most of it in China. How many years of interviews will that take? They set the stage of slappers only, but the orchestration implies that it is anything but slappers only, that view is reserved for the people they are trying to fool. I am not buying it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

June 14, 2022 · 22:35

Has Google lost the plot?

That is the question I am asking myself. This all started last night, well yesterday late as a man on the table next to me was complaining on the phone. He is a business man from South Canada (which in 2022 was still known as the United States of America). He was complaining as he wanted to buy something nice for his little girl (she just graduated, so she couldn’t be that little). He wanted to buy something local, but he could not do so as he was here (aka Sydney, Australia). The idea was laughable, but there you have it. 

So I needed to take a look at that, I understand what is going on, but have you caught on? So I wanted to be naughty (as I tend to be), so I looked for “Toronto Canada Engagement rings platinum” just in case I get the ‘drop’ on a certain person I know (it is not Laura Vandervoort). And guess what, all the top spots were taken by Garan Jewellers, in Victoria. Yup none of them were in Canada (or Toronto for that matter). And it got to be worse. There was one from a place called Etsy. So when I went there, I had the ability to Switch to Canada and Canadian dollars, or so I thought, but when I pressed ‘save’ the option remained in the true blue Australian numbers, the adjustment was not possible. Yet when I went to etsy.ca I was able to change it.

This is not a nice story, this accusation has more than merit. You see for all the things we try to explain away the one part that is overlooked is “The wish of the Customer”, the customer wanted a Canadian shop, with an optional engagement ring. But that is not where the advertisement money was, was it and more important neither show what the customer wanted. “Toronto Canada Engagement rings platinum” Others decided what the person wanted, other people set the stage of what he sought, but he never wanted that did he? He wanted something simple and it showed the one flaw Google has had for too long, the lack of enforced localisation. It does not sell advertisement, and in this case it actually does not help the seeker one bit. So you tell me, did Google lose the plot?

I am now and have for the longest time been pro-Google, yet I believe that this one, they got wrong and if I hear that this applies to one traveller stuck in a non South Canadian place, how many others face this setting? You think this is funny and yes to some degree it is, but when the fullness of 5G hits us, when Meta is everywhere. What happens to the localised voices? Will they ever be heard again? We think they will, but will they? When the advertisement bid and the localisation get in each other’s way? Bid will outreach localisation and that is something I warned some people about for several years. I merely did not expect to end up being that correct. So in this the question remains, has Google lost the plot? You tell me, I am not certain at this point.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT

Tagged as , , , ,

February 14, 2022 · 03:41

The arbitrary Echidna

Yes, we all have arbitrary moments, this is not mine. Yet something woke up in me when Reuters gave me ‘Google’s advertising tech targeted in European publishers’ complaint’ (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/googles-advertising-tech-targeted-european-publishers-complaint-2022-02-11/) and I took a look. So there were a few issues and the part of “alleging Google has an adtech stranglehold over press publishers” is merely window dressing. So as I went to a few of these sites, I saw German, Swedish and no English. Now, this is not a stranglehold for me, so I dug deeper. And I looked in a few publications, seeing that there advertisements were a mess, I could not even apply for advertisements in Die Welt, Das Bild and so on. I did not check them all, but the laughable setting is that they seemingly have no idea what they are doing. See the image below

I go to www.google.com and this is the first thing I get in the left lower corner. It was not rocket science, it was precise and clear. And the Advertising gives you:

Simple, precise and direct, NONE of the publications I saw offered anything like that. I got to a page on advertising with Das Bild (I needed Google search to find it), these players are hopelessly lost, they are conceited and running after the facts. Advertising should be a main option at the bottom of Das Bild and Die Welt and it is not there (or better stated, I never found it). The most basic of settings and two of Germans largest circulations are lost beyond hope. So as I personally see it, it is not ‘Google has an adtech stranglehold over press publishers’, as I personally see it, it has become ‘press publishers are hopelessly outdated in the digital environment’, the ‘information’ page I found had one mention of pricing and no relevant actual pricing information. How is that possible in this day and age? Google Ads gives you options, Price per click, price per impression, and many other options and you can select your preference and set how much you are willing to pay. And the Google system is unsurpassed. You might bid $20, yet in the end you ONLY pay one cent more than the previous bid winner. So if we see the following bids:

BidCharged
1$ 20$ 0.54
2$ 5$ 0.53
3$ 3$ 0.52
4$ 1$ 0.51
5$ 0.50$ 0.50

Before Google the advertiser was NEVER given this and it changed the game, the ‘exploiters’ suddenly lost all traffic, they lost their customers and they lost their revenue. This is not a stranglehold, this is giving the customer proper treatment, perhaps EPC Chairman Christian Van Thillo might take notice of that. If we publicly set the advertisement prices over the last six years from Axel Springer, News UK, Conde Nast, Bonnier News and Editorial Prensa Iberica, what will we see then? Even now I could not find precise advertising prices in Die Welt and Das Bild. I get a presentation who they work with, but a consumer wants to know what it will cost them. So when you all go cry at the desk of the European Commission consider that the consumer and the consumer advertiser is given a clear picture and a clear understanding and the stage of what comes next. In addition, when we take “When publishers choose to use our advertising services, they keep the majority of revenue and every year we pay out billions of dollars directly to the publishing partners in our ad network” and we set that against “Google has achieved end-to-end control of the ad tech value chain, boasting market shares as high as 90-100% in segments of the ad tech chain” it is because Google offered and showed value for money from the very beginning, something most advertising agencies have never done. In addition, Google Ads has driven technology that made the advertisers more clever in the way they advertised, something others have never done. 

And in all this, when we see the EPC make claims like: ‘Freedom to earn advertising revenue’ and ‘Freedom to innovate’ whilst two of the partner clearly are lost on innovation, they might embrace earn advertising revenue, but without innovation it becomes meaningless and in that, the advertisers that require visibility see that Google Ads delivers whilst keeping cost down, optionally setting a stage to a new path that is cheaper for the advertiser, so how did the EPC approach that? This is not stranglehold, this is as I see it the path of exploitation and many advertisers have had enough of that and they were willing to try Google Ads and those who did remained in Google Ads, clearly the EPC needs to look up the word innovation, let me help them out: “the introduction of something new”, so where is that innovation in Die Welt and Das Bild? 

Seems that it is another chihuahua crying that they no longer matter, a waste of my time as I see it, not the people that could ever qualify for my 5G solution, that is (as I personally see it) true advertising power, in the hands of the retailer. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 7, 2021 · 12:47

Two items

Yes, there are two items that are on the mind of may people. One is directly on the mind of many and as I stated in ‘Utter insanity’ on October 4th a lot of impact will be seen and the poor will get the brunt of that impact. As I see it, there is a lot that will be going wrong and even as the US Democrats are hiding behind the media slogans like ‘Biden: Republicans playing ‘Russian roulette’ with US economy over debt ceiling’, we better catch on quick. This issue is not now, it has been going on for over a decade, too much spending, no exit strategy and upping the debt every time and this has been going on since the Presidents George W Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and President Joe Biden were in office. From 2001 the debt want from $6 trillion until now as it is $28 trillion. I will agree that President Biden got a really bad hand and he inherited the debt, but so did Obama and Trump. George W Bush had Afghanistan and Iraq in consequence to what happened in New York which was not on him, but ALL these presidents had the option to overhaul the Tax system and NONE of them did so, this pox is on BOTH the Republican and the Democrat houses. A budget that was there to enable big business and media but none acted over well over 20 years, so this is on more. In this Bill Clinton was the one who left the budget was in surplus so his inaction has a decent acceptable excuse. And now the Republicans say enough is enough, I cannot fault them for that. As I showed the Defence department wasted $30-$45 billion on TWO PROJECTS, two projects that does not meet the bare minimum but we go on paying those wasting the funds. Why is that? And the lack of adjusting Tax laws, not to tax the rich, but the setting of justly tax ALL. An optional setting that as offered to them in 1998, but they were eager to state that it was too hard. Now consider the Google Ads system that properly (and decently) charges the advertiser and not greedy grab the advertiser like the advertisement  agencies did for decades. So it was not that hard, was it?

And as we now see the need to ‘overhaul’ the Senate rules to end the amendment of the ‘filibuster’, a stage that has been there for a long time is now regarded by the Democrats as too hard to handle. I am not the voice for against that decision, yet consider that THEY TOO would not overhaul the tax system when it was in their administration, so is it fair? And in all this Wall Street is giving whatever ‘free’ advice the media is willing to listen to, they are so scared now. 

What was issue two?
It cones from a different corner. When the BBC gave us ‘Princess Haya: Dubai ruler had ex-wife’s phone hacked – UK court’ 8 hours ago (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58814978) I saw “The High Court has found that the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed Al Maktoum, interfered with British justice by ordering the hacking of the phone of his ex-wife, Princess Haya of Jordan. The phones of her solicitors, Baroness Fiona Shackleton QC and Nick Manners, were also targeted during their divorce custody case, according to the court”, it took a few second (approximately 7.1) and my mind raced. You see the media is a nice source to use given information against them. You see, The Verge gave us on July 23rd (at https://www.theverge.com/22589942/nso-group-pegasus-project-amnesty-investigation-journalists-activists-targeted) ‘NSO’s Pegasus spyware: here’s what we know’. In that article we get “NSO Group’s CEO and co-founder Shalev Hulio broadly denied the allegations, claiming that the list of numbers had nothing to do with Pegasus or NSO. He argued that a list of phone numbers targeted by Pegasus (which NSO says it doesn’t keep, as it has “no insight” into what investigations are being carried out by its clients) would be much shorter”, It is the setting of “has “no insight” into what investigations are being carried out by its clients” against the setting that the BBC gives us which is “referred to the hacking as “serial breaches of (UK) domestic criminal law”, “in violation of fundamental common law and ECHR rights”, “interference with the process of this court and the mother’s access to justice” and “abuse of power” by a head of government”, we can agree with the point of view, but where is the evidence? The NSO stated that it does not keep any, so what is the source and the foundation of the evidence? The link the BBC gives us the judgment (at https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/al-maktoum-judgments/) yet there I see in the reference for the Hacking fact finding part:

i. The mobile phones of the mother, two of her solicitors (Baroness Shackleton and Nicholas Manners), her Personal Assistant and two members of her security staff have been the subject of unlawful surveillance during the course of the present proceedings and at a time of significant events in those proceedings.

ii. The surveillance has been carried out by using software licensed to the Emirate of Dubai or the UAE by the NSO Group.

iit. The surveillance has been carried out by servants or agents of the father, the Emirate of Dubai or the UAE.

iv. The software used for this surveillance included the capacity to track the target’s location, the reading of SMS and email messages and other messaging apps, listening to telephone calls and accessing the target’s contact lists, passwords, calendars and photographs. It would also allow recording of live activity and taking of screenshots and pictures.

Yet in all this, how was this evidence obtained? The findings rely on the setting stated by Baroness Hale, which is fair enough and she stated “In this country we do not require documentary proof. We rely heavily on oral evidence, especially from those who were present when the alleged events took place. Day after day, up and down the country, on issues large and small, judges are making up their minds whom to believe. They are guided by many things, including the inherent probabilities, any contemporaneous documentation or records, any circumstantial evidence tending to support one account rather than the other, and their overall impression of the characters and motivations of the witnesses.” Here I have a problem. Not the setting that Baroness Hale states, it applies for many cases and I would support this, yet in this technology the problem is that even those deep into this technology do not completely understand what they face. When we look at sources all over, we see a former intelligence officer from Germany who cannot state that Huawei is a danger, because their technology people do not comprehend it. We see source after source flaming the NSO group issues but they are flaming and even those sources are debated as it refers to sources from 2016, long before the Pegasus group had the software it deploys now. If we accept the words by Baroness Hale “We rely heavily on oral evidence, especially from those who were present when the alleged events took place” yet what happens when that witness the average normal person, how can that person give credibility to neural surgery? It is the same, a stage where the media relied on flaming and keeping people off balance, how can a person who does not comprehend technology be given the credibility that this court has? And should the court disregard the influence the media has, they merely need to see connected contributory manslaughter Martin Bashir was a part of, as I personally see it, his actions resulted in the path that led to the death of Lady Diana Spencer. 

In this I support “the court’s findings were based on evidence that was not disclosed to him, and that they were “made in a manner which was unfair””, I will take it one step further, if the submitted evidence is held to the cold light of day, its value will be debatable on a few levels. So when we consider “Dr William Marczak, who is based in California and is a senior research fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, which researches digital surveillance. He told the court he had no doubt the phones were hacked using NSO’s Pegasus software. He also concluded “with high confidence” that the phones were hacked by a single operator in a nation state. He concluded with medium confidence that it was most unlikely to be any state other than the UAE.” In this we saw the CIA with their “with high confidence” and I wonder hat it is based on. I am not attacking Dr William Marczak, there is no reason to, but when you consider “with medium confidence that it was most unlikely to be any state other than the UAE”, so he is not completely certain, he is decently certain that someone did it, but there is no evidence (aka he cannot swear) that it was the UAE, feel free to read the settings and the statements, it could have been anyone, if the evidence holds up to scrutiny and that pert is also a part I am not certain of. You see when we see “A senior member of NSO’s management team called Mrs Blair from Israel on 5 August 2020 to inform her that “it had come to their attention that their software may have been misused to monitor the mobile phones of Baroness Shackleton and HRH Princess Haya” and we hold it up to the interview in The Verge on July 23rd with Shalev Hulio we see conflicts, conflicts of optional evidence by the same source, why is that?

These are the two Items that were bugging me to some extent and as my mind is racing towards another TV series stage (it will be the third my mind designs) I wonder what the eager bored mind is able to contemplate. So as we wonder what drove the judgement (no negativity implied), I see too many strings going from one place to another and they might be just in my mind (the place between ones ears) but too much evidence does not make sense, in both stages offered and the media took centre stage to both, and the media is the weakest link of credibility, that has been personally proven a few times over.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 28, 2021 · 19:12

Sphere or Cube?

In continuation of yesterday, we have today. This is a direct consequence of time. Yet, that is not how some spin it and it is about spinning. In this we introduce Australia’s own spin master ACCC. They decided to inform us via the Guardian with ‘Google’s dominance of Australia’s online advertising needs to be reined in, says ACCC’, I personally wonder who they are speaking off (plenty of volunteers) but the article struck a chord, especially after what we saw today. I am not stating that limits should be drawn, I am not stating that the article is completely wrong. Yet the stage as it is painted does not add up, especially as some of the stakeholders are now in a stage where they painted themselves into corners. There is no real timeline here, because the article is actually quite good, but I am better (and a lot older). So let’s take you through the threads unravelling them one by one. Let’s be clear, there is no real lying here by the article writer. Yet when you see the unravelled strings, you might wonder how they got to this article. Time is the first element. The article is spun like it was a continuation of events, but it is not and more importantly the weavers seem driven to keep larger players Microsoft, Amazon and IBM out of the limelight. In light of this lets take a look at the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/28/accc-calls-for-new-powers-to-rein-in-googles-dominance-of-australian-online-ads) and look at that first thread. 

The first thread is “Google’s takeover of ad companies, including DoubleClick and Admob, as well video platform YouTube, have helped to further solidify its position, the ACCC said” the fact that these companies became part of Google is not in question, the statement “takeover of ad companies” however is. You see, YouTube was bought in 2006. In 2005 it was launched as a “an American online video sharing and social media platform owned by Google”, the players here namely Steve Chen, Chad Hurley, and Jawed Karim became multimillionaires overnight. After a golden idea a year later was tossed for a little over $1,500,000,000. In this we get from Steve Chen himself “he was inspired by how the search giant monetised without hurting their users. “It translated over to Youtube as well. There are people that create content, view content and pay for content,” he said.” Take here that the operative part was “without hurting their users” and it is important. Look at personal video’s, look at reviews of hardware (Hero 10, PS5) review of books, games and music, even video’s of songs. It all benefits the people, all the people. It was created in 2005 and sold in 2006. It was not until 2008 when they gained 480p videos, AFTER Google acquired it. Thanks to GoPro and DJI we now see 4K movies of cities. In all this time there was no mention of advertisement, the corporate world was not ready and not prepared for YouTube. 

Double Click was pure advertisement, and even as it was founded in a basement (behind the washing machine) by Kevin O’Connor and Dwight Merriman. It offered technology products and services for a mere handful of advertisers that included Microsoft, General Motors, Coca-Cola, Motorola, L’Oréal, Palm, Inc., Apple Inc., Visa Inc., Nike, Inc., and Carlsberg Group, and this is important! So why is this important? You see DoubleClick was acquired by an equity firm named Hellman & Friedman. Basically a greed driven Wall Street player who saw that this would be worth something over time. And the two clients that DoubleClick had (Microsoft and Apple) never saw the potential, even as they were trying to break through in all the markets that Google had created, we see things like MSN Search, aQuantive and adCenter (renamed to Bing Ads) as well as Search Alliance (renamed to Yahoo! Bing Network). Microsoft used a 20 year old tactic, why create when you can acquire. Google acquired too but evolved the segments into behemoth, all whilst there is every chance that the Bing Network would be unable to properly identify the word ‘Behemoth’. A stage we do not see in the Guardian article because it raises too many questions. The one given part here is that only Google knew what it was doing, the rest merely tried to invoke invoices on the corporate world, Google tried to cater to the greatest denominator here, they tried to adhere to the needs of the seeker, the searcher, and as Steve Chen states “without hurting their users”, a stage that was a winning mixture and we do not see that in the ACCC spin, do we?

Then we get thread two “Rod Sims told Guardian Australia a key issue facing news sites and other users of ad tech is they did not know how much revenue ad tech providers like Google were making from each advertisement served up to readers”, in this I find ‘a key issue facing news sites’ as well as ‘they did not know how much revenue ad tech providers like Google were making from each advertisement’. It’s almost like hearing a toddler ask “these juggling tits, do they always provide milk?” In all this does it matter how much the advertiser makes? How often was this asked of Yellow pages or the advertisement moguls in New York? And it is important, because this hits Microsoft as well (Bing Ads, or Microsoft Advertising) Google was upfront in this, they even made it public in their documentation. “No matter how much you bid, you are only charged $0.01 more than the previous winner”, so if we see the bids $12, $9, $2.36, and $0.99 number three pays $1.00, number two pays $1.01 and number one pays $1.02, not $12. A setting NO advertisement company EVER offered, it was all about how much they could rake in and in their defence a system like this was not possible before the digital age. More important, the digital innovators (Google) took that step from day one (well, almost day one). A customer facing setting that prolongs the visibility of marketing departments because they can advertise more and longer, a stage they never faced before, yet the Guardian never touches on that, do they? It was all about the threat that the friends of the ACCC see, not what we actually experience. Oh, and when it comes to advertisement. Why is there no mention of Facebook, or Amazon for that matter? 

The article gives us that there needs to be a border and there should be limits, but is that up to the ACCC? 

So when we see “if you want to block certain companies advertising on your website, it’s very hard to do that through Google” there is a choice, do not advertise on your website, or get your own channel, and, oh…. Here is a thing, Google states “To give you editorial control over the ads that may appear on your site, AdSense offers several options for reviewing and blocking ads. There are various reasons why you might not want certain ads to show on your site. You may have content or business reasons, or philosophical issues. Maybe you have a vegan food blog and you don’t want to show an ad for a steakhouse”, as I personally see it Sims engaged in some forms of non truths (aka lies). And that is the beginning of a much larger station. The ACCC is the BS caterer of their friends and the Guardian did exactly what it was told to do, not inform us but to perpetrate issues that are not really there. And the entire article gives no mention of AdSense at all, why is that? It might not fit the needs of the ACCC, does it?

Consider what you are offered and vet the information, it is important that you do, you are given a pile of goods that are glued together, a setting of 10.000 cubes, glued together so that we see a sphere, but is it a sphere? I will let you decide.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,