July 3, 2008
Microsoft to acquire Powerset
On Monday, Microsoft and Powerset announced that Powerset is being acquired by Microsoft.
In terms of timing, the companies announced that the deal was signed. There is still the customary period before the deal is officially closed (at which point, I expect we're going to have a great party).
I'm including, below, the text of the announcements from the blogs of Powerset andMicrosoft.
I think these sum up pretty well the logic behind the acquisition on both sides.
It took a lot of work by many people to make this happen. Most significant, of course, was the entire team at Powerset, who executed so well to build and launch a wonderful product that showed the world what is now possible.
Immediately following the announcement, we had a day of calls with members of the press, which resulted in a lot of coverage. I'll try to post a collection of links next week.
One press meeting that I really enjoyed was a podcast with me, Ramez Naam (Group Program Manager for Microsoft Live Search), and Mike Arrington for TechCrunch. That link provides an article, transcript, and the full audio of the interview.
There is a lot more to say about Powerset, Microsoft, the acquisition, and what it means for the future of search, linguistic technology, semantic web, etc. I am excited to be staying on with Microsoft in a strategy and evangelist role and I am looking forward to the chance to talk and write a lot more about this, and from a whole new perspective, soon.
Here is the text of Powerset's blog announcement:
We’re excited to announce officially that Microsoft has signed an agreement to acquire Powerset.Powerset has always been a small company with big dreams, with the ultimate goal of changing the way humans interact with computers through language. We set out to improve search by indexing Web pages based on the meaning expressed in them rather than just the literal words. Powerset licensed breakthrough technology from PARC, hired world-renowned computational linguists and search engineers, and recently released a search and discovery experience for Wikipedia articles. Our technology helps to improve search results and also makes new features possible, such as Factz, which aggregates information from many articles to summarize a topic.
With any startup, the challenge is to take the seeds of an idea and grow it into a viable company. At Powerset, we transformed our idea into a world-class semantic search platform, demonstrating the future of search with our Wikipedia search experience. But building a large-scale semantic search engine is expensive, requiring an engineering effort and computing resources beyond what most start-ups could ever imagine. Because our goals around improving search align so well, Powerset has decided to team up with Microsoft. We believe that this is the fastest way to bring our technology to market at a large scale.
Microsoft shares our goal to improve search through deeper analysis of queries and documents, and understands that our technology and expertise will play a key role in the evolution of search. With an existing search infrastructure, incredible capital resources, unlimited data, a leading search team, and clear mission to revolutionize the search landscape, Microsoft can rapidly accelerate our progress in building semantic search technology and bringing it to full Web scale. When we launched our first product, we heard: this is great, but when and how will we get Powerset to go beyond Wikpiedia? Microsoft accelerates our ability to move Powerset to the entire Web faster than anyone could have imagined.
Powerset will continue to operate much as we currently do, working in the same building, with the same organizational structure, and with the same uniquely talented and growing team (apply on our jobs page). We’ll continue to tackle the hardest problems in parsing, semantics, ranking, indexing, scalable computing, user experience and all of our other specialties. But now we’ll do it with the support of Microsoft and the vast resources of the entire Live Search team.
Over the past couple of years Powerset has made amazing progress. Starting with just a big idea, we licensed the best linguistic technology, recruited a top-notch team, built out our datacenter, engineered a world-class semantic search platform, tackled deep natural language issues, improved relevance, innovated an interface and launched a great product. So few start-ups ever tackle such deep, scientific problems successfully and create the kind of value we’ve delivered in such short order.
For now, Powerset.com will continue to host our Wikipedia Search & Discovery and we’ll be continuing to experiment with our product, based on user feedback. But, expect many announcements from us in the coming months about how we’re integrating our technology and features into Live Search.
And here's the text of Microsoft's blog announcement:
Powerset joins Live SearchWe're excited to announce that we've reached an agreement to acquire Powerset, a San Francisco-based search and natural language company.
Powerset will join our core Search Relevance team, remaining intact in San Francisco. Powerset brings with it natural language technology that nicely complements other natural language processing technologies we have in Microsoft Research.
More importantly, Powerset brings to Live Search a set of talented engineers and computational linguists in downtown San Francisco. This is a great team with a wide range of experience from other search engines and research organizations like PARC (formerly Xerox PARC).
We're buying Powerset first and foremost because we're impressed with the people there. Powerset CTO and cofounder Barney Pell is a visionary and incredible evangelist. When he introduced our senior engineers to some of the most senior people at Powerset — Search engineers and computational linguists like Tim Converse, Chad Walters, Scott Prevost, Lorenzo Thione, and Ron Kaplan — we came away impressed by their smarts, their experience, their passion for search, and a shared vision.
That shared vision is to take Search to the next level by adding understanding of the intent and meaning behind the words in searches and webpages.
We know today that roughly a third of searches don't get answered on the first search and first click. Usually searchers find the information they want eventually, but that often requires multiple searches or clicks on multiple search results. Two specific problems are the most common reasons for this:
* Differences in phrasing or context between a user's search and the way the same information is expressed on webpages. Search engines don't understand today that "shrub" and "tree" are similar concepts. We don't understand that "cancer" sometimes refers to a disease and sometimes refers to a horoscope and when a query or a webpage refers to which.
* Lack of clarity in the descriptions for each webpage in the search results. Sometimes a result looks relevant from its short description on the results page but turns out to be not so relevant when you visit the actual page. As a result, searchers frequently click results and then rapidly click back when they realize they aren't what they're looking for.These problems exist because search engines today primarily match words in a search to words on a webpage. We can solve these problems by working to understand the intent behind each search and the concepts and meaning embedded in a webpage. Doing so, we can innovate in the quality of the search results, in the flexibility with which searchers can phrase their queries, and in the search user experience. We will use knowledge extracted from webpages to improve the result descriptions and provide new tools to help customers search better.
Working with our existing Search team and other Microsoft teams that focus on natural language, Powerset will help us address all of those problems and opportunities.
We're looking to add even more talented engineers to the San Francisco team to accelerate our shared progress. If you're interested in joining the team, drop us a line.
We'll have more to say about the things we're doing in understanding searches and webpages through natural language technology in the coming months. In the meantime, please join me in welcoming Powerset to Microsoft!
Satya Nadella, Senior Vice President, Search, Portal, and Advertising
Posted by barney at 3:50 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 25, 2008
Semantic Web Patterns: A Guide to Semantic Technologies - ReadWriteWeb
Alex Iskold wrote a nice article that provides an overview and categorization of semantic web approaches, technologies, and companies.
Here are a few key points from the article, interspersed with some of my own perspectives.
- The Semantic Web is now capturing broad attention, and has been called the number one trend in 2008 (by Richard MacManus, founder of ReadWriteWeb).
- Yahoo! recently announced that their search engine is going to support RDF and microformats. This will provide incentive for publishers to use semantic markup in their content. This echoes a point I made in my semantic web keynote talk last year (see below), that search engines would create incentives to drive the semantic web faster than people may have expected.
- Several companies are now offering web services to support or automate semantic markup. These include the Semantify web service from Dapper, the Open Calais web service from Reuters/ClearForest, and the Semantic Hacker API from TextWise.
- There are top-down and bottom-up approaches to the Semantic Web. Bottom-up approaches require people to enter semantic markup. This can be in strong semantic web formats using standards like RDF, or in lightweight markup formats, like Microformats.
- Search is potentially a killer app of semantic technologies. The author argues that semantic technologies alone are not enough to deliver better search, but when used in combination with the other search techniques they might be better. I agree that the combination is best. But I disagree with the statement that
Google's algorithm, which is based on statistical analysis, deals just fine with semantic entities like people, cities, and companies.
I think there is a significant gap today between what we are used to with search engines and what is possible with stronger semantic approaches, and this will become clearer over the next year.- Contextual technologies use semantic markup within the page and combine that with external content and services. Thus a user does not have to search in order to benefit from the semantics. Examples include Snap, Yahoo Shortcuts, and SmartLinks. Such technologies are making their way into the browser, where they will have wider appeal and accelerate the trend toward the semantic web.
- Semantic databases focus on building and utilizing structure semantic information (as opposed to marking up unstructured content). Twine, by Radar Networks, and Freebase, by Metaweb, are two examples. (I am personally familiar with Freebase as we are integrating this within our offerings at Powerset.) Over time, we will see increasing synergies between the semantic technologies based on structured and unstructured data.
- Contextual technologies use semantic markup within the page and combine that with external content and services. Thus a user does not have to search in order to benefit from the semantics. Examples include Snap, Yahoo Shortcuts, and SmartLinks. Such technologies are making their way into the browser, where they will have wider appeal and accelerate the trend toward the semantic web.
I highly recommend this article to people interested in semantic technologies and search. For my own perspective on the relationship between natural language, search, and the semantic web, you can see the video and presentation of my Keynote Talk at the 2007 International Semantic Web Conference, entitled Natural Language and the Semantic Web.
Posted by barney at 9:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 26, 2008
In 5 years we will search more with voice than typing
David Vogelpohl wrote an article, Will Microsoft Resurrect Natural Language Search, citing a recent AP article about Bill Gates and voice-based search. Here are some quotes from the AP article:
People will increasingly interact with computers using speech or touch screens rather than keyboards, Microsoft Corp. Chairman Bill Gates said.“It’s one of the big bets we’re making,” he said during the final stop of a farewell tour before he withdraws from the company’s daily operations in July.
In five years, Microsoft expects more Internet searches to be done through speech than through typing on a keyboard, Gates told about 1,200 students and faculty members Thursday at Carnegie Mellon University.
David conjectures, as do I, that when people speak their searches they are more likely to use natural language than to use keywordese, and that this could change the game in search.
I personally can envision Microsoft trying to integrate speech based data entry as closely as possible with our normal style of speaking. Perhaps the phrase “Where can I buy a hd tv?” would be more natural for searchers when you take away the limitations of the keyboard.Wide spread speech based data entry will almost certainly impact the way Microsoft and subsequently all other search engines deal with search queries.
It's interesting to see Bill Gates predicting this to happen within 5 years. In the blink of an eye, an entire industry is going to change dramatically.
While on the topic of predictions about voice and language, here's one of my predictions that I have been meaning to write up:
Within 8 years from now (2016), every category of consumer electronics will have some linguistic interface as a standard feature.
By "linguistic interface", I mean voice interactions or text-based interaction that is linguage-based. Not that these devices won't still have nonlinguistic interfaces too (e.g. there will still be buttons, most likely). And by "every category", I mean you will not find a category of consumer electronics that does not have some product in that category with that feature.
For example, users will expect to be able to talk to cameras, tvs, stereos, ipods, phones, watches, microwave ovens, refrigerators, cars, etc. There will still be some cameras that aren't language-enabled, but every category will have some products that are.
As my friends Cliff Nass and Scott Brave write in their book, Voice Activated, when people interact with devices using voice, it also invokes the rest of their social apparatus. You can't hear a voice without ascribing some kind of personality, gender, race, social status, etc to the source of the voice. So in addition to expecting linguistic capability, we're also going to start expecting personality within the next decade.
I'll stop here before I get carried away to the singularity...
Posted by barney at 8:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 25, 2008
Powerset in Forbes article on the Language of Search
Forbes.com has a special issue on language, including interesting articles and interviews by some of my favorite writers on Language.
I'm happy that natural language and semantic search was included in the special issue. Andy Greenberg from Forbes.com published his piece on language and search engines devoting a good portion of the article to Powerset and Hakia, featuring interviews with me and with Hakia's founder Riza Berkan. The article, entitled "Language Web-lish" starts off with Andy using Powerset's metaphor comparing people's current use of search engines to communicating like cavemen:
A question in English, like "What year was Hillary Clinton born?" becomes what he calls a primitive "keywordese": "Hillary Clinton born year.""We have this great gift of human intelligence based around language," says Pell, "and now we have to translate it into a grunting pidgin language to interact with machines."
Andy described an example I showed him from Powerset:
When a user enters the question, "In what year was Hillary Clinton born?," Powerset's algorithm doesn't simply scour the Web for this collection of words in close proximity. Instead, it looks at pages with an eye for their meaning. Reading the sentence "Born to Dorothy and Hugh Rodham in 1947, Hillary Clinton is a New York senator," Powerset will disassemble the sentence's grammar and extract the fact of Hillary Clinton's birth date. That fact is then connected with the user's question, even if the word order of the result and the query didn't originally match.
Andy also went through an example from Hakia:
Taking the question "What drug is best for treating a urinary tract infection?" Riza Berkan points to the word "drug." Hakia's algorithm, he says, understands that the word contains a massive subset of concepts including synonyms and specific names of medicines. When it spots a term that falls into that subset, like "Amoxicillin," Hakia can substitute the medicine's name for the word "drug" in the result."You don't want the word 'drug,' you want the name of the drug," says Berkan. "That's a hidden failure in search engines, and people don't even know what they're missing."
Other natural language and semantic search companies mentioned included Cognition Search and Lexxe.
As is typical, my friend Peter Norvig at Google gets the last word in the article:
Google's Peter Norvig, the search giant's director of research, knows just how complex semantic algorithms can be: His Berkeley Ph.D. thesis tried to develop one in 1978. Every sentence of text, he says, took weeks to analyze. "The result was kind of like a dancing bear," he says. "It was amazing that it could dance at all, but we didn't expect it to star in the Moscow Ballet."But that doesn't mean Google's engineers are idly watching semantic search from a distance, says Norvig. The company's thousands of engineers are looking at how to incorporate semantic analysis into a search algorithm. But semantic analysis is just one of many directions that Google's teams are exploring... "Basically, we just do whatever works," says Norvig. "Instead of trying to understand everything, we're trying to understand something about billions of pages a week."
But does that pragmatic approach leave Google vulnerable to an innovative start-up willing to risk its fate on building meaning-based search from scratch?
"It's unlikely," says Norvig. "But even car companies have to worry about anti-gravity machines."
I think that analogy is quite a stretch. It's more like big car companies having to worry about smaller companies focused on electric cars. They don't have to worry about this immediately but, at some point, this is going to be the future of their industry.
Posted by barney at 12:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 19, 2007
Natural Language and the Semantic Web: ISWC Keynote talk
I gave an invited keynote talk last week at The 6th International Semantic Web Conference and the 2nd Asian Semantic Web Conference, 2007. The abstract for the talk is below. The image below links to the original video and presentation slides.
The live presentation (and video) contains technical demos that aren't in the slides. Some of the demos are already available inside Powerlabs (e.g. Powermouse, which lets you browse and query our semantic database of facts extracted from Wikipedia), while some of these are still internal (e.g. an open search box, and output of our natural language system on full sentences). I also gave some detailed walk-through showing how Powerset takes advantage of external semantic resources like Wordnet and Freebase.
For me, the most fun part of the talk was toward the end, where I got to speculate on how ecosystem effects can make natural language search and the semantic web become deeper and more powerful more quickly than people might expect. For example, advertisers, publishers, and vertical search sites will be able to contribute ontologies that enable them to get more users, better internal search, and more revenue, while having as a side effect that the broad search engines get more knowledgeable about different domains. The questions afterward were also challenging and interesting.
![]()
POWERSET - Natural Language and the Semantic Web
Continue reading "Natural Language and the Semantic Web: ISWC Keynote talk"
Posted by barney at 8:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 12, 2007
Tim Converse on Proximity is a Hack
Powerset's Tim Converse wrote a great article entitled: Proximity is a Hack.
In the article, Tim says that the two biggest improvements in web search were the use of links (including anchor text) and term proximity. The article explores the benefits of term proximity and argues that works to the extent that it approximates linguistic relationships in the text.
He concludes that natural language processing of the documents should have the ability to more accurately capture linguistic relationships even if the query itself is in keywordese (as opposed to a natural language query with internal linguistic structure).
To recap: proximity is both a wonderfully powerful relevance feature, and a total hack. It helps enormously, but it’s not what you really want, it’s just sorta somewhat correlated with what you really want. What you need for what you really want is the underlying structure of all that web content: the real syntactic structure of the sentences, how the sentences connect to each other, how the facts relate, and (maybe) how the discourse flows and the topics connect. We’ve squeezed all the juice we can out of webpages considered as word-vectors; now it’s time to parse this stuff and get at the real structure.Can that be done? A couple of years ago I would have said no, but I hadn’t seen the PARC natural language technology then, and didn’t know that an effort this concerted and well-funded was on the way. Now, do I think that Powerset will do it? I still don’t know, frankly - there’s so much more to do to make it real and debugged and scaled the way it needs to be. But it’s clear to me that the next big thing in web search is either this or something a whole lot like this, and I think we have the best shot of anyone. And that’s why I’m at Powerset.
The article is definitely good reading for people interested in search and the potential benefits of NLP.
Posted by barney at 9:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 9, 2007
Technology Review on Building a Better Search Engine
Technology Review recently had an article featuring Powerset: Building a Better Search Engine, by Michael Reisman. In addition to Powerset, the article also mentions Hakia and Cognition Search, and closes with a discussion of a semantic search project inside IBM.I am an avid reader of Technology Review and am really excited to have an article about us in this great publication.
The full article is worth reading.
Here are just a few excerpts about natural language search and Powerset's technology:
The company claims that the engine finds the best answer by considering the meaning and context of the question and related Web pages. "Powerset extracts deep concepts and relationships from the texts, and the users query and match them efficiently to deliver a better search," Powerset CEO Barney Pell says.Powerset chief technology officer Ron Kaplan has led PARC's XLE team since the 1970s and is the author of much of the technology behind XLE that has been licensed to the company. Kaplan says that he and Pell began to collaborate on the idea about two years ago. Current methods of searching used by more traditional engines focus on isolated keywords and broad but shallow content coverage. This leaves a lot of room for improvement, Kaplan says.
"They are really not getting at relationships," he notes. "The best that they do to approximate relationships are words that are close to other words." He adds that a much deeper level of analysis is required.
The article came in time to announce the upcoming launch of Powerlabs, our early user community:
The company plans to release demo versions of the search engine on its Powerlabs website, where consumers can test-drive the product beginning in September. User feedback will be taken into consideration as Powerset makes the final product, which is slated for release next year."The key challenge is to get the system to the point where people can understand how to use it and get real value out of these systems even though they are not perfect," Pell says. "We are finally at the point where we are going to cross that threshold."
Posted by barney at 8:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Information Week on The Ultimate Search Engine
An article in Information Week this week, The Ultimate Search Engine, by Nick Hoover, gives an overview of many approaches and providers of next-generation search.
The article begins with a statistic about search frustration that I have heard several times but have not been able to find the data:
People search for 11 minutes on average before finding what they're looking for, and half abandon searches without getting that far, according to Microsoft. By Gartner's estimate, half of potential Web sales are lost because visitors simply can't find what they want.
The article covers the following ideas being explored for next-generation search:
- Natural language and semantic search: Search that benefits from the meaning of the query and/or the content being searched.
- Queryless search: Giving relevant results without a query box based on saved searches or the context of a current search.
- Personalization: Search results that benefit from knowledge of an individual.
- Social Search: Ways to improve search using humans. This includes tags, social filtering, human powered answers, among others.
- Results Oriented: Improvements to the results of search. This includes faceted refinement options, clustering, and direct answers to questions.
- Multimedia: this includes voice, image, video and universal search.
The discussion on natural language and semantic search features Powerset and Hakia.
Here are a few relevant excerpts:
Continue reading "Information Week on The Ultimate Search Engine"
Posted by barney at 7:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 7, 2007
When is Natural Language useful?
In talking about Powerset and natural language search, I am frequently asked "When is Natural Language search useful?". The idea here is that maybe there are some specific situations where you really want natural language search. My general response is that this is like asking "When is Natural Language useful?" to talk to other people? The very question assumes that there are some particular situations where you want to use natural language, and others where you would prefer to just grunt out a few words.
I am aware of a number of situations where it is really clear that you want the power and usability of natural language for search, including:
Continue reading "When is Natural Language useful?"
Posted by barney at 8:07 PM | TrackBack
February 13, 2007
Barney interviewed by Bambi Francisco on Marketwatch about PARC/Powerset deal
Bambi Francisco, from Marketwatch, interviewed me last Friday about the PARC/Powerset strategic deal announcement. The video is now available.
We discussed the following questions:
- How fundamental is the PARC technology to Powerset?
- What are the financial terms of the deal? Is PARC now an investor in Powerset?
- How does the deal being completed affect Powerset's product development plans?
- Why is this technology so special?
- NLP technology has been under development for so long, why is the timing different now?
- When is Powerset going to launch?
The interview was brief and to the point, and I think we shared some useful perspective on the significance of this deal.
I still need to post an entry to an earlier video interview with Bambi last November. It's hard keeping a blog up to date when so much is happening with your startup company.
Posted by barney at 9:07 PM | TrackBack
January 1, 2007
Happy New Year: Powerset in the New York Times
Powerset was featured in the New York Times today in an article by Miguel Helft entitled: "In Silicon Valley, the Race Is On to Trump Google". The article talks about the wave of startups going after aspects of the search market. I originally thought the article was going to be titled: "What are they thinking?", as the emphasis is on the mindset of the entrepreneurs and the investors going after a large market in the presence of such formidable players. The article begins and ends with a discussion of Powerset. In between, the search startups discussed in the article include Powerset, Hakia, Snap, A9, ChaCha, and Wikia.Continue reading "Happy New Year: Powerset in the New York Times"
Posted by barney at 4:34 PM | TrackBack
November 19, 2006
Google and Powerset in the Sunday Times
Powerset was mentioned today in The Sunday Times in an article entitled: Quest for last word in search, by Paul Durman.The article interviews my friend Peter Norvig, now director of research at Google, and discusses natural language search. Here are some relevant excerpts:
Continue reading "Google and Powerset in the Sunday Times"
Posted by barney at 10:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 9, 2006
John Battelle interviews Yahoo's David Filo and Bradley Horowitz at Web2.0
- A Conversation with Yahoo!
- David Filo and Bradley Horowitz
- Interviewed by John Battelle
- Web 2.0 Summit
- November 9th, San Francisco, CA
- Notes by Barney Pell
Here are my raw notes from the talk just now. It came right after a fascinating panel with teens and parents, in which almost everyone knew and used Google and Myspace, with Yahoo receding in the distance. In contrast, David and Bradley seemed very positive about Yahoo's situation and prospects for the future. They have had competitors over the last 12 years, and this isn't much different from the past.
At least we had a promise from David Filo that there wouldn't be any announcement about Microsoft acquiring Yahoo tomorrow.
Continue reading "John Battelle interviews Yahoo's David Filo and Bradley Horowitz at Web2.0"
Posted by barney at 5:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 4, 2006
Amazon Web Services and Powerset in Business Week article
Rob Hof at Business Week just came out with an article called Jeff Bezos's Risky Bet. The article talks about Amazon's Web Services initiative, in which Amazon is enabling other companies to take advantage of the massive technology infrastructure Amazon has developed to power its own operations:
Amazon has spent 12 years and $2 billion perfecting many of the pieces behind its online store. By most accounts, those operations are now among the biggest and most reliable in the world. "All the kinds of things you need to build great Web-scale applications are already in the guts of Amazon," says Bezos. "The only difference is, we're now exposing the guts, making [them] available to others."
This article was the first to announce that Powerset is one of the major early customers for Amazon's new Electric Compute Cloud (EC2) Web service. Here are the relevant paragraphs, which mention Powerset and some of our key angel investors:
Continue reading "Amazon Web Services and Powerset in Business Week article"
Posted by barney at 2:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 11, 2006
We are all natural language searchers
My Powerset CoFounder, Lorenzo Thione has written a nice article on his blog, in which he argues that we are all natural language searchers. He surveyed the underlying themes in much of the criticism in the current blogstorm about Powerset and natural language search. Lorenzo groups the arguments in support of keyword search into three clusters:- The vast majority of queries are only a few words long
- There is only so much semantic intent that one could extract from queries such as "Britney Spears", "beach", or "digital cameras"
- Whether or not one could build a better search engine is a moot point. Delivering better results to queries formulated in natural language won't work, because it would require users to change their behavior.
Lorenzo's article addresses each of these points in turn, and it is good reading so I won't summarize all the key points here. I particularly like his response to the "most queries today are short" critique. He introduces the idea of the long tail of failed queries, in which users initially try more natural queries stating what they want, but eventually learn that it doesn't help with the search, so they shorten the queries, which leads to the observation that most queries today are short. It's a bit like looking at the fact that all Model-T cars were black, after Henry Ford decided that's all he would give them, and concluding that there was no market for colorful cars. As Lorenzo says:
The data so far about short queries and past failures of natural language attempts is no indication about what users will really do or not do, as users have never yet been presented with the possibilities of true natural language search.Combining this with my previous post on my vision of natural language search, this gives a good view of our perspectives on what we think is obvious: that users will ultimately want to interact with search engines in natural language, not just keywordese.
Posted by barney at 2:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The Powerset Blogstorm: 1 week later
I wrote a week ago about how Powerset had become the subject of a blog storm, and shared my vision of natural language search. Little did I realize that the storm had barely started. One week later, there are now about 400 blog articles about Powerset, according to Technorati (over 100 with some authority). We got covered by many of the leading writers on search and internet technology. Below are a few comments on some of the articles by high-authority bloggers.- Michael Arrington on TechCruch presented the story to a broad audience. He stated he has become so familiar with keywordese that he even uses it now sometimes in IM and email discussions, but that he is open to the possibility of improved communication of meaning and intent with natural language search. The 60 comments to his article address the issues of natural language and search from many useful perspectives.
- Danny Sullivan's Search Engine Watch gave a great critique of past attempts at natural language search and wonders why Powerset would be any different. He argues that natural language requires users to change behavior, and is thus unlikely to succeed. By contrast, he is a big fan of query refinement. For the record, in addition to natural language, I like query refinement too, and I'll throw in suggestions, guided navigation and faceted refinement to round out the picture.
- Erick Schonfeld at Business2.0 picked up on Danny's criticism that "the most 'natural' thing for people is to be lazy". He then talks about other approaches to improving search: personalization, social search, and query refinement.
- Matt Hurst's Data Mining picked up on my "grunting pidgin language" characterization of keywordese. While I used an analogy of getting by speaking first-year French but wanting more expressiveness, he gives a great analogy of talking to a reference librarian in keywordese vs. English. This really points out how much potential there is to go beyond what search offers users today.
- ValleyWag says "If the company can pull this off, it has a shot at rescuing the world from speaking Search Grunt."
- Om Malik has a poll on whether Powerset can really beat Google. As of this writing, 20% votes cast agreed that "Powerset will reset Google". I think that's a lot of confidence for a product most people have never seen...
Continue reading "The Powerset Blogstorm: 1 week later"
Posted by barney at 1:09 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 4, 2006
Powerset and Natural Language Search
Ever since I stated that Powerset was in "semi-stealth" mode about a year ago, I have been pretty quiet about the company on my blog. A few months ago we realized, after going through a fundraising process with a great set of angel investors, that much of Silicon Valley already knew that Powerset was building a natural language search engine. So we finally put some content up on the Powerset website and agreed to let some of our friends write about us. Some of the first articles about Powerset are those by:
- Stefanie Olsen,
- Esther Dyson (also an investor), and
- Matt Hurst.
But I have been so busy with the company that I just didn't take the time to write up the vision on my own blog.
Powerset has now unexpectedly become the subject of a recent blogstorm, initiated by an article posted yesterday by Matt Marshall on VentureBeat. Since Matt wrote his initial version of the article before he was able to contact us, he expressed skepticism about what he inferred we are trying to do. (Update: Matt Marshall has just written a new article about Powerset, after meeting with me and Steve yesterday.) This article started a debate in the blogosphere, with people coming down on both sides of the "search is great, nobody can compete with Google" vs. "search is broken, go for it" divide (for the former, see Steve Bryant's article, and for the latter, see this article by Richard Koman).
Given all the attention, I want to take time out to share my vision of natural language as the future of search. To start with, I will characterize the conventional thinking as expressed by various critics.
Continue reading "Powerset and Natural Language Search"
Posted by barney at 10:26 PM | Comments (10) | TrackBack
April 8, 2006
Quaero: Europe-funded multimedia search engine
Quaero is a large-scale government-funded effort to create a European competitor to the American search hegemony of Google, Yahoo and Microsoft. Exalead, a French-based search engine that many people think is cool, is one of the partners and is likely providing the backbone of the text search.
The main innovative focus is on multi-media search. One piece that caught my attention is based on finding similar images.
Users can enter a query to get similar images. And pages that have unlabeled images will inherit labels from similar images on other pages.
The government has not announced (or determined?) how much money it will allocate to the project. Given the number of players and the history of European projects, I have very low expectations for this project to create a successful new consumer search engine. But I think it's great that Europe is being visionary and recognizes the importance of search. I also hope they produce some great new technology that Powerset can license when we're ready!
Posted by barney at 6:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
In-Car information from the Web: Siemens and SmartWeb project
This press release describes the SmartWeb system. The new system is being developed by experts from the Siemens Corporate Technology Division in Munich and engineers from the Fraunhofer Institute for Device Architecture and Software Technology (FIRST) in Berlin. The vehicle prototype from the SmartWeb project will be on display for the first time at the CeBIT computer trade show March 9-15 in Hanover.
Examples of the use of such a system include finding the lowest gas prices on your route, finding sports scores, or any other internet information that normally resides in tables on web pages.
I found two aspects of the system description interesting:
- They automatically generate voice dialog systems directly from tables on web pages containing different types of information.
Once the system finds an appropriate table, the program automatically converts it into a voice dialog application by accessing a phonetic lexicon, as well as a voice model that was automatically generated from the contents previously compiled from the Internet.
- Rather than providing interactive services from a website, the system downloads all the tables of information directly to the in-car computer. Then the user interacts with the car without latency or dependency on the net.
Siemens is targetting such a system to reach market in 10 years. Ajay Juneja, founder of Speak With Me, (see my previous post on Speak With Me) who pointed me to this announcement, says he can likely have such technology in cars within the next 2 years. I expect the data transmission parts could take longer than the voice technology.
Posted by barney at 3:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 10, 2006
Visual Image Search
I just came across Tiltomo, a new visual search engine (thanks to a posting on Silicon Beat). Most visual search methods are based on color histograms, so they are good for finding similar color schemes to a reference image (eg roses, sunsets). This one also lets you constrain the search by the "theme" of a reference image (without having to specify the theme yourself). The homepage has a nice demo using images from Flickr. I did a search for the tag "spider" and got lots of great spider images. Then I selected one of them, with a close-up of a spider in a web, and got many more similar ones to that. For other searches, I found it easy to get collections of photos of people's eyes, stuffed animals wearing stripey costumes, and of course, swimming suits.
I did find myself wondering about how much human effort was involved in preparing the data for use with the service, and how that would scale up. The system seemed almost too good at knowing which photos were of people vs. animals, men vs. women, and using this information to find related photos.
While I'm writing about visual search, check out AHOP2, which lets you do find websites based on aesthetic style. It's a good way to look for furniture that might go well in a modern house, for example.
Down the line, I know of several companies that will be bringing visual object recognition into search. That's a topic for a later post.
Posted by barney at 6:19 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
December 9, 2005
Barney moderating panel on "Venturing in Online Search, Advertising and Sales" at Caltech
I'll be moderating a panel on OPPORTUNITIES FOR INNOVATORS: Venturing in Online Search, Advertising & Sales at the December Caltech/MIT Enterprise Forum, December 10th.
The abstract for the event:
In 2005 acquisitions of online companies involved with sales, search and allied technologies have been striking: IAC/Interactive bought Ask Jeeves; Scripps paid $560 million (cash) for ShopZilla; E-Bay swallowed Shopping.com; Yahoo! bought tiny Konfabulator; AOL grabbed Weblogs; and Rupert Murdoch is on the prowl with billions of dollars. All this activity testifies to entrepreneurial opportunities for ventures that improve technology, and enhance e-commerce success: the big guys are hungry for innovation to help them compete with each other. Moreover, with its renewed vigor e-com has diversified, as both online companies that grew in situ and traditional media giants are snapping up even the smallest of enterprises.In this context - today's keynote speaker, entrepreneurs and panelists will share their perspectives on future trends and opportunities in online advertising and sales, search, blogs and other e-phenomena, as well as what makes a company a likely target for acquisition.
Keynote Speaker: Farhad Mohit, Co-founder and Chief Strategist, ShopZilla (now a Scripps Company)
Moderator: Barney Pell, Entrepreneur-in-Residence, Mayfield Venture Capital
Panelists/Entrepreneurs:Producers: Michael M. Krieger, Willenken, Wilson, Loh & Stris LLP, and Richard C. Hsu, Townsend and Townsend and Crew LLP
- David Hughes, CEO, The Search Agency (former Senior Vice President, Corporate Development, United Online)
- Craig Ogg, Co-founder, ThisNext (former Vice President of Research & Development, Stamps.com)
- Joel Toledano, Director of Business Development--Search, Yahoo!
While we planned this event a few months ago, the topic is perfectly timed, in light of even more recent string of acquisitions in this space (Brainboost acquired by Answers.com and Del.icio.us acquired by Yahoo, to name just two in the last week) and coverage in the media of the topic of search acquisitions in general.
The recent article in Business Week on Googling For Gold points out the new trend for large search companies to try to acquire companies early on, preferably before they even raise VC funding. One reason: the work that companies do after raising VC funding is largely about building a brand and an audience, including sales and marketing teams. Since the large search engines already have all of those, they don't view that as adding value. Far better to just acquire the company when they have the first promising product and a strong team that can easily integrate into the new parent company. The incumbents get the company at a low price, and the entrepreneurs get a great return much earlier and with less work.
At Mayfield, we met with a team from Yahoo! Search and discussed exactly this topic. They were interested in companies that we liked but didn't want to invest in because the market opportunities were too small, or it was too easy for someone like Yahoo to compete.
That's where I met Joel Toledano, who I invited to be one of the panelists for this event. It will be interesting to hear his take, and perhaps he will talk about Yahoo's acquisition today of Del.icio.us.
The "acquire before VC funding" logic raises two related questions:
- As an entrepreneur, when and why should you raise VC funds?
- As a VC, which companies should you fund, especially when the incumbents will be trying to acquire competitors earlier in the lifecycle.
I expect these quetions to generate interesting discussion at the paen, and perhaps in the blogosphere at large.
Posted by barney at 10:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 30, 2005
MSN Toolbar Features Watson Contextual information agent
Watson 2.0 is a new product by Intellext, a company founded by AI researcher Kristian Hammond and team at Northwestern University.
It is highly reminiscent of Purple Yogi, the original product of the company that now is Stratify (where several of my friends have worked). The idea is that the system watches everything you do on your desktop (preserving privacy!) and suggets information from desktop, corporate, and external sources that is likely to be of interest to your current context, based on understanding of the text you are working on and your history.
Here's the text from their website:
Intelligence in Context. This statement forges the foundation of Intellext, a visionary company that takes information retrieval out of the search box. We have a vision - that wherever you are, whatever you are doing - indeed whatever you are thinking - your computer should be bringing relevant information to you.Intellext is delivering on this vision with Watson, the company's flagship product that transcends the boundaries of contemporary search and information access. The product of research conducted by Intellext co-founders Dr. Jay Budzik and Dr. Kristian Hammond at Northwestern University, Watson removes the burden of search from the shoulders of computer users. By reading and understanding what people are working on and using that knowledge to proactively find and deliver useful information to the user, Watson is able to find information the user didn't know existed - in places they otherwise might not have looked.
While there have been several attempts at this in the past, this one might actually work. I haven't tried it yet, but the UI, services interface, and integration with search all look well designed and usable. In addition, Microsoft is now promoting this on their MSN Search Toolbar, which will give the product (and company) great visibility.
Here's an article about Watson on PC World.
Posted by barney at 6:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 20, 2005
Highlights from tonight's vertical search panel
This evening's event on business models in vertical search (see my previous post ) was fun. I estimate about 150 people attended. Half the audience raised their hands claiming to be working in a vertical search startup.
Since I was the moderator, I was unable to take careful notes (I hope someone in the audience will post their notes to the blogosphere). Below are some points that I did note down or remember.
- Definitions: We essentially agreed that the phrase "vertical search" has come to be used synonymously with "specialized search". Search can be specialized along many dimensions (including content, users, and context) and is a matter of degree (leading to more or less deep specialization).
- The "Vertical" distinction here is independent of the horizontal/vertical application distinction (tools for HR are horizontal as they cut across all companies, while tools for securities trading are vertical as the apply only to that industry segment).
- Vertical search applies to searching all forms of data (varying from structured databases to unstructured text documents).
- The additional constraints and context of vertical search should enable improved search performance (precision, recall, usability, integration, convenience). Hence we should expect to see fragmentation of general search into a set of verticals.
- Moreover, this fragmentation would likely continue (so if Pets is a valuable vertical today, then Dogs is one too, and perhaps there is even a market for Poodles.com). To prove this point, Scott Rafer planted the audience with representatives from Dogster.com (complete with dog costume). The Pet-Web is not easily accessed via a general search engine, and this 3-person company is profitable, with 200,000 unique visitors/month and 125,000 registered users!
- Vertical search businesses are combined media and technology businesses. They can be supported like any other such businesses, including advertising, subscription revenue, and paid content models. Successful companies will focus and define a core audience and develop offerings to serve the informational needs of that audience. It may even be more profitable to lose audience members that are not core, as that provides a more focused audience for your advertisers.
- As an example of the potential benefits of supporting a focused audience with what is otherwise a generic search, I pointed to big.com. This site was created as a result of user testing during the development of Snap.com (a Mayfield company, and one for which I am an advisor). During the testing, it turned out that a segment of very happy users were much older than the typical internet search demographic. When Snap asked these users why they liked the site, they explained that they preferred the big font that Snap happened to be using, as it was as easier to read. With this insight, Snap recently launched Big.com, the first search engine that lets users increase the font size with a single click on an icon. This site will undoubtably have an older demographic than most search sites, and may well get higher advertising rates than the main snap.com by virue of the focused (and economically important) demographic.
Continue reading "Highlights from tonight's vertical search panel"
Posted by barney at 11:14 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
September 19, 2005
Barney moderating a panel on Vertical Search: Show Me The Money
I'll be moderating a panel discussing Business Models in Vertical Search at the MIT Stanford Venture Lab event happening tomorrow, Tuesday September 20th, at Stanford University.
From the event announcement:
Remember the heydays of the first generation Internet search engines like InfoSeek and AltaVista and then of course, our darling Google? Vertical Search is now one of the hot new topics buzzing around the Internet industry and the investment community today. It refers to specialized search technologies that focus on narrow niches like a specific industry such as travel or health or new Web-based communication tools like blogs. Users can much more effectively find what they are looking for - be it cheap plane tickets or to find out what the investor community thinks about a certain technology. Businesses have much more effective way to reach their target customers. But the big question, as with first generation search, is Where is the Money? Though there is no question that there is value for vertical search, who is willing to pay for it? At the September 20th VLAB event, Scott Rafer, CEO of Feedster, will present how his company is building a business around providing vertical search for listings, news, and blogs, followed by a panel discussion moderated by Barney Pell, Entrepreneur in Residence at the Mayfield.
I was originally invited to participate as a panelist on this topic, with Wired Magazine's Chris Anderson moderating. But within a day of my accepting, the organizers told me that Chris had to cancel and they asked if I would be willing to moderate. This came at a really busy time for me as I was just about to leave for Burning Man, followed by two conferences, but given a topic so close to my interests I found it hard to decline.
At a broad level, I think the business models for vertical search are not particularly challenging. Search is typically supported by advertising, and vertical information services are typically supported by advertising, subscriptions, and commerce. Hence these are all natural revenue models for vertical search.
For any given vertical search business, the specific choices and mix of revenue in these categories will depend on the value of the vertical content to specific customer segments, the features of the user interface, and the integration into workflow and transaction streams. All this is modulated by the uniqueness of the offering and the corresponding reality or threat of competition.
I think we have an exciting group of panelists assembled:
- Scott Rafer is sure to stir up some controversy, as he did at the Vertical Leap event a couple months ago. In addition, as he has recently stepped down from CEO of Feedster, I hope he will share some candid lessons learned and advice for new players in the space.
- Reid Hoffman has much to say about people search in social networks and all the verticals that stem from this. One business model challenge in monetizing social networks (and other services with network effects) is that you often defer revenue while maximizing growth, and then monetize later. This causes cash-flow challenges for the early business, and user expectation challenges when you start charging them later. Reid has been through this now several times, so I think his perspectives will be valuable.
- Dion Lim's resume reads like a tour through vertical internet businesses, including finance, shopping, and currently jobs. Since SimplyHired and LinkedIn have partnered, we might also get Dion's perspective on how to build value through partnerships with other vertical search companies.
- I haven't yet met Paul Flaherty, but I expect he has a lot to talk about, based on his experiences as founder of Altavista and then as a corporate strategist. I am personally looking forward to meeting him.
If you have specific questions you'd like us to cover during the panel (before the general audience Q&A), please send me your thoughts or post them here as comments.
If you couldn't have planned to attend the event otherwise but want to go as my guest, send me a note and I'll try to put you on the guest list.
Posted by barney at 9:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 2, 2005
Faster Browsing: Browster and SNAP UltraSearch
I'm friends with two companies that have developed innovative new user experiences for accelerated browsing of search results: Browster and Snap.Browster
When you view a search results page (or any page with many links) with Browster (www.browster.com) you see a little icon beside each result. When you mouse-over that icon, Browster shows the corresonding page in a new window. If you like what you see, you can just start working in that new window. If not, the window goes away when you move the mouse. Because Browster pre-fetches the pages for each search result, you don't have to wait for them to load. The result is increased speed (no time waiting) and better ergonimics (no need to open and close new windows or click back if you don't like page). Walt Mossberg really liked Browster when he was given a sneak peak. Tom Foremski's recent post points out some substantial issues with the business model, and includes a response by Browster CEO Scott Milener.Snap Ultrasearch
SNAP (see my recent entry about Mayfield's investment in Snap) recently launched Ultrasearch, which they promote as "The most amazing, multi-tasking search tool ever". I must say I agree! The Ultrasearch Toolbar sits conveniently at the top of your screen in compressed form. When you click to expand it, you get multiple entry boxes. Most of the boxes let you choose a specific search engine (google, yahoo, ebay, amazon) to search from, so when you type in your query it directly opens that search in a new window (this is a bit like A9's OpenSearch feature). However, when you enter your query in the "Ultrasearch" box, you get a completely different experience from anything you've seen on the web. Ultrasearch launches as a new window. It feeds your search into your preferred search engine (right now I think it defaults to Snap). The titles of the results are listed on the left hand side. But the rest of the window contains a matrix (e.g., 2 by 2, or 3 by 4) of web browser windows already opened to the first set of results. So you can take in up to 12 results visually with no required mousing. You can even scroll all the windows in parallel. If you don't see the results you like, you can mouse down on the results list to open up the next set of windows (the next 4, or the next 12, in my example matrix settings above). Like Browster, Ultrasearch pre-fetches the next batch of results while you look at the current set, so when you move down the results are already fresh.One last aspect to note about Ultrasearch: Looking at the full pages of many results simultaneously is not just a faster way to browse search results. It gives you a wholistic experience of the results, as a collection. For example, if you ultrasearch for "Yogen Dalal", Managing Director at Mayfield, you can see all his portfolio companies on a single screen. I really like the 4x3 view on my high resolution 17" monitor. It is nice to have tools that finally take advantage of the increasing amount of pixels available on computers today.
I recommend anyone to try out both of these new tools. These are both exciting pointers to thinking "outside the search box".
Posted by barney at 3:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 20, 2005
Snap.com raises $10M in VC Funding, led by Mayfield
Mayfield and Snap announced this week that Mayfield led a $10M venture capital investment round in Snap.com. I am proud to report that I helped to make this deal happen. My partner at Mayfield, Allen Morgan, will go on the Snap board of directors.
It might seem puzzling why you would invest in a general search company (perhaps as opposed to vertical search companies that might have more specific focus and could be acquired and merged into offerings by the incumbents), in the presence of so many giants. The article about Snap in USA Today suggests that Snap only wins if they can unseat Google. However, I think Snap represents an good investment, without any need that they become the new #1 or #2 general search engine. Below are my thoughts about the general search landscape and some major themes that Snap addresses. (Disclaimer: I am currently an Entrepreur in Residence at Mayfield and have a personal interest in Snap; the thoughts below are my own and should not be taken to represent the thoughts of Mayfield or Snap).
Online advertising is today a massive market that continues to grow rapidly. The U.S. paid search component of this market was $4B in 2004 and is predicted to grow to $6B by '06, with a worldwide paid search market growing to $23B by 2010. The paid search market comprises both search portals (e.g. Google Adwords), where users go specifically to search, and contextual advertising, where users are exposed to ads in the context of viewing publisher's websites (e.g. Google Adsense ads on NYT.com). The contextual advertising market is growing even faster than search portals (a desktop client advertising market is also growing quickly, but represents a much smaller portion of the market).
Continue reading "Snap.com raises $10M in VC Funding, led by Mayfield"
Posted by barney at 9:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Marc Cuban at AlwaysOn05
Fireside Chat with Marc Cuban, interviewed by Allen Delattre
At Always On 2005
July 20, 2005
I thought it was an interesting discussion. Here are the points I found most noteworthy:
- blog search: I agree with Marc's comments about the growing importance of Blog Search, and his view that the aggregators will capture the market value from the long tail of blog search. I personally like www.blogpulse.com the best. Cuban's new IceRocket seems to be direct knockoff. Blogpulse gets my vote for best blog search engine not just because my friends from Whizbang days were the founders of this service, but because it has the best analytics and, unlike Technorati, it hasn't yet hit a scaling barrier.
- Releasing movies simultaneously in all channels: I think that's a great idea, and it is exciting to see Marc Cuban in a position to lead the way here.
- Interactive TV and accountable TV advertising models: I agree with him that models for TV advertising are going to change, and that this will be enabled by interactive TV (and time shifting services like Tivo). The 30 second spot is dying (George Gilder made a comment about this in a preceding session at Always On), and new measurable forms of advertising are being developed to take its place. I don't expect it will be as simple as pay-for-placement, but I do think internet and tv advertising models will come together in some interesting blend over the next few years.
- Dennis Rodman and Paris Hilton's intuitive sense for media manipulation: indeed! (I hope that previous reference doesn't cause my blog to become misclassified...).
Continue reading "Marc Cuban at AlwaysOn05"
Posted by barney at 7:44 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
July 1, 2005
News / Blog search at Vertical Leap
News / Blog search Moderator: - Om Malik, Business 2.0 - Steve Gillmor, Gillmor Gang
Panelists:
- Tantek Celik, Technorati
- Jim Pitkow, Moreover Technologies
- Scott Rafer, Feedster
- Chris Tolles, Topix.net
Tantek: We index > 12M weblogs in real-time, and use them as a collaborative filter to show you top tags, movies, books, searches, etc. Also form simple standards like microformats so community can grow as a whole.
Scott: Feedster blog/RSS search, used side by side with technorati. We're a search engine and advertising network. As world moves from pure search there's a new way for things to be done.
Jim: CEO of Moreover. Current awareness content: News, blogs, etc. We have a strong footprint, and do distribution on the internet as well. MSN, Ask Jeeves, etc. Not a direct consumer play but behind the scenes, and value added services for publishers.
Chris: Topix.net is a news aggregator, with consumer footprint and also syndicate our feeds. We categorize news, with differentiated technology. We categorize down to each zip code in US and Canada.
Steve: Scott, connect some thread between previous sessions and this one?
Scott: The question that keeps occurring to me that affects the group of us up here is how people are thinking of vertical search. One ways is "vertical market", like jobs. Things like shopping and local search and functional in a certain way. A new standard is arising quickly. When feedster started by two guys, they just noticed a standard called RSS going through the roof, and that it really screwed up pagerank. They saw inefficiency between gold standard of Google and what some users want. So take this piece of the web, this kind of data google does poorly on, and get enough of it together with a great UI to push that to the stratosphere. There is any number of new formats coming out in web2.0 world, where as they hit critical mass there will be new problems.
Jim: News is the most used application besides email on a daily basis. Thousands of courses, millions of blogs, all updated throughout the day. The end user requirement is to find out about it as soon as it happens. This is a very different cycle from search. And it's been around a long time, a successful profitable vertical search industry. With emerging standards to take it in ew places.
Chris: A big factor for relevancy is "how new is it". The general search guys don't have the freshest content. Vertical search is a set of things that don't work as well for general reference search. In our case it's the things that you want to be fresh.
Continue reading "News / Blog search at Vertical Leap"
Posted by barney at 2:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Travel Search at VerticalLeap
Travel Search At Vertical Leap Vertical Search EventTag: verticalleap
moderator: Niki Scevak, Jupiter Research
panelists:
- Phil Carpenter, SideStep
- Beatrice Tarka, Mobissimo
- Scott Jampol, Yahoo Travel / FareChase
- Vajid Jafri, Cfares
Here are my raw notes. Further processing to come later.
niki: Recently left to start own venture. Took a deep look into vertical search. Travel and retail form the backbone. Travel has unique trend in that 30 years ago the listings were trapped inside mainframes. The internet webified those systems and brought them online, but kept intact the agency model of listings being centralized, and people transacting with the listing agency.
Post 9/11, airlines going bankrupt spawned discount airlines with closer connection to their customer.
Jafri: Travel is 40% of all ecommerce. Building a search company as believe the next generation of travel companies
Niki: How much is consumer demand in these 3 factors: 1. fragmenting of listings 2. more people buying travel online 3. market spending more money on search engine marketing
Phil: Travel is incredibly fragmented. Messy markets are good when looking at search as you can aggregate it all for consumers. Overwhelming rush of people and demand is good as well. This is the right sector, fusion of search and travel is a good mix. The peanut butter and chocolate combinations that taste great together.
Beatrice: Growing demand for onlie information search. You can just go online and search for tickets. In the past booking through travel agent were expensive systems. Many of those suppliers chose to establish their own channel. In US had 3 independent suppliers, in Europe over 50. Mobissimo caters to those independent suppliers, especially international. In the future, growing globalization of economics means we need search to locate inventory and prices.
Scott: Travel search represents the way some people shop for travel. A large and growing segment want to compare prices and availability, but want more than price comparison, want value comparison. Continue to see it as a blend going forward.
Jafri: $52B in transactions, going to $76B next year. The other two industries that come close are illegal...
The challenge for travel search engines is how to collect all this information. You wouldn't know you could buy a $2000 ticket wholesale for $500. Search is also of great value to suppliers, gives them market info they have historically never received because legacy systems don't capture it. They can use the info to dynamically change the price and increase market share. So we see this as a great opportunity for market to evolve from front ends to legacy systems, to a whole new infrastructure.
Continue reading "Travel Search at VerticalLeap"
Posted by barney at 1:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 28, 2005
Classifieds / Job Search at VerticalLeap
Classifieds / Job SearchAt Vertical Leap Vertical Search Event
Tag: verticalleap
Here are my raw notes. Further processing to come later.
Moderator: John Zappe, Classified Intelligence Report
Panelists:
- Craig Donato, Ooodle.com
- Gautam Godhwani, Simply Hired
- Konstantine Guericke, LinkedIn
- Garrett Price, Kijiji
Continue reading "Classifieds / Job Search at VerticalLeap"
Posted by barney at 2:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Shopping Search panel at VerticalLeap
Shopping Search
At Vertical Leap Vertical Search EventTag: verticalleap
Here are my raw notes. Further processing to come later.
Moderator: Gary Stein, Jupiter Research
panelists:
(Mark Bradley, NexTag - absent)
Graham Jones, PriceGrabber
Chris Salto, Yahoo Shopping
Michael Yang, Become.como Michael
Founded MySimon in 1998, price comparison shopping on internet.
Raised VC funding and grow traffic. In 2000, was acquired by CNET.1.5 years ago, got together with partner Yeogirl.
Chose shopping as felt there was more that could be done with the
unstructured and structured content.
Launched become.com algorithmic search for shopping 2 months ago. Getting a
lot of traction. Launching comparison shopping in 2 weeks.o Graham
PriceGrabber been around since March 1999. Started in computers vertical,
moed to electronics, photography, software, then across the soft channel
markets. Added travel and autos most recently. Saw we could employ the same
tech across multiple channels. SKU association: match products based on
manufacturer name and product information. We brought it down to single page
per product, with multiple vendors.
We just announced we'll work with MSN to provide them with more offers to
their search results. Should roll out beta soon.Gary: Interesting how you started with one category and grew and grew.
o Chris Saito, runs product management group at Yahoo Shopping. It's one of
60M products from 250,000 merchants. Build our database through structured
data from merchants, and we crawl also to get breadth and comprehensiveness.Recently we launched free listings for auctions, integrated tightly into
shopping. Also focus on integrating Yahoo Shopping throughout the
network. Travel services, auto marketplace, and main search.q: Gary: Consumer benefit is ability to find the breadth of products. When we
first heard about mysimon, there was concern it was the death of the brand
and would wreck business. What's the real story, looking back?Chris: we've learned that people don't just shop on price. Merchant and
brand are very important. We created a community to let people rate
merchants. When user has recognized them, that's a key part.Graham: There are a ton of merchants that aren't even participating in
comparison shopping. They feel they can't compete on price. Examples: bed,
bath and beyond; lowes; pier one. If they were aware the customer
acquisition cost from our services they would pay in a second. It's not just
comparison shopping. If you go to Google or Overture, they're buying just
their name as they keyword, but not even buying "bed" or "bath" (and
certainly not "beyond" :). Pricegrabber had 12 million people use our site
in December 2003, 18 million in 2004. Consumers are deciding they want to
comparison shop.Michael: People are looking for info about products, like reviews and buying
guides and articles. People use general search engines to do research for
products. But using engines like Google you get a lot of junk results, based
on manipulation. E.g. I was shopping for LCD Projector, trying to research,
and kept getting merchants trying to sell me something. Not just price but
the quality of product, what other users have to say about. So we developed
algorithmic search engine that is focused on gathering also all the
non-shopping information.o Gary: On paper the benefits of comparison shopping are very clear, but
people are still going to Yahoo etc. What are the shopping engines doing to
bring traffic directly to their sites. They are enormous buyers in
keywords. Are users shifting to go their directly?Graham: We syndicate our site, cobrand it. Eg. on PC World they have a
finder. Similar with Ask Jeeves, Comcast, About.com. Shoppers are embracing
comparison shopping but we're giving the content to the publishers so they
can monetize their traffic. For PriceGrabber more people are using our
service. And for publisher and advertiser this gives more ways to reach an
audience interested in this content.
We're bringing people back to the publisher.Continue reading "Shopping Search panel at VerticalLeap"
Posted by barney at 1:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Investing in Vertical Search: Panel at Vertical Leap
Investing in Vertical Search
At Vertical Leap Vertical Search EventTag: verticalleap
Here are my raw notes. Further processing to come later.
o Mark Kvamme, Sequoia Capital
"Search has been good to us"
Experience has to be better, consumers have to see it instantly
Kayak: better experience. And deal with AOL for distribution.
Google, though very good, got their big uptick with Yahoo distribution.
So need not just very good product but also distribution.
If you have distribution, you have clicks, the advertisers will find you
because they know it's a very important market.o Chris Moore, Redpoint Ventures (backed Ask Jeeves, MySimon)
Redpoint invested in Fatlens, Oodle
Google, Yahoo, Jeeves are good at navigational quries (you know the site or
piece of info you're looking for, helps you get there).
The next set of opportunities will address class of queries more complex and
fine grained than the basic search engines are providing today.
Lot of room for improvement in the search experience because of these fine
grained and complex queries.
The bad news is many of these are niche oriented. And unlike the first time
around, when Yahoo gave Google distribution, all the big guys are paying
attention to filling out the user experience, and acquiring the niche
engines that are filling the need. But the challenge is to find some of thes
that do hae the potential to be really large.Oodle: search engine for classifieds. Aggregating al the listings across the
web. Ex Excite guys. Lots of sources, not that easy.
Fatlens: search paradigm for comparison shopping category. Focusing on
categories where the ihherent listings are unstructured, to normalize them
into a complelling user experience. Started in tickets, but you'll see them
roll out across other categories.Continue reading "Investing in Vertical Search: Panel at Vertical Leap"
Posted by barney at 11:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 23, 2005
Future of Vertical Search
An update on my earlier post on this topic: I am moderating a session at the Vertical Search conference next Tuesday 6/28 on the "Future of Vertical Search". The session has come together with a good set of panelists each illustrating themes I think will be critical in the future of vertical search.
Panelists:
- Ofer Ben-Shachar, CEO, RawSugar
- Julia Komissarchik, CTO, Glenbrook Networks
- Paul Pangaro, CTO, Snap.com
- Bob Wyman, CTO, PubSub Concepts
Here is a preview of themes we will be discussing, from the perspectives of the different companies:
- Glenbrook Networks is relevant to the problem of extracting and structuring vertical information directory from millions of web pages. (This capability was pioneered by Whizbang Labs, a company I was part of a few years ago).
- Snap is relevant to the problem of showing many different verticals from a single front-end and with a common UI paradigm for each vertical.
- RawSugar is relevant to the problem of structuring new verticals using tagging.
- PubSub is relevant to the problem of creating an open distribution system for individual records that comprise any vertical search domain.
Posted by barney at 6:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 13, 2005
Combining Google Maps with other data using open APIs
An Associated Press article last week, Google Maps Make Demographics Come Alive , describes a variety of nice hacks built by developers using Google Maps API with outside data sources.
As it turns out, Google charts each point on its maps by latitude and longitude — that's how Google can produce driving directions to practically anywhere in the nation. Seasoned developers have figured out how to match these points with locations from outside databases that can contain vast amounts of information — anything from police blotters to real estate listings.
The applications include:Crime locations (Police data): http://www.chicagocrime.org