17 thoughts on “Google Click To Call Cancelled?”

  1. My guess is that this a result of Sergey injecting some sanity into product management there. Most products besides search and maps have not been runaway successes. The click to call option for ads is interesting in principle, but for a lot of businesses, it’s way cheaper to send people to their website than to a live operator. So I wouldn’t be surprised if click-to-call ads, well, failed to click with users, and that they decided to send this idea to the glue factory.

  2. I find it difficult to believe that Google would abandon click-to-call. Maybe, they abandoned the method.

    The click-to-call method Google is/was using does not incorporate Google Talk. It was simply a way of connecting the user to the advertised company through a Google-facilitated PSTN phone call to both parties.

    More information please. πŸ™‚

  3. Last week, Google opened up Google Talk to anyone; you no longer have to have a GMail account to use GTalk.

    Still, I believe a browser plug-in would be Google’s best bet on click-to-call.

  4. As of now, the page has been pulled. Was the original post a prank, especially given the number of spelling mistakes in the short excerpt…

  5. Click to call for business purposes doesn’t seem like a good idea to me. As others have said, it’s far cheaper to send someone to your website… Most advertisers on Google sell exclusively online, most likely to keep the number of employees (and costs) down. Those costs go up when you hire operators…

    Looking from the other side (as a consumer), I would much rather get information from a website than call some shady sales rep…

    With that said, click-to-call has value to general users looking to get in touch with friends and family, or those rare networking experiences that occur via blog comments or forums (i.e. a “software-less” Skype).

    Those are just my own thoughts, but what do I know – Google trumps all.

  6. Click per call is not new, it’s already being offered by companies such as Ingenio, Google or eStara, but in mixed mode, meaning that they mainly use traditional telephony, and very little VOIP. Setting up advertising campaigns in PPcall makes using a easy to use Web call centre indispensable.

    in other side, Simply that whenever we are faced with an application or an ad, we will systematically be offered to get in contact via telephone thanks to a simple click passing through the IP protocol. And when we think of how important social spaces like Myspace are to the younger generation, we can say that they will soon find it abnormal to dial a number on a fixed telephone.
    Read more…


  7. it is really hard to say if that was a prank or not, but i have dropped them – ebay and google an email and hopefully will get to the bottom of it.

  8. Odd.

    Actually, I think click-to-call is a great idea, but not for ads. It’s real value is as a widget that can be added to a company website. For the privledge of using it, you have to register your business on their local pages. Local.Live.com uses their own click-to-call on the map results, which I’ve used several times.


  9. It was just a hack Om. I find it quite amusing – not that long ago Google managed to delete the blog altogether. You’d think a company of that size could get it’s security together!

  10. Sure it’s cheaper to send people to your website. It’s also WAY less effective in closing sales.

    I don’t have specific numbers on it but I would imagine a trained operator is at least an order of magnitude more effective at closing a sale than a website. Especially in more complex sales situations (like insurance or switching cellular carriers)

  11. Erik,

    You are absolutely right, and that’s why I (as a consumer) don’t want to call a sales rep! Of course they’re going to say their product is good – I’d rather do my own research and make the final decision at their site, not over the phone.

  12. uh, if it was a hack – which it appears to be – then shouldn’t you post a retraction and edit the posting title? …or is this anti-journalistic approach to blogging mean that you’re going to shelf integrity when sources are unusually unreliable? dude, there’s a line in the sand on this kind of posting…check the facts. always. before promoting big company rumors…otherwise, honestly, you’re gonna turn this into valleywag…okay, not trying to be that harsh, but the overall issue with blogs as resources boils down to reliability…

  13. Dave,

    Isn’t a rumor just that? Most big companies don’t respond to inquiries about rumors, but rumors are often interesting and spark debate (Google + YouTube?). How was anyone supposed to know that Google’s blog got hacked at the time? The Google blog isn’t a source of rumors, it’s a source of Google corporate facts, therefore it’s a trusted source.

    Your beef should be with Google, not with Om.

  14. Dave,

    bunch of things – first of all, the title alone suggests that I am not sure about it. hence the question mark.

    Secondly, have contacted both ebay and google about this and trying to get to the bottom of it. before calling it gospel, wanted to be sure about it. Just to be sure, hope you noticed:

    Still as Aswath reminds us, the spelling errors in the post makes one wonder about the authenticity of the post. Hopefully the Google/eBay spokespersons would help clear the air.