Google Shopping to charge retailers - The Business Journal Google Shopping to charge retailers - The Business Journal
free web site traffic and promotion

Friday, June 1, 2012

Google Shopping to charge retailers - The Business Journal

Google Shopping to charge retailers - The Business Journal

Google Inc.  is converting its Google Shopping site into a paid service for retailers, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) will require retailers to bid to display their products on the site, which is free now.

The move, part of Google's effort to bring in more revenue from its search engine, will also affect how Shopping search results are displayed, the report notes.

Google is No. 1 for search, but trails far behind Amazon.com and eBay for shopping searches.

bizWatch

You must have a bizjournals account to follow a company.
Please Log In or Register.



Shopping police illegal parking caught on camera (From Watford Observer) - Watford Observer

Police caught on camera parking on yellow lines for shopping trips in Watford

Police officers in Watford have been caught on camera for the second time in two weeks parking on double yellow lines to go on shopping jaunts to supermarkets.

The town’s force is facing a mounting outcry after officers were snapped on Friday parking up on a pavement in central Watford for a trip to Iceland.

The revelation comes just a week after pictures emerged of police illegally parking in St Albans Road to visit a Tesco Express.

The pictures have been branded “disgraceful” by one former police detective who said the abuses damaged the force’s standing with the public.

Watford’s Chief Inspector Nick Caveney has also come down hard on the practice, saying the officers involved have been reprimanded and prosecuted.

The town’s top policeman also described the two incidents as a “rare lapse” in the behaviour of his committed and dedicated force.

The latest picture taken by a Watford resident who saw officers park their car on the pavement in Albert Road South, a stone’s throw away from Watford Police Station, where there are double yellow lines.

The resident, who asked not to be named, said: “A patrol car pulled up with all four wheels on the pavement, two officers jumped out slammed the door shut and left the engine running, presumably with the keys inside.

“I thought they were going to make an arrest but they strolled over to Iceland to do a bit of shopping.

“They emerged from the shop 10 minutes later with a bag of shopping. I wouldn’t mind but it would be quicker to walk from the police station in Shady Lane than to drive there.”

A retired Metropolitan Police detective, Terry Hymans, who lives in Rickmansworth, said he felt there was no excuse for officers misusing parking privileges.

He also said actions like the ones caught on camera damaged the public’s trust in the police.

“I think it is disgraceful personally,” he said “I don’t think there is any excuse. This is part of the reason people have little regard for police officers today.

“It sends out a signal of don’t do as I do, do as I say. People will naturally assume they (the police) all do it and that is not true.”

The first pictures police parking on yellow lines was first captured by Abbots Langley resident Kevin Brown who submitted them to the Watford Observer last week.

He said he was “amazed” to see an officer park on a double yellow lines on a pavement in St Albans Road before spending seven minutes in Tesco Express and emerging with a shopping bag.

Following the revelations Chief Inspector for Watford, Nick Caveney said he was “shocked and surprised” to see the pictures.

He said: “As police officers, we have a very clear responsibility to operate totally within the law, whether this is when dealing with people we have arrested or while using a public highway in a police vehicle.

We have to set a good example to our communities and these incidents clearly do not. I am glad these have been brought to my attention and have since spoken with the officers concerned to establish the circumstances.

“Had they been responding to an emergency, illegal parking is justified and allowed, but this was not the case.

The officers concerned have been reprimanded for their behaviour and just like any other member of the public, are being prosecuted for their actions.”

“I’m very proud of our team here in Watford who work beyond the call of duty on a daily basis in order to keep our communities safe.

“These incidents are a rare lapse in an otherwise committed, dedicated and upstanding team.”

Comments(14)

TRT says...
10:02am Fri 1 Jun 12

Reprimanded? They should be fined same as the rest of us! TRT

Hornets number 12 fan says...
10:04am Fri 1 Jun 12

Considering Iceland has it's own car park this is even more stupid on the officers part! And if I or you left our vehicle parked with the engine running the same Police officer would be down on us like a ton of bricks! Sort it Out Watford Police! Hornets number 12 fan

Taximan says...
11:07am Fri 1 Jun 12

Well done Mr Brown of Abbots Langley, this makes a change to drag the fuzz in rather than being dragged in by the fuzz! Taximan

AWatfordTaxpayer says...
11:34am Fri 1 Jun 12

I was in Watford with my family when I saw a number of mounted police chatting to each other outside McDonalds near the flyover. Two patrols had met up.

One of the horses then did his business right there in the middle of the pedestrian walkway, a few yards from the entrance to McDonalds, leaving a load of manure for any lucky gardener passing by, or any unlucky pedestrian going by, if you get my drift.

I asked the rider, a policewoman, what she was going to do about it. She replied it was a job for the council and that she was going to do nothing about it. After chatting a while longer, the riders went on their separate ways, leaving the steaming deposit for the people of Watford to enjoy at their leisure.

As a dog owner, I would be liable to a £1000 fine for leaving a dog poo on the pavement. The police leave something altogether more impressive and just ignored it, and that outside a popular fast food restaurant.

It really is one rule for us, and one for them, isn't it? The policewoman was not embarrassed at all, it was really just a case of "tough luck, shoppers".

I took photos to send to the council, of the horse in the act and the mess left afterwards, but decided not to as I doubted they would care or do anything about it.

I must admit, I was very disappointed in the police for leaving this steaming manure in the middle of the street and doing nothing at all about it. The policewoman just tried to ignore it until I brought it to her attention, whereupon she dismissed it.
I was in Watford with my family when I saw a number of mounted police chatting to each other outside McDonalds near the flyover. Two patrols had met up. One of the horses then did his business right there in the middle of the pedestrian walkway, a few yards from the entrance to McDonalds, leaving a load of manure for any lucky gardener passing by, or any unlucky pedestrian going by, if you get my drift. I asked the rider, a policewoman, what she was going to do about it. She replied it was a job for the council and that she was going to do nothing about it. After chatting a while longer, the riders went on their separate ways, leaving the steaming deposit for the people of Watford to enjoy at their leisure. As a dog owner, I would be liable to a £1000 fine for leaving a dog poo on the pavement. The police leave something altogether more impressive and just ignored it, and that outside a popular fast food restaurant. It really is one rule for us, and one for them, isn't it? The policewoman was not embarrassed at all, it was really just a case of "tough luck, shoppers". I took photos to send to the council, of the horse in the act and the mess left afterwards, but decided not to as I doubted they would care or do anything about it. I must admit, I was very disappointed in the police for leaving this steaming manure in the middle of the street and doing nothing at all about it. The policewoman just tried to ignore it until I brought it to her attention, whereupon she dismissed it. AWatfordTaxpayer

Taximan says...
11:47am Fri 1 Jun 12

Sounds like a load of crap to me. Taximan

Reg Edit says...
11:53am Fri 1 Jun 12

Clearly the horse was leaving it for the council as a contribution to Liberal thinking and policymaking? I would say that they have clearly since acted on a lot of the content of this contribution, what with 20's plenty and the Cassiobury CPZ. In fact, I struggle to think of any policies from the local council that are not complete H@r$3 S***. Reg Edit

Reg Edit says...
11:59am Fri 1 Jun 12

Maybe the Lib Dems, instead of posing for election photos besides potholes (which incidentally are the domain of the County Council, nothing to do with the local council), could set up a crack team of councillors who would be ready to pose next to a steaming pile of horse-doo and then get a shovel and a sack and scoop it up. Then the greens could take it away and make use of it. There, something useful for the Lib Dems and Greens to do, instead of messing up this town with their dotty ideas. Reg Edit

garston tony says...
12:12pm Fri 1 Jun 12

[quote][p][bold]TRT[/bold] wrote: Reprimanded? They should be fined same as the rest of us![/p][/quote]The chief officer did say reprimanded AND prosecuted. I'm assuming that means fines any of us would have received so they have been treated the same as the rest of us TRT. It's always a shame when people leave themselves stupidly open to critisism. I think on the whole the police do a great job in the circumstances they are given, but stuff like this just gives ammunition to those that want to knock them garston tony

TRT says...
12:25pm Fri 1 Jun 12

@Garston Tony. As usual, the text of the article has changed and expanded since I originally made my comment, which was moments after it appeared on the site. TRT

garston tony says...
1:05pm Fri 1 Jun 12

Fair enough TRT, its good that they do make corrections but can cause some confusing comments hey! garston tony

LSC says...
1:10pm Fri 1 Jun 12

Am I the only one who thinks this is a bit of a fuss about nothing? Probably the ONLY perk of being a police officer is being able to park where you like. The rest of the time is spent on horrible shifts dealing with drunk and abusive low-life scum and then filling out 32 forms that ensure there was no abuse of human rights and catalogue the approximate race of everyone within half a mile of any incedent. Piling head first into fights with drugged-up possibly armed psycopaths, with a small stick and a hat as their only defence. Yes, they are not above the law and parking badly is a silly thing to do PR-wise, but come on people. Take a look around you. If the police parking on double yellow lines is the biggest injustice you witness this week then I envy you very much indeed. LSC

TRT says...
1:14pm Fri 1 Jun 12

@LSC. It's broken window syndrome. They are supposed to set a good example to the rest. Let he who is without sin etc. etc. TRT

onlyonerodthomas says...
1:22pm Fri 1 Jun 12

last month whilst walking to buy a paper and crossing the road(st albans rd) i noticed a uniformed police officer in an astra texting whilst driving in slow traffic!!!.unbelieva ble,you couldnt make this up.i wonder how many fines he has issued in his time for a similar offence. onlyonerodthomas

Maclanx says...
2:57pm Fri 1 Jun 12

[quote][p][bold]LSC[/bold] wrote: Am I the only one who thinks this is a bit of a fuss about nothing? Probably the ONLY perk of being a police officer is being able to park where you like. The rest of the time is spent on horrible shifts dealing with drunk and abusive low-life scum and then filling out 32 forms that ensure there was no abuse of human rights and catalogue the approximate race of everyone within half a mile of any incedent. Piling head first into fights with drugged-up possibly armed psycopaths, with a small stick and a hat as their only defence. Yes, they are not above the law and parking badly is a silly thing to do PR-wise, but come on people. Take a look around you. If the police parking on double yellow lines is the biggest injustice you witness this week then I envy you very much indeed.[/p][/quote]There are lots of greater injustices - trouble is the image is that police don't appear to care or do anything about it. So on top of that when they think they can break the laws that they are supposed to enforce it really takes the mick. Another example is parking outside KFc on St Albans Rd, on the cycle path, so often I've lost count. Maclanx


Google's big changes to shopping business - Stuff

Google has unveiled major changes to its shopping business that will likely prove controversial in the e-commerce world.

Starting in the spring, product search results for users in the United States will be influenced by how much retailers and advertisers pay, a company executive said. In the past, product search results were based mainly on relevance and the program was free.

Google, the world's most popular Internet search engine, will rename its service Google Shopping from the current Google Product Search.

"We are starting to transition Google Product Search in the US to a purely commercial model," said Sameer Samat, vice president of product management at Google Shopping. "This will give merchants greater control over where their products appear on Google Shopping."

Google has been in the product listing and search business for about a decade. During that time, it has provided merchants with free access to shoppers. The company made money by running paid product search ads along with the organic, or unpaid, product listings, according to Eric Best, CEO of Mercent, which helps retailers sell through Google and other e-commerce websites such as Amazon.com and eBay.

"Today, that model goes away," Best said. "It's a very big deal."

The changes may ultimately help Google extract more revenue and profit from its retail advertisers, which account for up to 40 percent of Google's advertising base, according to Best and others.

Google Product Search drives about US$650 million in annual sales in the United States and about US$1.3 billion globally, ChannelAdvisor, which helps merchants sell online, estimated on Thursday.

"That's the free sales that are going to disappear unless they decide to pay," Scot Wingo, CEO of ChannelAdvisor, said.

Under Google's new system, retailers may have to spend an extra US$130 million a year in the United States and US$270 million globally, to fill that sales hole, he estimated.

"The winner in this is Google," Wingo said. "That extra spending is pure margin and will drop to earnings per share."

Some of the retailers ChannelAdvisor works with are questioning Google's motives, Wingo added.

The changes will kick in by October, which does not give merchants much time to adjust to the new system in time for the crucial holiday shopping season, he said.

For retailers, there are upsides and downsides, according to Mercent's Best.

"The downside is that retailers are going to have to pay for performance when it comes to e-commerce traffic and revenue driven by or through Google," Best said. "The free traffic is disappearing."

The changes may be controversial in the Internet community because Google's search results have traditionally not been influenced by money, Best said.

"Pay-for-placement to some degree is an alternative to purely organic relevancy results," he said. "The fact that shopping results will be more closely tied to bid-for-placement will not sit well with all advertisers."

The new program will help retailers make their products more visible to shoppers searching on Google. The old system was difficult for Google to police because retailers could list a lot of products for free. If they have to pay, it may reduce clutter, Best said.

"Having a commercial relationship with merchants will encourage them to keep their product information fresh and up to date," Google's Samat wrote in a blog on Thursday. "Higher quality data - whether it's accurate prices, the latest offers or product availability - should mean better shopping results for users, which in turn should create higher quality traffic for merchants."

The quality argument is suspect, according to ChannelAdvisor's Wingo.

"That's a slippery slope because this could apply to websites, not just product listings," he said. "Why have organic search at all? Anyone can set up a website and use it for spammy purposes. That's what Google is supposed to deal with."

Amazon and eBay will likely be affected by Google's changes because the e-commerce giants currently get a lot of free traffic from Google Product Search. In the future, they will have to pay for that, Wingo said.

However, some merchants may decide to list more products for sale on Amazon's and eBay's online marketplaces, which would be a boon for those companies, he added.

- Reuters

SHARE



New cross-border shopping rules take effect - CTV

TORONTO — Whether preparing to put their credit cards through their paces or bracing for a brutal assault on their business's bottom line, Canadians across the country are preparing to usher in a new chapter in their relationship with U.S. retailers.

New rules governing the amount of money Canadians are allowed to spend south of the border take effect today, both firing consumers with enthusiasm and filling businesses with foreboding.

The changes --previously announced in this year's federal budget -- raise the amount of money Canadians are allowed to spend duty free during most cross-border trips.

In most cases, the increases are substantial. Canadians who could only declare $50 of purchased goods after an overnight trip across the border are now able to bring $200 worth of merchandise back home.

The limit has doubled from $400 to $800 for people on a jaunt of between two and seven days, while the limit for those gone for more than a week increases from $750 to $800.

Stephen Fine, founder of online shopping resource crossbordershopping.ca, said would-be bargain-hunters are keen to take advantage of the new limits.

Shoppers had begun mobilizing to pressure the government into changing the personal exemption rules, he said, adding the 24-hour duty free limit was a frequent bone of contention.

Fine said the government's new regulations have addressed those grievances, but have failed to eliminate the main source of inconvenience. Canadians are still barred from bringing back any duty-free goods purchased on a same-day excursion to the U.S., in sharp contrast to Americans who are entitled to $200 worth of exemptions when crossing the border from Canada.

"There's been a lot of disappointment about that from our audience because the majority of cross-border shoppers are same-day shoppers," Fine said, adding trips of less than 24 hours make up about half of all visits to the U.S.

The lack of a same-day exemption, Fine said, will almost offset the impact of the other rule changes on cross-border traffic.

Officials at some of the country's border crossings agreed the effects won't be easy to spot right away.

Matt Davison, spokesman for the Peace Bridge Authority that oversees the crossing from Fort Erie, Ont. into Buffalo, N.Y., said traffic is expected to remain steady despite the higher limits.

"Weekends are always busy times anyway," he said. "We don't expect to see anything out of the ordinary."

An employee at the duty free shop at Woodstock, N.B., who declined to provide her name, said store staff haven't taken any steps to prepare for an influx of cross-border dealfinders.

Even if it is business as usual for those who man the gateways to the U.S., some companies based in border towns say the government's new regulations don't bode well for their survival.

Marq Smith, owner of motorcycle shop Western PowerSports in Langley, B.C., said he's already lost thousands of dollars worth of business to cross-border shopping over the years.

Raising the duty free limits, he said, is a perfect way to take money away from Canadian business owners.

"We don't get the tax income as a country or a province. That's why I don't understand what the government is doing," Smith said. "Why would they take money out of their pockets, which of course is our pockets, by enhancing the ability to bring goods across the border?"

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has previously responded to similar charges by saying the exemptions had not been adjusted for inflation in decades, adding the higher limits would also free up customs officials to focus on security issues.

But Smith's concerns were recently echoed in a report from BMO Capital Markets. Deputy chief economist Douglas Porter suggested the new rules would lead to a spike in the number of cross-border shoppers, which would in turn accelerate the bleeding from a retail sector that already loses between five and 10 per cent of its business to U.S.-based rivals.

"Even at a conservative estimate of five per cent, we are talking over $20 billion a year," Porter said in his report. "If correct, that represents a real drain on domestic retail sales, employment and government revenues - a drain that looks (likely) to deepen."




Drivers won't benefit from falling oil prices - Citywire.co.uk
Drivers won't benefit from falling oil prices

The price of oil fell below the $100 a barrel mark on Friday for the first time since last October, but a weaker pound means drivers won’t save a penny at the pumps.

A barrel of Brent crude fell to $98, down from $120 a barrel last month.

The 2p saving drivers should see at the pumps as a result of lower oil prices, however, has been 'knocked out' because the pound has fallen in value by 4% since the middle of May, the AA explained.

'Had the pound remained worth $1.61 instead of around $1.53 now, further falls in the NW Europe wholesale price of petrol (taking it below $1000 a tonne for the first time since January) would have saved drivers a further 2p a litre,' the AA said.

Meanwhile, retailers have also yet to pass on the full 10p a litre saving from previous falls in wholesale prices to drivers.

Drivers have seen a saving of just seven and a half pence per litre at the pumps, Luke Bosdet of the AA explained. So while a weaker pound means they will not benefit from the most recent drop in wholesale prices, they are still owed a two and a half pence saving from the wholesale price falls seen since mid-April.

Yesterday the average price of petrol in the UK stood at 134.92p a litre, down from the record high of 142.8p seen in April. The cost of diesel, meanwhile, has fallen from 147.93p to 140.52p.

Earlier this week, the government warned fuel companies that they were being given 'one last chance' to improve transparency in the market.

Retailers have long been accused of responding to increases in wholesale prices much more quickly than price falls – prices shoot up like a rocket and fall like a feather, said Bosdet.

Transport secretary Justine Greening has now ordered retailers to set up a code of practice that allows drivers to monitor changes in petrol and diesel prices. If they don't, the government has said it will implement legislation.

Retailers claim that the industry does not understand the complex pricing mechanism, said Bosdet. Yet this fall in the price of oil is a perfect example of why greater transparency in the market would benefit suppliers as well as drivers.

On the one hand transparency would show drivers that a quarter of the savings from the original fall in wholesale prices was yet to be reflected at the pump, while on the other retailers and suppliers accused of pocketing the benefits of falling oil prices, would be able to defend themselves as to why a weaker pound means there will be no added savings.  



Shopping on Google? Only Advertised Items to Appear - Newser

(Newser) – Google Product Search will soon become Google Shopping, and the new name will be accompanied by a big, and potentially irksome, change to the service. In a nutshell, companies will now have to pay for their position in search results. "We are starting to transition Google Product Search in the US to a purely commercial model," a VP tells Reuters. "This will give merchants greater control over where their products appear on Google Shopping." Up until now, the service had been free—and the shift is "a very big deal," says an e-commerce insider.

Product Search currently leads to an estimated $650 million in annual sales, so companies have a lot at stake: "That's the free sales that are going to disappear unless they decide to pay," says another online sales expert. "The winner in this is Google." To see that level of sales, one expert predicts merchants will have to spend $270 million a year on advertising. But Google defends the plan: "Having a commercial relationship with merchants will encourage them to keep their product information fresh and up to date," the VP blogs. "Higher quality data ... should mean better shopping results for users, which in turn should create higher quality traffic for merchants." The change will go live by October.



No comments:

Post a Comment