gmail: what's the business advantage of google storing all your emails

[dpopiz]

it costs a lot to provide 2.7GB for each gmail user, and I know most people don't use nearly that much, but gradually they will: I'm always surprised how fast my gmail storage-usage goes up even though I only deal with regular old emails (no huge attachments and such)

so...what business value is there in holding peoples' email forever other than "we have more space than anyone else so we are the best" or "you can use it for crafty things involving storing large files"

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: dpopiz
it costs a lot to provide 2.7GB for each gmail user, and I know most people don't use nearly that much, but gradually they will: I'm always surprised how fast my gmail storage-usage goes up even though I only deal with regular old emails (no huge attachments and such)

so...what business value is there in holding peoples' email forever other than "we have more space than anyone else so we are the best" or "you can use it for crafty things involving storing large files"

"what business value"

There's NO business value in using a web based email system that scans your emails for ad's. Security is more important than just getting free mail hosting.

 

[Pastore]

ummm... Getting and keeping users eyeballs to continue hitting their ads? Tell me you're not that dense.

 

[yobarman]

I think google would be the company that knows how to handle mass storage, so providing this kind of space to people shouldn't be a problem for them.

And yes, it is (most likely) profitable for the following reasons: Branding their name, and the adsense advertisements you see throughout the site.

 

[DaveSimmons]

At some point they could also start charging to keep archiving your old mail, and you'd have no choice but to pay whatever they ask.

But storage space is dirt cheap now and drops in half every couple of years.

 

[johnjbruin]

Originally posted by: Pastore
ummm... Getting and keeping users eyeballs to continue hitting their ads? Tell me you're not that dense.

I think the percentage of people that ignore ads on the internet is growing constantly.
Its another matter that total internet users is also growing so the total number of "ad views/clicks" ends up growing despite the ignore factor growing.

Example (which has been exagerated) - imagine the following:
Year 1:
Total Users: 100k
Total Users Looking at Ads (30%) = 30K

Year 2:
Total Users: 150K
Total Users Looking at Ads (25%) = 37.5K

The percentage went down - but the total went up.

Do you guys think this would be something that is sustainable in the long run?

 

[Atheus]

Google robots go through your email and generate specially targeted ads.

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: johnjbruin

Originally posted by: Pastore
ummm... Getting and keeping users eyeballs to continue hitting their ads? Tell me you're not that dense.

I think the percentage of people that ignore ads on the internet is growing constantly.
Its another matter that total internet users is also growing so the total number of "ad views/clicks" ends up growing despite the ignore factor growing.

Example (which has been exagerated) - imagine the following:
Year 1:
Total Users: 100k
Total Users Looking at Ads (30%) = 30K

Year 2:
Total Users: 150K
Total Users Looking at Ads (25%) = 37.5K

The percentage went down - but the total went up.

Do you guys think this would be something that is sustainable in the long run?

Let's see, do you/have you worked in Search Engine Marketing? Obviously not, or you wouldn't be spouting this crap. Companies pay PER CLICK to have their ad there, not just for the sake of it being there. Google gets payed when that ad is clicked. The model is sustainable because of the ridiculously low overhead that AdSense costs Google.

EDIT: Along with all the crap wrong with your post, your percentages are hugely off. Our ratio hovers right around 3% month to month

 

[johnjbruin]

Originally posted by: Pastore

Originally posted by: johnjbruin

Originally posted by: Pastore
ummm... Getting and keeping users eyeballs to continue hitting their ads? Tell me you're not that dense.

I think the percentage of people that ignore ads on the internet is growing constantly.
Its another matter that total internet users is also growing so the total number of "ad views/clicks" ends up growing despite the ignore factor growing.

Example (which has been exagerated) - imagine the following:
Year 1:
Total Users: 100k
Total Users Looking at Ads (30%) = 30K

Year 2:
Total Users: 150K
Total Users Looking at Ads (25%) = 37.5K

The percentage went down - but the total went up.

Do you guys think this would be something that is sustainable in the long run?

Let's see, do you/have you worked in Search Engine Marketing? Obviously not, or you wouldn't be spouting this crap. Companies pay PER CLICK to have their ad there, not just for the sake of it being there. Google gets payed when that ad is clicked. The model is sustainable because of the ridiculously low overhead that AdSense costs Google.

EDIT: Along with all the crap wrong with your post, your percentages are hugely off. Our ratio hovers right around 3% month to month

Did your dumb brain read the words of my post. See the stuff in bold - I am not editing my post.

 

[dpopiz]

I think anandtech is the worst forum in the world....

 

[thecrecarc]

Originally posted by: dpopiz
I think anandtech is the worst forum in the world....

BAN!

 

[John]

Originally posted by: dpopiz
I think anandtech is the worst forum in the world....

If that's truly the case the real question is why you're an active member posting threads.