Eric Schmidt Floats Idea Of A Yahoo-Google Search Partnership

google-bing-yahoo-logosApple, Google and mapping apps weren’t the only thing that Eric Schmidt spoke about today in Tokyo.

Forbes is reporting that Schmidt also floated the idea of a Google-Yahoo search partnership. Dow Jones reporter Kenneth Maxwell was at the event, and shared this statement with Forbes:

Yes, I can confirm, Eric Schmidt definitely said they’d be interested in working with Yahoo US. He also said nothing doing for the time being, but they would be interested. It was also mentioned to him that there is new management at Yahoo US with a Google connection. But he played it pretty straight…. He also said they had expressed this interest to Yahoo before on a number of occasions.

That’s right – it’s not really a new idea and it’s also an obvious one; of course Google would love to be Yahoo’s search partner. The two companies briefly had a deal on the table in 2008, but Google pulled out over fears that the government would declare Google a monopoly.

Yahoo and Microsoft ended up striking a deal, instead, and that remains in place today. But Yahoo has an out: It can cancel the deal soon after March 31, 2013, when Microsoft’s revenue guarantees come to an end. For more on that, see Danny Sullivan’s story from about two months ago: As The Yahoo-Microsoft Search Alliance Falls Short, Could A Yahoo-Google Deal Emerge?

The new piece in all of this, of course, is that Marissa Mayer is now in charge of Yahoo. Her ties to Google could make her just as interested as Schmidt in striking a search deal … or it could make her more willing to take on the gargantuan task of getting Yahoo back in the search business on its own. Mayer is reportedly briefing Yahoo employees on her company vision today, so we all may know more soon.

Related Topics: Channel: Industry | Google & Yahoo Ad Deal | Google: Business Issues | Microsoft & Yahoo Search Deal | Top News | Yahoo: Business Issues

Sponsored


About The Author: is Editor-In-Chief of Search Engine Land. His news career includes time spent in TV, radio, and print journalism. His web career continues to include a small number of SEO and social media consulting clients, as well as regular speaking engagements at marketing events around the U.S. He recently launched a site dedicated to Google Glass called Glass Almanac and also blogs at Small Business Search Marketing. Matt can be found on Twitter at @MattMcGee and/or on Google Plus. You can read Matt's disclosures on his personal blog.

Connect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn



SearchCap:

Get all the top search stories emailed daily!  

Share

Other ways to share:
 

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion. Comments using foul language, being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion will be deleted. Comments may also be removed if they are posted from anonymous accounts. You can read more about our comments policy here.
  • PeterCaoBlue

    Q&A for flaws in the handling of such criminal cases by certain police officers presented by a Schmidt and Thrun supporter at [i.doubt.it/tag/sebastian-thrun/]

    “Dr. Kelly Arthur of the Sonoma County coroner’s office, is reported to have reviewed it and said she stood by her original finding that there were not any signs of trauma.” — that still would not gurantee a suicide conclusion, wouldn’t it? where/when/how did those trauma come into being, then? Can Dr. Kelly Arthur explain? or would it be wiser for the officer who drew conclusion of suicide to make sure where/when/how did those trauma come into being before drawing conclusion of suicide?
    ——————-
    “Except Peter Cao, who asserts that Mengyao Zhou was murdered by or with the help of Schmidt and Thrun, in order to intimidate him personally.” — Schmidt there were not any signs of trauma.” — that still would not gurantee a suicide conclusion, wouldn’t it? where/when/how did those trauma come into being, then? Can Dr. Kelly Arthur explain? or would it be wiser for the officer who drew conclusion of suicide to make sure where/when/how did those trauma come into being before drawing conclusion of suicide?
    ——————-
    “Except Peter Cao, who asserts that Mengyao Zhou was murdered by or with the
    help of Schmidt and Thrun, in order to intimidate him personally.” — Schmidt did send me life threatening message for sake of Thrun during their fight with Stanford people. I said they killed May Zhou to intimidate me and to terrorize Stanford people; you omitted the serious part. My statement is far more reasonable than police can give, don’t you agree?
    ——————–
    “… and an email that Zhou sent to her 16-year-old sister as “consistent with a goodbye note.” — can we see such an email before we could believe it? How much good-bye is there in it? digital messages could be unreliable, by the way

    ———————

    But then you can’t expect someone killing themselves to make choices that appear rational to others. If it’s not tasteless to speculate, perhaps she felt ashamed and wanted to hide herself.”
    — Is that the way you describe death of an innocent girl as May Zhou is? Shame on you!
    — Would the officer in charge of May Zhou’s case agree? How to get connect with such an officer? I have serious stuff to report

  • Jenksy

    Whoa unto such an unholy alliance, lol.

    (Somewhat) more seriously: how would Google + Bing cause Google monopoly concerns but Google + Yahoo! would not?

    Oh, and Marissa Mayer is a Google plant. That’s what my gut tells me, anyway.

    ^Only half-joking, there, as well, that last line.

  • http://blog.clayburngriffin.com/ Clayburn Griffin

    This is a great idea for Google, and would be the death knell for Bing.

  • Jenksy

    What it would be is another nail in the coffin of transparency and user choice.

  • Maurice Walshe

    Um some one needs to get HR to tell Erric to cut down on the Jazz Cigarettes – when your under investigation for anti trust you do not make silly remarks like this – Hes not related to Mitt Romney is he.

  • http://blog.clayburngriffin.com/ Clayburn Griffin

    Nobody cares about that. Google is the result of user choice. We choose it. If you don’t like it, there’s always Duck Duck Go.

  • Steve B

    Let the FTC investigations begin….if this coupled with the monopolizing of Google search listings for paid and google sponsored results, does not scream of Monopoly, then I don’t know what does. They should just have Larry Page wear a monocle and collect his $200 bucks for passing go. Just don’t roll three doubles in a roll….

  • Jenksy

    (Red herring/Straw man given that I was specifically referencing monopolization of the Search space, but I’ll play)
    Everybody cares about that. The success of Google is the result of myriad factors aside from ‘choice’ that, should Joe and Sally websurfer become fully cognizant of, would dramatically affect Google as peoples’ default engine.

    The ‘love it or leave it’ mantra of Google sycophants has a ridiculous, vainglorious and empty ring to the ears of nearly everyone who has given these things much ethical examination.

    Of course I can go to Duck Duck Go. The reason why you saying this is a vacuous rhetorical jingle is that the ethical dilemmas Google continues to raise at every turn would remain even if I did.

    Monopolies, be they actual and definitive monopolies, or, monopoLIZERS, are not good for anyone; and, have never – not ever, not even once in the history of business – come to the fore by the choice of the people to whom a company is beholden to distribute their goods and services. Even when they have had the best product. They do it by stealth, lack of transparency, disinformation, and money going into the hands of the ‘right’ people.

    Just like Google.

  • http://blog.clayburngriffin.com/ Clayburn Griffin

    Boo hoo. We get what we deserve. Nobody is forcing us to use Google.

  • http://www.bestbackgroundchecks.com/ Dave Jordan

    Seriously? There is no other choice. Bing sucks, Yahoo isn’t even an honorable mention, and the smaller engines are unknown. You might also want to take a look at the SERP’s next time you do a search. You’ll find fewer truly relevant results from informed individuals, organizations, etc, and more results featuring big brands. I’ve also had a number of people complain they’re actually having difficulty finding relevant results more often than not.

Get Our News, Everywhere!

Daily Email:

Follow Search Engine Land on Twitter @sengineland Like Search Engine Land on Facebook Follow Search Engine Land on Google+ Get the Search Engine Land Feed Connect with Search Engine Land on LinkedIn Check out our Tumblr! See us on Pinterest

 
 

Click to watch SMX conference video

Join us at one of our SMX or MarTech events:

United States

Europe

Australia & China

Learn more about: SMX | MarTech


Free Daily Search News Recap!

SearchCap is a once-per-day newsletter update - sign up below and get the news delivered to you!

 


 

Search Engine Land Periodic Table of SEO Success Factors

Get Your Copy
Read The Full SEO Guide