StealThunder Blog

January 13th, 2006

Why is there so much trash talk about the newest kid in the cyber mall? My first take was that it was because Google had gone ahead and launched a half-baked product, rather than holding off until it was ready for public consumption. It’s an easy impression to get, especially since so many things about both the announcement and the product seem slapdash and unfinished.

But then it struck me: The problem with Google Video isn’t that it’s beta; some pretty cool Google products still carry that label. The problem is that Google has positioned Video as a “store,” when it’s not. Google Video is a flavor of search with the option to buy what you find. VoD classifieds.

Don’t think iTunes; think craigslist, with a bit of the bargain bin at Wal-Mart thrown in.

Maybe in its desire to expand beyond search, Google would like us to believe that shopping is just another kind of searching. But I’m not buying it. Say “store” and I’m automatically expecting a whole lot more than a search box. Store conjures up the image of a place where I can navigate, browse, find, compare, preview, review, discuss, recommend, comment, email questions, authenticate, fill and empty my shopping cart, check out, and do a bunch of other things to help me find what I’m looking for and purchase it quickly, easily, confidently. What’s missing from Google Video Store is price of entry for the iTunes, Amazons, eBays of the world.

Seen through this lens, it’s no surprise that Video Store got panned.

Could it be that the company that poo-poos traditional marketing doesn’t understand that “stores” are about selling? That even if you’re philosophically opposed to merchandising, you’ve got to put some effort into displaying the wares and stocking the shelves if you’re going to set up shop? (See Truveo for a look at how it could have been done.)

The problem isn’t that the product isn’t ready for primetime; even Video’s senior product manager has gone on record saying the product is “good for users and good for content providers” and that it “shipped when it was ready.”

The problem is that they called Video a store, when it’s really just an example of Google doing what it does, giving it a new name, and figuring we wouldn’t notice the difference.

January 7th, 2006

That seems to be the predominant sentiment around the Googleplex. Insiders proudly point out they turned Google into a household name and an $8.5 billion dollar brand with hardly a dime spent on marketing. So who needs marketing? It’s an evil; we don’t do evil.

Maybe that sentiment played a role in the Larry Page’s CES keynote speech, which unfortunately seemed to leave fans and the press underwhelmed.

With his white lab coat and loose sheaf of notes, Page may have felt like a breath of fresh air in a Las Vegas landscape where hype runs amok. It left me thinking, though, that Google may be getting dangerously near the point of hubris. Because no matter how much contempt you may have for marketing, you can’t cavalierly frustrate users’ expectations too many times without risking some serious damage. Marketing isn’t about duping people. It’s about creating awareness and desire, and then meeting the expectations you’ve set.

Whether it’s arrogance or naiveté, Google’s approach to just about everything seems to be “build it and they will come.” You do that once or twice successfully, then start thinking you can do it whenever you want. But not even Google can get away with just half-building something cool like a video store, announcing it, and then basically punking its audience.

You have to wonder–and certainly Googlers will have the data—on how many potential customers hunted around for the Google Video Store and didn’t find it. (Google Video is buried under “Labs” half-way down the “More” page.) Or, if they did manage to find it, what their impressions were when they discovered homegrown clips like “Tom Cruise Kills Oprah” and “Fire Fart” instead of CSI, Survivor, NBA, Sony music videos, and the other premium content touted in the press release. CNET’s Google Blog drives home the point nicely. Even the Google Video “about page” is amazingly bereft of content; just click on any of TV channels under “Search for programs” and most likely you’ll come up with zilch.

With the press primed, Google Video Store got plenty of awareness. But the company threw away the opportunity to create big time desire, (not to mention traffic and revenue), by drawing attention to a half-baked product. Not a smart thing to do, even—or especially—if you’re flush with mega brand strength. Too much is at stake. Google should take off its “do no evil” glasses for a little while and took a look at the Steve Jobs marketing playbook on how to deliver desire.