
Bing Now Powers 30% of US Searches - sandaru1
http://thenextweb.com/microsoft/2011/04/11/bing-now-powers-30-of-us-searches/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheNextWeb+%28The+Next+Web+All+Stories%29
======
chaosmachine
These numbers are bogus, as far as I can tell.

I help run a popular music forum that gets over a million pageviews every
month, and our search referral numbers show Google at 98.7%. The numbers are
similar across 10 other domains I own.

I challenge anyone to show me a site that gets 30% of their search engine hits
from Bing. Seriously, if your Bing stats are even close to 30%, please share
with us.

~~~
patio11
To my surprise, for March, Bing is at 15% and Yahoo is at 11% for BCC organic
searches. My demographic is older, female-r, and more middle American than
most of y'alls are. (Even with that, I cannot remember BingHoo being above 20%
in _years_.)

~~~
nostrademons
When did it jump up? Do you know of anything they did that'd make them
suddenly more popular?

~~~
patio11
You guys should hire me for SEO consulting if you can't answer this one in-
house. ;)

Jokes aside: BingHoo share, followed by comparison to Google (which makes it
harder to see).

[http://images1.bingocardcreator.com/blog-images/hn/nostra-
an...](http://images1.bingocardcreator.com/blog-images/hn/nostra-answer-2.png)

[http://images1.bingocardcreator.com/blog-images/hn/nostra-
an...](http://images1.bingocardcreator.com/blog-images/hn/nostra-answer-1.png)

I'm not specifically aware of anything material which would have materially
affected BCC's performance on BingHoo in the last 3 months, and the big
candidate for affecting performance at Google (Panda or whatever you guys call
content farming internally) largely seems to have missed me. When you compare
year-to-year to back out the seasonality, though, both Yahoo and Bing show
strong growth in my Jan/Feb/March numbers and Google growth is much more
muted. Feel free to backchannel me if you want the spreadsheet.

For reasons known only to the Excel gods, the X axis considers the last data
point (March) to be in February.

~~~
nostrademons
I suspect that if you wanted a job at Google it would not be terribly
difficult for you to get one. ;-)

Anyway, I bet there's probably somebody in search quality whose job it is to
track these numbers, but I don't know who it is, and it's easier just to ask
you. Plus, this way the HN community gets some interesting numbers. Thanks.
:-)

------
randfish
Important to keep in mind that when Hitwise/Comscore/Nielsen/etc. measure
"Microsoft/Bing powered searches" they're including a LOT of searches that
never leave MS/Yahoo's sites. If you do a search on MSN Autos or Yahoo! News
or in Facebook's web search, for example, those are all powered by Bing and
count toward their share.

Contrast with Google, where very few searches on Google's entire network lead
to another page on Google (most of that traffic goes out to other sites like
those we own/control). Thus, while 30% of web searches may be Bing powered,
the Statcounter numbers are the ones I'm much more inclined to look at as a
comparison. 8% for Bing and 11% for Yahoo! seem like plausible figures for
outbound traffic sent from those engines.

~~~
ooorrr
Rand, I thought one of the providers (Hitwise or Comscore) started to separate
out internal v. external links. Perhaps those were just pure links, like when
a link at MSN.com went to a search results page?

I also don't get the Facebook reference. Google has distribution deals -
Google searches in Firefox still count for Google, for example. Is it just the
fact that web results are at the tail of the page?

~~~
randfish
I think you're correct that Comscore controls for/removes links to searches
(like Bing's news links) but not for the queries done "in network" (at least,
not that I'm aware of).

------
sinaiman
Microsoft inflates their search share statistics with sites like this:
<http://www.clubbing.com>

Where they bribe people to play games that "search" on Bing in exchange for
points they can use to buy things.

Additionally, this site is really easy to automate bots for (there are whole
communities that work on this) in order to automate the prize winning process.

Even still, that's all good for Microsoft as far as I can tell, since even
playing with bots brings up their share in the search market.

~~~
sinaiman
For anyone that can't tell what the site is about at first glance: it's a
collection of word-based games (think text twist) and every time you
guess/figure out some word correctly, a search to Bing is fired off in a
separate frame.

The reasoning behind this Bing-fueled gaming experience is so that you can
"research" words as you play...or something.

It's all very shady/hilarious.

~~~
kyp
Google is doing the same thing with A Google a Day:
<http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2383379,00.asp>

------
bkhl
I've been using Bing since I found the Bing Rewards
(<http://www.bing.com/rewards>), which gives you a point per 2 searches and
lets you redeem the points for something later on. I have not found myself
going back to Google, yet.

~~~
r00fus
So each point is worth between $.007 and $.01 (based on the gift card
conversions).

Assuming you make 50 searches per day, you'll make at most $.50 - is it really
worth it for a half dollar a day?

~~~
bkhl
I don't know... $0.50 (Bing) vs. $0.00 (Google). What is better for me when I
can still find whatever I need to find in both?

~~~
mcantelon
Weird that you find them comparable. I've compared the two and Bing's results
are just kind of weird (old results and non-related results come up). It's
worth 50 cents a day for me to have decent results.

~~~
DaveMebs
When did you do the comparison? In the summer of '09 when Bing launched I gave
it a shot, but just did not like it as much as Google. A few months ago I went
back and tried it again, and have not gone back to Google since.

~~~
mcantelon
I've tried it a few times since it launched and just did a quick try doing a
self-Google. Again, less useful results than Google.

~~~
underwater
Google have a special case for vanity / people searches. I don't think that
searching for yourself would given an accurate representation of the two
search engines.

------
wtallis
Not too surprising. Just yesterday, I found that Bing had managed to get
itself back in the list of search engines in my Firefox installation. I use a
Mac! The only thing I can think of is that I must have updated the Flip4Mac
WMV codecs, but I didn't even let it install Silverlight. If Microsoft is
trying this hard to push Bing in so many ways, I'd be surprised if they
_couldn't_ manage to hit 30% while the competition is resting on their
laurels.

~~~
Stormbringer
Much respect to Firefox for being the torch bearer in the darkness and all
that, but their secret auto-updates in the background are why I don't use
them.

I use a Mac not because I'm some techno-illiterate neo-lithic throwback, but
because I'm a raging control freak. On the Mac I feel like I'm in control.
Programs that go and do random weird stuff behind the scenes break that
fragile illusion. :D

The worst was when Firefox's stealthy self-updating broke itself. I don't
remember which version that was (sometime in 2008? 2009?) and it might have
been on a work machine (Windows? Vista?) but there was basically no going back
(couldn't use previous versions because of stealth updates...), and no going
forward (wasn't gonna sit around waiting for them to patch it).

~~~
msg
All a little off topic, but...

    
    
      menu Preferences -> Advanced -> Update
    
      seek to "When updates to Firefox are found"
    
      check "Ask me what I want to do"
    
    

Now you have your control again.

~~~
podperson
Continuing off-topic -- I hate programs that think updating is more important
than whatever I had in mind when I launched the program. I prefer programs
that update/download in the background while I get stuff done then let me
update at my leisure when they've finished downloading.

~~~
stoney
I was just thinking the same thing - why doesa Firefox insisted on installing
updates just when I open it to use it (which really is exactly when I don't
want it to be doing it). Why not do the updates when I close it down?

~~~
nl
The potential for data/program corruption is much higher when it is closing
down (think of what happens when the computer shuts down, or when the program
is closed immediately followed by a shutdown. )

------
hardtke
The most important number is search advertising revenue. The entire online
services division (which includes Bing) has revenues of around $2 billion per
year. Google's AdWords brings in about $15 billion per year. Microsoft is
nowhere close to 30% of the search market, revenue wise. For individual ad
clicks Microsoft gets about as much as Google, so clearly Microsoft is not
doing 30% of "real" searches (actual people looking for actual things and
occasionally clicking on an ad.)

~~~
brudgers
> _"The most important number is search advertising revenue."_

The effects of that kind of thinking at Google is why I often use Bing - too
often Google's results appear to be skewed toward ad impressions rather than
usefulness.

------
famousactress
Sorry. I'm sure I'm missing something obvious but can someone explain how I'm
expected to resolve these two statements as something other than
contradictions:

 _Yes, Bing-powered search ...clocking in at 30.01%_

 _Google in the same time period dropped .. to 64.42%, ceding that ground to
Bing._

[Edit: Oh, sorry. yeah, I'm a fool. It reads _That was a rise from its
February tally of 28.48_.. So Bing was already almost 30%. I get it now. That
said? No Way.]

------
Dramatize
I manage a site with 61.92% of users using Internet Explorer

Google = 92.66% Bing = 3.65% Yahoo = 2.03%

------
famousactress
This just really isn't sitting well with me... so, warning. Total conspiracy-
theory cynicism ahead.

These numbers are from a company that at least in part appears to generate
revenue from supplying analytics, and helping other companies tune their
search results. While that may put them in a good position to tally these
kinds of numbers, it also strikes me that it puts them in a good position to
benefit from a redistribution of search-engine market share.

I'm not making an accusation at all. I'm far from informed enough to do so.
That said, I'd love some insight on this angle from someone who's more
familiar with the space that Hitwise is in.

~~~
kenjackson
Hitwise has been around before Google. I've never known them to be in the
middle of a controversy. It's always possible, but application of Occam's
Razor wouldn't look favorably on your theory.

~~~
brudgers
"They're making money" is often the simplest explanation - not that I'm
advocating a conspiracy theory.

------
sorbus
> clocking in at 30.01% in March according to Hitwise. That was a rise from
> its February tally of 28.48%. Google in the same time period dropped from
> 66.69% to 64.42%, ceding that ground to Bing.

So Bing gained 1.53% while Google lost 2.27%. Where did the other 0.74% go?

~~~
shadowfox
ddg perhaps

------
awa
According to Statcounter the number is closer to 20%.
[http://gs.statcounter.com/#search_engine-US-
monthly-201103-2...](http://gs.statcounter.com/#search_engine-US-
monthly-201103-201103-bar)

~~~
xutopia
Really? It says 8.72% for Bing for April 2011.

~~~
citricsquid
Yahoo is just bing search, so they're combined I assume.

------
patrickk
It's important to note that Google made 88% of it's revenue outside of the US
in 2009.

Here's is a paragraph describing how Google legally dodges tax:

" _The Dublin subsidiary sells advertising globally and was credited by Google
with 88 percent of its $12.5 billion in non-U.S. sales in 2009._ "

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-
sho...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-
how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html)

So it seems a bit silly to focus solely on US searches. These are global
markets we are talking about.

EDIT: link

~~~
jsnell
I think you misread the quote. 88% of the non-US revenue going through Google
Ireland doesn't in any way imply 88% of the total Google revenue being non-US.

Bing results are total garbage outside the US at the moment, so it's no
surprise that their share would be low. And likewise it makes sense for MS to
concentrate on reaching a critical mass in a single market first, and only
worry about the rest of the world later.

~~~
patrickk
Indeed. Thanks.

------
Groxx
Yahoo search uses Bing? I must've missed the memo... that could help explain
the 30% value - Bing's _site_ usage is still a percent and a half below
Yahoo's.

A question, if anyone out there has an answer / speculation:

> _Yahoo! Search and Bing achieved the highest success rates in March 2011.
> This means that for both search engines, more than 80 percent of searches
> executed resulted in a visit to a Website. Google achieved a success rate of
> 66 percent._

How much of that is impacted by the ridiculous number of queries Instant
generates?

------
sbochins
That seems to be a large increase. I was under the impression that Bing/Yahoo
made up 10 or 15%. Wonder what the change has been.

~~~
nod
I did the same double-take. They both make up between 10 and 15% -- when MS
bought Yahoo's search traffic, they effectively doubled their traffic and
jumped to about 24-28%. So that's the number they've grown from recently.

------
lisperforlife
Right... the majority of the searches involve terms like "download firefox"
and "download chrome". :-)

------
patrickc
People just use Bing to search for porn so Google can't see that. Then they
use Google for pretty much everything else, which is not much.

~~~
amurmann
I suspect the same. It would be really interesting to see an analysis of
search terms on Google vs search terms on Bing. Bing's video search also lends
itself to porn searches.

------
known
What % on non-windows?

------
pitdesi
This doesn't foot with the traffic to our site. Would be cool to have our own
little unscientific survey, as I'd like to see what experiences other folks on
here have... can you fill in the following?

1) Domain

2) Audience

3) Google/Yahoo/Bing % of traffic

4) Notes

~~~
theDoug
1) <http://ama.ab.ca/>

2) Auto club (similar to a AAA club in the US) (see 4b).

3) Google: 89.29%, Bing: 6.2%, Yahoo: 3.4% (see 4d).

4a) Numbers from the last 30 days, so this is relevant. 4b) We have members in
~1/3 of all households province-wide, so we feel our traffic represents an
average online user well. 4c) 350,000+ Unique Visitors monthly (search +
organic). 4d) Search-specific traffic.

------
pitdesi
It only lists Yahoo and Bing here to come up with that 30%, what about
Facebook search? Is that not counted (or counted separately)?

It's "Powered by Bing"

~~~
peregrine
Personally I am not a big fan of Facebook search. I can barely ever find links
I've posted or any non-person/group/game/widget content.

------
Stormbringer
Google's search is bad (spammy advertising), but Bing's isn't any better.
Recently at work I went to do a search for something innocuous like

"what words can you put s in front of and still have a word"

And the number 2 result was something about anal sex. I'm like WTF??? I'm at
work!

How they can tout themselves as a major search engine in 2011 and not
understand the concept of NSFW I do not know.

\----

My predictions:

1) So long as Microsoft keeps throwing money at it, Bing will continue to
improve.

2) So long as Google's main source of revenue is advertising, they will
continue to try to find that "sweet spot" of bombarding us day and night with
ads, but _not quite_ enough to make us switch.

It's like a choice between new evil and old evil... either way that ain't a
good thing.

~~~
Cushman
Well, Apple seems well on their way to making their own curated internet, so
don't give up all hope.

~~~
guywithabike
What makes you say this?

