Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 198 posts

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#81

Post by bdcravens »

AznHisoka wrote: post #29
redm wrote: post #9

"Mr. Stoppelman feels he has no choice. Like a lot of small internet companies, Yelp lives in a world where one company, Google, accounts for an outsize share of its business, and could destroy it at any time." That sums it up for Yelp and many others, myself included. Combine that reality with the black box that Google is, in many ways, and you have an inaccessible behemoth who's decisions decide the fate of many. G…

It would help if Yelp allowed new, emerging search engines (potential google competitors) to crawl their site. But their robots.txt only allows Google, Bing and a few others to crawl them ( https://yelp.com/robots.txt ) allow all crawlers and I would have at least a little sympathy for Yelp.

Presumably they want a legal defense against scrapers.

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#85

Post by jimmywanger »

scurvy wrote: post #42
x0x0 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on position. They treat CSRs like absolute shit -- see Talia Jane. Given a choice, I'd prefer not to work for companies that treat any employee like that.

Curious, but is there any company that treats CSR's really well and have a 85%+ employee satisfaction? I've worked at a lot of great companies, and the CSR groups are always unhappy and have miserable employee satisfaction ratings. I also started my career in customer service, so I've seen good and bad firsthand.

I believe Zappos treats its CSRs fairly well, considering they are considered the backbone of the company.

However, this is secondhand, gleaned from several books and articles I've read.

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#86

Post by mattnewton »

tyingq wrote: post #57
simion314 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point here is that Google is not returning the best results but pushing it's own other services on top of the list even if in this case other review services are better.

And even when the searcher is VERY specific that they want Yelp...it's right in the query.

..why didn't they go to yelp then?

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#87

Post by jimmywanger »

x0x0 wrote: post #7
wannabe_miner wrote: post #4

Unrelated but related, what is it like to work at Yelp? I was recently contacted by them for a position but it didn't inspire confidence. The mention of a "shoestring operation" in this article is making me believe I made the right choice.

It depends on position. They treat CSRs like absolute shit -- see Talia Jane. Given a choice, I'd prefer not to work for companies that treat any employee like that.

I've read her article. (https://medium.com/@taliajane/an-open-letter-to-my-ceo-fb73d...)

It really has nothing substantive to say except "I'm struggling, pay me more."

She even points to several facts in her article.

"She ended up leaving the company and moving east, somewhere the minimum wage could double as a living wage."

"But boy did I not anticipate a decade and a half ago that a car and a credit card and an apartment would all be symbols of stress, not success."

If you hate the job that badly or feel like you're not being renumerated properly, you have options open. I'm assuming she doesn't have a house, because of the mention of her apartment.

Yelp is not holding a gun to your head. Neither are they responsible for paying you what you think is necessary for a comfortable life.

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#88

Post by ocdtrekkie »

mattnewton wrote: post #86
tyingq wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And even when the searcher is VERY specific that they want Yelp...it's right in the query.

..why didn't they go to yelp then?

To a large percentage of Internet users, entering something into the Google search bar IS how they go places. (The address bar is a very strange mystery to plenty of people.) That's a big part of why Google is not permitted to act the way they are. They have become more or less the front door to the Internet, and hence, cannot unfairly prioritize their own products over others'.

A big part of why tech users don't understand why Google is being subject to antitrust action is that a lot of people in the tech industry literally have no idea how everyone else uses their computers. Like not understanding that people tend to go to Yelp by Googling "yelp" and clicking the first link. (Which is sadly, usually a malicious Google Ad imitating Yelp, but I digress.)

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#89

Post by annexrichmond »

mrunkel wrote: post #13

I find all this hand wringing over Google to be so tiring. Google is doing what is best for it's customers. Be that advertisers and/or searchers. If they stop doing that, they'll lose their market dominance. Last I checked, nobody is forced to use google to search for things, nobody if forced (except for perhaps android users) to use Chrome. I'm not a laissez-faire capitalist by any means, but I don't see that Google…

> Google is doing what is best for it's customers

except it has been shown that the organic search results rank Yelp listings higher than Google's Local listings thus they are, in fact, displaying worse results at the top. Unless you believe Google's search product sucks I think this proves they aren't doing what's best for customers at all, they are doing what's best for them.

Keep in mind they are trying to develop Google Maps into a social review platform where you can write reviews, order delivery, etc. that seems similar to Yelp. Is it not clear they are using their Search monopoly to get more content on their own, currently worse, local reviews platform to have it become more dominant in the long run?

Re: Yelp’s Six-Year Conflict with Google

#90

Post by ocdtrekkie »

bdcravens wrote: post #79
euske wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it amusing how their argument is similar to the MS' antitrust argument in 90s. Microsoft: "An OS should include everything. Third party apps aren't needed. It's only good for consumers." Google: "A search engine should include everything. Third party websites aren't needed. It's only good for consumers."

More interesting is the HN (and elsewhere) crowd that never relents on Google apologetics, yet presumably would be (and among those older, were) among the Microsoft critics.

People's allegiances and opinions often settle in when they're younger, and they will stick to those brand loyalties for decades into the future. A lot of us grew up (or got into tech) during the Microsoft lawsuit days, which set in that view, and when Google came around, they were a breath of fresh air.

It's really hard for people to realize that times have changed and the tables have turned.

Post reply on HN