Google Checkout or Bill Me Later...

[equality72521]

I've never heard of them.

[VincentVega]

x2

[scottbombedout]

Hasn't Bill me Later just been bought out by Ebay?

[Porsche-poor]

Prefer the old fashioned visa/master card no paypal

[deathpunk dan]

We wanted to add Bill Me Later but were not quite big enough to qualify at the time. I recommend it.

Google Checkout is interesting - will it be seemless with your analytics? The real big value add with GC appears to be better Click Thru Rates with Adwords as the cart icon etc draws people's eyes.

If I were starting my own e-tail site from the ground up and running as lean as possible, I'd use google analytics and checkout for sure.

For larger, more visible businesses with strong brand recognition...I'd want to read more white papers/case studies before recommending GC.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

the sportomatic market is very soft. make an offer. also have a very nice oil tank.

[Jim727]

google's reputation for respecting individual privacy is extremely bad and getting worse. I wouldn't trust them with any financial information.

[holtjv]

Google checkout is definitely my preference. Would I purchase more from you? Maybe...if you sent out some more teaser products based on my profile and had the easy Google checkout (it's very, very , very easy).

GCO is good because it's:

1) one click and you're done
2) you get shipping updates automatically

Bill Me Later? Never used it.

As to not trusting with fin'l information? How many people have been ripped off by Google? I have no idea but I do know that I can call my cc company and immediately dispute an item. I think this objection holds little water nowadays.

[competentone]

Originally Posted by holtjv

How many people have been ripped off by Google?

http://www.apogee-web-consulting.com/blogger/2007/11/how-google-uses-fake-searches-click.html

(Probably a little more complex than what a Google Checkout user would be concerned with, but a pretty clear indication that Google treats its customers -- that is, its advertisers -- pretty poorly. If I advertised with Google, I'd be watching it like a hawk.)

[holtjv]

Originally Posted by competentone

http://www.apogee-web-consulting.com/blogger/2007/11/how-google-uses-fake-searches-click.html

(Probably a little more complex than what a Google Checkout user would be concerned with, but a pretty clear indication that Google treats its customers -- that is, its advertisers -- pretty poorly. If I advertised with Google, I'd be watching it like a hawk.)

If you didn't know this (how Google makes money) then shame on you. Each of the things the article lists is obvious to anyone who clicks through a Google sponsored ad.

Why in the world would you think Google was a philanthropic organization? Are they a non-profit? Nope.

[deathpunk dan]

We will spend ~$500,000 with Google Adwords in 2008. Every keyword/phrase, ad group, campaign etc is tracked at an extremely granular level. We use multiple rules and algorithms to determine max bid.

We have seen nothing fraudulent that Google would be liable for. The entire issue of misleading contextual advertising can be avoided by not advertising on their content network (aka Adsense).

People love to hate Evil Google, and I can honestly say that there has been a tangible shift in G's priorities post IPO, but it still remains (by far) the single best and most cost effective source of potential new customers for our business.

I could see Bill Me Later being great if you needed something expensive and were on a deadline (like you were rebuilding your engine, there was a track day coming up and you found out your cylinders were not reusable. Blam! You buy those Nickies using Bill Me Later).

Also, a lot of CC companies are lowering people's limits - heard it on the radio yesterday...

[competentone]

Originally Posted by deathpunk dan

We have seen nothing fraudulent that Google would be liable for. The entire issue of misleading contextual advertising can be avoided by not advertising on their content network (aka Adsense).

Richard Ball is no lame Google basher -- he's commented that he's a shareholder and thinks Google is an extremely efficient method of advertising. He probably directs quite a few million dollars worth of business to Google.

The complaint he raises in the link I provided above was all about how Google was showing ads on their content network sites even when the advertisers had the content network turned off. Advertisers could not "opt out" of the sort of content network listings they were receiving.

Google has since changed their system so that "opting out" of all content network listings is now possible, but the last time I checked, Ball was still complaining that Google structured their set-up for advertisers so this option to opt out was fairly "hidden."

I don't know how carefully you read Ball's article (and the others he had linked to the one I linked to), but I think he raises some issues that reflect poorly on Google's ethical standards.

I've seen some of the arguments Google's lawyers have made in some of their copyright infringement and click fraud cases. I've seen their lawyers take quotes from previous cases completely out of context, in an attempt to imply their positions were supported by legal precedent. My conclusion from some of what I've seen, is that there are some seriously "morally bankrupt" individuals in high positions in Google's corporate structure.

I wouldn't rule out the idea of doing business with them if I were involved in a venture where I thought buying advertising through them could be effective, but I would not give them any significant level of "trust" in those dealings.

[RWebb]

i like google pay over paypal -- by a huge margin

i've always used a credit card at pelican tho