Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Clausse, S. 2
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Originality Avowal
I hereby certify that I understand the nature of plagiarism and collusion, and that I
understand the Colleges Academic Regulations regarding Examination Misconduct.
I verify that I am the sole author of this report, except where explicitly stated to the
contrary.
Clausse, S. 3
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Table of Contents
1. Introduction..........4
2. Industry Analysis.5
2.1. Porters Five Forces Framework...5
3. Analysis and Discussion..10
3.1. Core Competencies..11
3.2. Competitive Advantage Differentiation...14
3.3. Differentiation Strategies..16
4. Forecast.18
4.1. Forecast Performance.18
4.2. Investment and Recommendations..19
5. Conclusion....20
6. Bibliographies and References..21
Clausse, S. 4
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
1. Introduction
Two very different companies, but still two giants in the .com industry and global
search engine market, Yahoo! and Google both seek to dominate the cyberspace
traffic flow, each with their distinctive strategies. Yahoo! focuses on creating a
content, communications, and community platform that delivers rich consumer
experiences and advertising solutions across the screens of peoples lives (Yahoo!,
2011). On the other hand, Googles mission is to organize the worlds information
and make it universally accessible and useful (Google, 2011).
This paper compares and evaluates both Yahoo!s and Googles strategies, but
first an analysis of the .com search engine industry is performed using Michael
Porters five forces framework. Then, Porters theory of competitive advantage is
applied, to appreciate how both Yahoo! and Google grow advantages over each
other through their generic strategy. Subsequently, the strategic capabilities in
terms of the core competences and resources of Yahoo! and Google are compared
and evaluated to analyse how these strategic capabilities provide sustainable
competitive advantage. Lastly, based on the aforementioned, the performance of the
two companies is forecasted, and recommendations are given in terms of which
company to invest.
Clausse, S. 5
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
2. Industry Analysis
To analyse the .com search engine industry where Google and Yahoo! compete
and operate, Porters five forces framework is used, which helps identify the
attractiveness of an industry in terms of the five competitive forces.
2.1 Porters Five Forces Framework
Figure 1: Porters Five Forces
Bargaining
Power of
Buyers
Bargaining
Power of
suppliers
Threat of
New Entry
Threat of
Substitutes
Competitive
Rivalry
Competitive Rivalry:
The main competitors in the internet search engine industry are Google,
Yahoo!, Microsofts Bing, Ask Jeeves, Baidu and AOL. There are other
Clausse, S. 6
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
The following pie chart compares the market share percentage for each company in
the internet search engine industry for the last three years.
Figure 2: Market Share of Internet Search Engines as of October, 2011
0.04%
0.59%
0.35%
0.02%
1.41%
4.07%
3.79%
Google - Global
6.84%
Yahoo - Global
Bing
Baidu
Ask - Global
AOL - Global
Excite - Global
82.89%
Lycos - Global
Other
(NetMarketShare, 2011)
As figure 2 displays, Google has approximately 83% of the market share,
followed by Yahoo! with a market share nearly 12 times smaller than Googles. Bing
and Baidu both have roughly four per cent of the market with the rest of the
competitors taking less than one per cent of the market share each. This shows
Googles dominance in the internet search engine industry.
Overall, there is high competition between Yahoo! and Google, which keeps both
companies busy developing innovative search algorithms and products to attract
internet users and gain market share. There is also competitive rivalry with Bing and
Baidu, but Yahoo! and Google are the primary competitors.
Clausse, S. 7
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Threat of Substitutes:
The threat of substitutes is very low, as there are no real substitutes for internet
search engines.
Overall, this presents a very positive characteristic of the online search engine
industry as there is low or no threat of substitutes.
Overall, there is a low threat of new entry as internet users are locked-in to Yahoo!
and Google through additional services. Also, it is difficult for new entrants to gather
enough data and reputation quickly. However, it is important to note that when
Google started in 1998, Yahoo!, Altavista and Excite were the market leaders, and
Google still managed to outrun them (Viney, D., 2007).
Clausse, S. 8
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
well.
Online search engine firms can buy their computers and networking devices
from many suppliers, lowering supplier power.
Software engineers, web developers and programmers are growing in
numbers, so internet search engine firms have more available resources to
Overall, the bargaining power of suppliers is low as there are many available
suppliers and a low switching cost, however, this is always compromised by forward
integration as Microsofts and Apples software can take a search engine firm out of
business.
The numerous internet users and no switching cost between search engines
lowers power of buyers.
Users require and demand more sophisticated search engines and additional
Since search engines are free, firms depend on the amount of traffic flow to
Greater or lower traffic flow implies that advertising firms will pay more or less
to the search engine company, respectively.
Buyers are not very powerful but firms cannot increase price as there are
numerous online search engines available to users.
Clausse, S. 9
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Overall, the bargaining power of buyers is low because customers have no other
option to search the internet than using search engines. However, companies must
be always improving their search tools to adjust to the needs of users and need to
provide additional services to achieve customer loyalty and gain market share.
On the whole, Porters five force analysis identifies the online search engine
industry as a worthy industry to be involved in. The high barriers to entry and
the numerous competitors make it a difficult industry to enter and survive, although
Google has shown how it is possible and how successful and profitable a company
can become. Furthermore, there is plenty of room for further innovations and the
online search engine is an ever-improving and growing market, making it an ideal
industry to be part of.
Clausse, S. 10
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Competitive Advantage
Target Scope
Broad
(Industry Wide)
Narrow
(Market Segment)
Low Cost
Product Uniqueness
Cost Leadership
Strategy
Differentiation
Strategy
Cost Focus
Strategy
Differentiation Focus
Strategy
(QuickMBA, 2007)
Clausse, S. 11
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Yahoo! and Google are constantly looking to outrun each other by improving their
search engines and providing additional services to users in order to retain
customers. A comparison of the core competencies of both Yahoo! and Google is
next performed, to evaluate how both companies deliver customer value,
differentiate their business, and to evaluate their future potential as the market
changes.
3.1. Core Competences
Yahoo! and Google are very different companies, each taking different paths to
become the cyberspace leader. Yahoo! is the premier digital media company
(Yahoo!, 2011), whereas Google is primarily a search engine based on technological
innovation. Each company however, has their own core competences which help
them succeed and deliver qualitative customer value. These competences are next
identified, individually for Google and Yahoo!.
Google:
Google has the best programmers and engineers creating superior search
engine technology to provide the best and fastest results than any other
(Google, 2011).
Google offers advertisers measurable, cost-effective and highly relevant
advertising (Google, 2011), through their advertising technologies such as
(Google, 2011).
Google has a strong social media, YouTube, which generates a high traffic
flow, and Google+ to compete with the social networking giants.
Clausse, S. 12
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Google offers software like Google Chrome to help users browse the web
quickly and easily (Google, 2011).
Google has an extended product line, including Gmail, Google Buzz, Android,
Google Earth, Maps, News, Documents, Translators, Google Scholar and
Overall, Googles main strength is its investment in product development and in its
core business. Googles core business is the search engine, using top level
technology to provide with fast and reliable search results. Googles technology
overcomes Yahoo!s by large margins.
Yahoo!:
(Yahoo!, 2011).
Yahoo! focuses strongly on creating a content, communications, and
community platform that delivers rich consumer experiences and advertising
content in general.
Yahoo! News is still the No. 1 news site, and Flickr continues to grow and
remain a highly successful photo Web site (Bilton, N., 2010).
Yahoo! is very competent as a web portal or content website, hosting news
and content in bigger and better than Google. The following figure compares
the news page of Yahoo! and Google, where Yahoo!s is clearly better
presented.
Clausse, S. 13
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Figure 4 shows how Yahoo! is better at content, whereas Google is primarily about
searching. Yahoo! presents news like a newspaper and Google is used to search
news.
Yahoo! is a very successful company, with its core business focused on the media
content and web portal. Yahoo! delivers content, communication, social networking,
and advertising through personalized portals and the unique combination of
Science + Art + Scale (Yahoo!, 2011). However, Yahoo!s weakness is the
divergence in investment and development in its core businesses (Cybion, 2008).
Yahoo! is not exactly a media company, nor is it a technology company, and hence
they ended up being something that was neither here nor there (Graham, P.,
2010).
Clausse, S. 14
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Yahoo!
Google Talk
Yahoo! Messenger
Google+
Yahoo! Companion
Desktop
Ad Network
Web Browser
Google Chrome
Video Content
Pictures/Images Storage
Picasa
Flickr
Checkout and
Yahoo! Shopping
No Yahoo! Documents
Translate
Yahoo! Games
Calendar
Maps
Shopping
Business Software
Mobile Apps
Mobile Software
Mobile Hardware
Home & Office Tools
Games
Google chrome
TV
eBooks
Ebookstore
Clausse, S. 15
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
As figure 5 shows, Yahoo! and Google have very similar features and provide mostly
the same services. Based on figure 5, there are four features that Google has that
Yahoo! does not: eBooks, mobile hardware and software, and a web browser. This is
mainly because Yahoo! is not a technology company; it focuses mainly on media
content, whereas Google is purely a technological innovator always seeking to take
the lead with new technological features.
Yahoo! and Google are always trying to grow a differentiation advantage over each
other. In 2006, Google bought YouTube to increase its social content, and Yahoo!
reacted by engaging in a partnership with well-known selling company, eBay. Later
in 2009, Google launched its own web browser, Google Chrome. Not to stay behind,
Yahoo! formed a partnership with Microsoft to have Yahoo! as the main portal for
Internet Explorer. Then, in 2010, Google developed a social networking service,
Google Buzz, while at the same time, Yahoo! partnered with Twitter to expand
Yahoo! into the social networking services.
Yahoo! gains competitive advantage with its media content and especially with
Yahoo! mail. Yahoo! reported statistics having 302 million mail users worldwide.
Research from Return Path reported that Gmail finished 2010 with roughly 193
million mail users. Overall, Yahoo! aims to keep more than half a billion people
connected and to connect advertisers to the consumers (Yahoo!, 2011) through
its web portal. On the other hand, Googles goal as a search engine is to provide fast
answers, so it aims to have people leave our website as quickly as possible
(Google, 2011). Clearly Googles search engine is the best internet searching tool,
giving Google a competitive advantage, but the search engine directs users out of
Googles pages, hence why Google also focuses on developing other technologies
such as Google Chrome, mobile software and hardware which keep it at the top of
the market.
Clausse, S. 16
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Clausse, S. 17
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
The overall strategies of each company are next outlined to further distinguish the
differences in strategic management.
Google:
Dominate the cyberspace by building and acquiring its own social media
(YouTube, and Google +)
Technological innovator.
97% of revenue is from ads out of which 70% is from the search engine.
Yahoo!:
Partners with major social media, like Tweeter, to drive traffic to its website,
Content and media company, its a web portal not just a search engine.
Clausse, S. 18
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
4. Forecast
By looking into Yahoo!s and Googles strategies and considering the previous
effects on both, it is possible to forecast their future performance.
4.1 Forecast Performance
The internet is a rapidly changing market, where businesses can grow or die out very
quickly. The internet has been growing significantly in the last decades, and it will
continue to do so, as one cannot imagine the future without it. However, the future of
Yahoo! and Google is uncertain.
It can be seen from Googles strategies that they are already envisioning the future
and focusing on technologies that will keep them market leaders. The future of
search engines probably lies within the mobile phone industry. Google has
developed Android and it is working on Google phones and applications. Yahoo! has
itself developed applications for mobile use and it has integrated itself with Apple
products, but it has not shown any indications of developing their own mobile phone
operative system. Yahoo! could succeed by forming partnerships with phone
companies to include Yahoo! within the phones, like they are already doing with
Apples IPhones.
The rapidly evolving social networks also should be kept in mind for both Yahoo! and
Google. Yahoo! users can already connect via Yahoo! with the main social networks
(i.e. Facebook and twitter), and Google has developed its own social network,
Google+, which makes connecting on the web more like connecting in the real
world, sharing thoughts, links and photos (Google+, 2011), taking search engines to
a whole new level.
Yahoo!s future performance aims at maintaining users constantly connected through
the Yahoo! portal which connects with social networks, search engines and all other
services within Yahoo!, creating an unique multifunctional web portal.
Googles future performance is based upon Google producing their own computers
and operative systems, with Google Chrome and all Google applications, because
from Googles perspective, the more uses a person has for Googles services, the
Clausse, S. 19
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
more opportunity there will be to show them ads (Morrow, B., 2008). Google could
possibly diversify into many technological industries, dominating the cyberspace.
4.2 Investment recommendations
Investing in either Yahoo! or Google seems beneficial; however it depends on the
type of investment. For advertising firms for example, Yahoo! is a better bet, as
Yahoo! aims at partnering with them. Google has been growing tremendously over
the last few years, thus investing in Google shares could be profitable as Google has
fairly extended product lines and it is expanding into the mobile, social network and
web browsers industry. Nonetheless, almost all of the revenue Google receives
comes from its ad network (Valor, J., 2004), presenting a good reason not to invest
in Google stock.
Yahoo!s future appears uncertain as Yahoo! is not developing a web browser or
moving into the mobile phone industry, and because the internet market is a rapidly
changing market, Yahoo! could easily vanish as a media company. Google, on the
contrary, has Google Chrome, Android and Google Phones, as well as other
services to diversify itself from the search engine industry. A new and better search
engine could be invented anytime soon, causing Googles search engine to fade, but
it is these other features and technologies that Google has which will keep it alive.
Furthermore, theres always the possibility of Google developing its own operative
system, to compete with Microsoft and Apple, whereas Yahoo! does not have these
technological backups to keep it alive in case of a big change in the internet
industry.
In summary, Google portrays itself as a better investment than Yahoo! as it is
already the market leader and it keeps growing with its broad and differentiated
product lines. Google currently dominates a young, explosively growing market,
which has more potential than almost any other market (invest-your-moneynow.com, 2009), making Google a potentially profitable source of investment.
Clausse, S. 20
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
5. Conclusion
The internet market is growing more competitive, where companies cannot be
guaranteed success. Every company has to maintain continuous efforts to develop
innovative ideas in-order to remain profitable. This is the case in the internet industry
with Yahoo! and Google who are constantly striving to develop innovative ideas in
order to grow. Yahoo! and Google are both successful, but in different terms.
Yahoo! is the premier digital media company (Yahoo!, 2011), and is better than
Google with its web content. Yahoo!s news portal is bigger, better structured and
better presented than Googles. Yahoo! owns OMG, a celebrity news hub, which is
quite successful and differentiates Yahoo! from Google. Yahoo! is better as a web
portal, presenting information and retaining users to their website.
On the other side, Google does not write its own news, nor does it present news as
qualitatively as Yahoo! because that is not their focus. Google is primarily a search
engine, and that is what they are best at. Googles technology clearly surpasses
Yahoo!s technologies by a great margin. Google has better technological products
such as Android, Chrome, Google Earth, and Dropbox to name a few. Google is
constantly developing new online tools and services, whereas Yahoo! focuses
more on its core business, being a media company, as technology is no longer its
strength. Yahoo! should be more innovative, flexible/fast to capture/retain the
market (Corporate Strategy Forum, 2006).
Based on their core competences, both Yahoo! and Google each implement
their own strategy to succeed, where Google is a search engine and Yahoo!
is a portal with a search engine product (Card, D., 2006).
Clausse, S. 21
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
Card, D., Carlson, N., (2006) Analysts: You cant compare Yahoo! to Google.
[Online] Available from:
http://www.internetnews.com/xSP/article.php/3647916/Analysts+You+Cant+Compar
e+Yahoo!+to+Google.htm [Accessed 14th November 2011]
Clancy, C., (2011) How do Search Engines Like Google Make Money? [Online]
Available from:
http://www.netregistry.com.au/blog/seo/how-do-search-engines-like-google-makemoney
[Accessed 16th November 2011]
Corporate Strategy Forum (2006) Google Inc Vs Yahoo! Inc - Strategies : Summary
of Case Studies. [Online] Available from:
http://corporatestrategy-forum.blogspot.com/2006/05/google-inc-vs-Yahoo!-incstrategies.html [Accessed 14th November 2011]
Cybion, (2008) Yahoo! vs. Google. [Online] Available from:
http://www.veille.com/IMG/pdf/Cybion-Yahoo!-Google.pdf
[Accessed 14th November 2011]
Google. (2011) Corporate Information Company. [Online] Available from:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/about/corporate/company/index.html
[Accessed 14th November 2011]
Google+ (2011) A Quick Look at Google+. [Online] Available from:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/+/learnmore/ [Accessed 14th November 2011]
Clausse, S. 22
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913
John. Mbtgoogle2. (2008) Porters Five Forces for Google. [Online] Available from:
http://mbtgoogle2.blogspot.com/2008/09/porter-5-forces-for-google.html
[Accessed 11th November 2011]
Parr, B., (2010) Google vs. Yahoo!: Who Has the Right Social Strategy? [Online]
Available from: http://mashable.com/2010/03/08/Yahoo!-google-social-colum/
[Accessed 15th November 2011]
Valor, J., (2004) Investing in Google: Am I Feeling Lucky? [Online] Available from:
http://www.iese.edu/en/files/Art_Valor_Google_May04-translated_tcm4-5647.pdf
[Accessed 14th November 2011]
Viney, D., (2007) Search Engine History - Web Search Before Google. [Online]
Available from:
http://www.seo-expert-services.co.uk/blog/posts/search-engine-history-%11-websearch-before-google.html
[Accessed 11th November 2011]
Clausse, S. 23
Candidate Number: P13986
Student Number: 0918913