In late 2004 Idealab's search engine Snap launched to much fanfare around greater "transparency" and in bringing cost-per-action (CPA) advertising to search and shopping ("action" being defined on a case-by-case basis). Once the initial hoopla died down, the engine found itself in A9 territory: innovative but without any usage. The company hadn't given consumers enough reason to switch or even try the engine.
Now, with a redesign, Snap is making a new bid for usage. While most of the press attention continues to focus on the CPA model (and the fact that organic and paid results are blended) the real questions and action are around whether or not the new interface and results will be different enough to drive meaningful consumer traffic. Without that, there will be little or no advertising.
The preview pane is not unlike Google Reader or, as many have commented, Ask's binoculars or Browster. It's quite helpful to be able to quickly scroll or page through results and see the pages without clicking. There's also a "suggest" feature (like those being used by Google and Yahoo!) that seeks to "anticipate" your search.
Snap is factoring a number of variables into the ranking of results. According to ClickZ:
"The company uses a combination of factors to rank results including post-click behavior, conversion ratings, text analysis and link analysis. Because Snap.com allows advertisers to buy on a cost-per-action basis, it must gather information on conversions from advertisers' sites. It uses that information to rank results. The company also buys anonymous clickstream data from third parties to analyze post-click behavior."
It's smart that Snap has redesigned and the new consumer features are helpful but probably not enough to wrest usage from Google and Yahoo!. A9 was and is a very innovative engine that has had enormous trouble gaining usage. Clearly being innovative isn't enough; it's being obviously innovative and different, yet accessible. And then there’s that intangible “buzz” or “cool” factor that helped propel Google and helps the iPod maintain its lead.
There’s also “habitual” behavior that has taken root. You’ll find all kinds of data all over the place about search engine loyalty. Some data argue there’s little or no loyalty and some argue the opposite. But I believe – and there’s data that supports this too – that consumers have primary engines that they use and that they’re comfortable with. And for most people that’s Google. Yahoo!, MSN, Ask and others are spending huge amounts of money and putting enormous amounts of time into the question of how to differentiate from Google.
Here's how/why Snap thinks it's better. Snap clearly has chutzpah! Let’s see if consumers agree.
Screenwerk 