mark cuban on squawk box saying pay per click going to bring google down

[MusicWave]

mark cuban on squawk box this morning talking about domain parking saying google doesn't want to confront fraud that exists in pay per click and everyone listening to him like, really, guess mark cuban wants to buy a few more domains himself

[StockDoctor]

I think it'll be the other way around. Google et al will get rid of click fraud and typos. Who is Mark Cuban anyway, and should I care?

[MusicWave]

he's got a few assets

owner of dallas mavericks, original owner of broadcast.com

now owns hd.net and their accompanying sites hdmovies.com - hdfilms.com

[mark]

true. cuban sold broadcast.com for more than 5 billon dollars several years ago. he has a reputation for "shaking things up" on a regular basis.

p.s. welcome to the forum musicwave

[financialtraffic]

Who is Mark Cuban?

He's someone that has made more with one idea and one domain than Marchex, Name Administration Inc., Internet Real Estate, and any others you want to add to the group.

Just for reference, he generated a sale 34.75 times greater than the Marchex portfolio sale.

It's unlikely (but possible) that the companies mentioned above will ever catch him even with their large portfolios. The reason being that he got out at the top of the bubble. Even if another bubble comes, the people who lived through the first one will be much smarter and less prone to supporting unrealistic valuations.

[StockDoctor]

Oh ok, wow! I'll make sure I hang on every word he says from now on out.

Very similar to all the guys that made it rich based on being lucky enough to have gotten in early, (or had the silver spoon to buy in later) and now spend a lot of their time praising their wisdom and giving each other awards.

Hey, my ex should join in with them.

[financialtraffic]

Who said to hang on every word? You asked yourself who he was. He is someone who has done a few things right to say the least.

If you discount all past entrepreneurs simply because you chalk it up to them all being lucky to "get in early" I think you're missing out on the point.

Some individuals have a knack for looking at things in a different way. Some are able to put luck on their side many times because of preparation and foresight.

I would never change my business plans because of what one person is saying. But at the same time, to flip over the blinders and not listen to other opinions is a sure way to limit your potential in my opinion.

*Also, as an investor I know that Mark Cuban is not always right. He's invested in some companies that have languished or continue to languish.

http://news.earthweb.com/bus-news/article.php/3376981
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/s...1/daily90.html

[StockDoctor]

He is someone who has done a few things right to say the least.

If you discount all past entrepreneurs simply because you chalk it up to them all being lucky to "get in early" I think you're missing out on the point.

Some individuals have a knack for looking at things in a different way. Some are able to put luck on their side many times because of preparation and foresight.

I would never change my business plans because of what one person is saying. But at the same time, to flip over the blinders and not listen to other opinions is a sure way to limit your potential in my opinion.

*Also, as an investor I know that Mark Cuban is not always right. He's invested in some companies that have languished or continue to languish.

I agree with most of what you say. I point out that people should look behind those stories to see how things came about before they award the shepherd title to any of these guys. I'm more impressed with accomplishment in measured degrees than I am in shear wealth. I've seen a lot of complete bumbling idiots that have tons of money. Can you say George W. Bush? But I still wouldn't listen to a word that clown would say either.

[Bart]

In the first place: stop watching CNBC, it fogs your mind.

My investment-returns increased drastically after shutting them down a couple of years ago.

[DomainBuyerBroker]

Mark Cuban is the luckiest loser. He sold Broadcast.com to Yahoo for that crazy price. How's Yahoo doing with Broadcast.com? I'm sure they would like their money back.

Anyway, Cuban owns a stake in Register.com if that tells you anything about his character.

[mark]

More on Cuban here:
http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000477073472/

[Yojimbo]

Cuban may have gotten lucky by being in the right place at the right time but he was also very shrewd to get out of that place at the right time as well. It's not his fault Yahoo was caught up in the frenzy and grossly overpaid for Cuban's company. I know Cuban has not done that well with some of his other investments. Charter Communications is one that he's involed in along with that other brilliant investor Paul Allen.

Not sure why Stoc Doc always has to find a way to inject an anti-Bush comment but I would say that there is ample evidence of bumbling fools who sold out America to the Chinese and gave nuclear technology to Iran getting rich after the fact as well. ie. Bill Clinton.

[hugegrowth]

Google can't get rid of pay per click because that's
where they make all their money. As long as Google
remains a relevant search engine and online destination,
advertisers who want their sites to show up there will
have to pay for it. Right now Google is trying to increase
their content offerings to get more community members,
it's all about having a large community of return visitors.
Online advertising is increasing by double digit % every year,
did Cuban mention where all that advertising is going to move
to, if pay per click goes down? Advertisers have to be on
relevant, high traffic sites, which right now is Google, Yahoo,
MSN, etc. But it's interesting to hear different points of view
because ppc is still new, and who knows what changes will take
place even one year from now.

[mark]

here is another viewpoint on the future of ppc advertising:
http://ppc-advertising.mcdar.net/48605.php

[StockDoctor]

here is another viewpoint on the future of ppc advertising:
http://ppc-advertising.mcdar.net/48605.php

Now that was a pretty useless article. No substance, and containing just 1 paragraph where the author states his opinion that ppc can still work no matter the click fraud percentage. No explanation of how it could still work, just that it could. My 14 year old could write a better article.

[SouthernTn]

everyone hates on google

[JMJ]

PPC is here to stay folks. He seems to be hell bent on talking it down. I wonder if he has some interest in some other competing venture? PPS? Anyway, people have played the SEO game for years and figured out it was just that a game. Everyone wants to be the first position. Whats the easiest way there? PPC.

You can't do PPS in this senario, it won't work. You can't give one company out of thousands priority over the other on a particular keyword with hundreds or thousands of different product/services for those keywords on PPS. In addition to each of those offering a different commision and pricing on all of those products. Thats if they have a product to offer at all they may just want traffic. Then you have to factor in tracking the actual sale. Companies aren't going to give up their books. Cookies can be changed or deleted. And then you have the whole factor of the fraudsters just turning into the advertiser and not paying on the sale.

There's always going to be fraud and theft in any business. In fact most companies have it built into the business plans. Retail stores know very well they are going to have a percentage of their products stolen.

If you want to look at it in a different light. If you have any name parked that gets a google feed and you are an honest domainer. Google is stealing money from you. They state in their adwords that 25% of the clicks are returned to compensate for fraud. So as a domainer you're paying your part aswell.