December 17, 2014
Google Shopping exploring one-click buy button
Taking aim at Amazon’s dominance of web shopping, Google has approached retailers about adding a "Buy Now" button to their Google Shopping listings as well as a two-day shipping program.
Currently, Google Shopping simply redirects browsers to retailers’ websites.
Sources told the Wall Street Journal that the "Buy Now" feature would work similar to Amazon’s popular "one-click ordering" feature. Shoppers would place an item in a shopping cart and check out with a single click while remaining on Google Shopping. The system would remember credit card and delivery information for future purchases. The big difference with Amazon is that fulfillment would still be handled by third-party retailers.
At the same time, a two-day shipping program for products purchased via Google Shopping is being explored. The program is expected to work much like to ShopperRunner, which charges $79 a year for unlimited two-day shipping across multiple retailer sites, as well as mirroring Amazon’s $99 per year Prime service.
Ginny Marvin on Marketing Land saw logic in Google building out into "a more complete e-commerce experience" beyond its search busines. "Google faces steeper competition from sites — Amazon in particular, of course, but also sites like Pinterest — that users increasingly turn to for commerce search," she wrote.
In a speech in mid-October to regulators in Berlin, Google’s Chairman Eric Schmidt stated that the company’s "biggest search competitor is Amazon. People don’t think of Amazon as search, but if you are looking for something to buy, you are more often than not looking for it on Amazon."
According to Forrester, 39 percent of U.S. online shoppers in the third quarter began researching their purchases on Amazon versus 11 percent on Google. In 2009, 24 percent of shoppers began their research on search engine sites versus 18 percent on Amazon.
The WSJ, however, said retailers have so far been "cool" to Google’s "Buy Now" button because of concerns over price competition and letting a third-party control key points of the shopping experience. A "Buy Now" button would also provides Google more insights into conversion and possibly greater leverage over advertising rates. Trusting Google with payment information is another hurdle.
Talks are said to be preliminary.
- Google Shopping to Counter Amazon – Wall Street Journal
- Google Wants To Launch A ‘Buy’ Button To Hurt Amazon – Business Insider
- Google may offer Amazon-like ‘buy’ button and two-day shipping to retailers – Geekwire.com
- Google Reportedly Working On A ‘Buy Now’ Button To Compete With Amazon – Search Engine Journal
- Google Shopping may try to take on Amazon with ‘buy’ button – San Jose Business Journal
- The New Gründergeist – Google Europe Blog
- Google Shopping May Go Deeper Into E-Commerce With "Buy Now" Button To Challenge Amazon – Marketing Land
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
What are the pros and cons of retailers partnering with Google Shopping on a “one-click buy” button? If not Google, is a shared retailer aggregator website the best way for merchants to compete with Amazon?
Poll
Amazon has been stealing share of product search from Google for years. According to Forrester, more people search for products on Amazon than Google. “Infinite” selection and great product content make Amazon a compelling destination for product research.
Google can’t afford to lose such a key search market, so it’s investing deeper and deeper into the e-commerce value chain—even developing its own last-mile logistics play to support retailers.
The new Buy Now button is another way to position Google as a destination for product search/research. As Amazon raises the bar for convenience, expect Google to continue to enrich its offering.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery—and retailers’ desperation to copy the market leader.
The Buy it Now or one-click buy button will only be successful long-term if there are great backend systems that fulfill consumer expectations for service after the sale.
Amazon is still far and away the online leader in the holistic experience that comes with one-click. Google, Alibaba, eBay and all of the rest will be measured against Amazon service levels by consumers, so the shipping and support had better be as good as the one-click to purchase.
There are pluses and minuses for partnering with Google Shopping. The pluses:
- Higher listing on the world’s leading search engine.
- One-click ordering, with the purchase being handled by a source that consumers trust.
- Ability to capture consumer data.
The minuses:
- Inability to control every aspect of the transaction.
- Sharing data with Google.
- It’s easy for consumers to compare prices.
Looking at the pros and cons, I’d say the pros win. Consumers are going to compare prices anyway.
With 39 percent of online shoppers beginning their search on Amazon, merchants, particularly small merchants, needs to band together. Google is offering this opportunity. The problem is that it may be too late to make a difference.
It’s a little disappointing to me that Google, of all companies, is resorting to merely copying Amazon’s ideas. Regardless of the issues that retailers must overcome to be willing to work with Google (all valid in my mind) it would still be more beneficial if Google, and retailers, found their own ways to drive business.
Amazon is not a perfect model and there are needs that Google and retailers can fill. Retailers can use loyalty cards, bonus offers and more targeted selections to reach their customers. Google can improve its shopping interface by highlighting price comparisons and recommending similar products with more more features or a better price.
On a side note: I find it interesting that online shoppers are moving towards a more in-person style decision making process (see it/like it/buy it) while retailers are spending a ton of time and money investing in technology to give shoppers the benefits of online shopping while in-store (reviews, similar item searches, etc.).
It makes perfect sense for Google. Shopping is one of the major sources of traffic on the web, and losing that traffic to Amazon is a significant ad revenue loss for Google. Google Knowledge Graph, Weather, Travel, etc., are all examples of Google adding more experiences on Google properties that keep that traffic from visiting other sites on the web. The Google buy button is a similar concept.
The question is if it’s good for the retailer. It could offer a lower-friction experience that some shoppers might benefit from, but it’s a bit like paying a third-party a commission to sell your products on the street in front of your store. You’re giving away margin to shoppers that likely would have visited your store anyway and you’re keeping those visitors out of your store where you could have build a stronger relationship with them and helped them discover other purchases.
At the end of the day the lesson for retailers is that you can’t rely on other businesses like Google or Facebook, Wanelo, etc., to be your primary traffic driver (because they have their own business interests that may eventually conflict with yours). Retailers need to build their own audiences that use properties the retailer owns as a destination.
I don’t know why a retailer would not do this. Great exposure. Ease of sale. Isn’t that what retailers are in business for? I did not see anything where a retailer could not participate in both Google and Amazon.
The process is all about clicks. Minimize the clicks and sell. The reason product search has moved from search engines to Amazon is because searchers discovered that they ended up on Amazon through the search engine. So why not just go to Amazon?
If not Google, is a shared retailer aggregator website the best way for merchants to compete with Amazon? Google has the critical mass. Why build another aggregator website that would pale in comparison to Google’s reach?
Partnering with Google gives retailers a deep pocketed resource to help compete against Amazon. Amazon has shown that it wants as much market share as it can get so this could help retailers push back on that. It aligns retailers with a partner who on the surface doesn’t appear to have a conflict of interest with them, as Google is primarily trying to maintain its search ad display business which none of them compete in, but it’s always worth reading the fine print.
Good question on the shared retailer aggregator website. Have to be careful there depending upon how it takes shape, but that could be a possibility. The challenge is the company running the aggregator website has to be really savvy and be able to manage thousands, if not tens of thousands, of merchant relationships. Reminds me of what I was working on in the mid-’90s at NetMarket.
Amazon is just another retail channel for retailers to promote and sell their products. They are obviously the leader and frontrunner in this area. Not sure how long it will take for Google to reach a critical mass where the “one-click buy” button will be popular enough to pull share away from Amazon. And just like Amazon, the Google program will simply be another channel for retailers. There will be others that choose to get into this area and they may come and go—or have staying power. Depending on the cost of entry, a retailer may consider Google or others. The retailer should also consider where the people/shoppers are. That will help make a decision if a retailer should participate on Amazon, Google or any other retail platform.
There might be some slight advantage to a retailer. Personally, I don’t trust my “buy it now” information to Google and would probably never use a Google “buy it now.” The catch up game is not something Google does well. In other areas, Google’s need to catch up has resulted in gluts that have damaged many of their partners. (Seemingly unrestricted access to and use of its Android operating systems have made the prospect of any profitable premium smart phone unlikely. Samsung is reorganizing right now to address this situation).
Google may have some difficulty establishing enough trust with suppliers to gain much traction. Competing with Amazon is not a matter of aping the Amazon functions. To compete you have to exceed the Amazon package. Google will be hard pressed to make this happen in my lifetime.
This might be an opportunity, but perhaps the real question remains…why partner with Google when you can more easily (and successfully) partner with Amazon?
There is nothing but opportunity for more shopping channels than Amazon. Although there is initial retailer hesitation, I would recommend adoption of the Google button or something similar to offer a wider choice and greater control of the shopping experience by the consumer. Merchants need to be everywhere today. This is just one more avenue for them to create awareness of their offers to their audience. This is definitely at least something to try.
For small and medium sized retailers, this can generate incremental demand. For the leaders, the solution to Amazon isn’t creating another Amazon, unless they’re willing to sacrifice the long term for short term gain.
Google the good guy? Retailers are cool for good reason. As Jason said above, when companies get as big as Google, Amazon, Apple, or Facebook, they become retailers’ biggest competition. When Google is successful, the fees for using “buy online” will escalate just like PLAs.
Retailers need to be careful they don’t further drive customers away from their sites to make purchases on Google. The path to aggregating demand is not built in a day. There is the independent web of bloggers and mid- to long-tail publishers that companies like CJ and Shoppable access.
I hope Google is willing to absorb the blowback from Google’s largest customer, who happens to be Amazon.
Google Shopping can provide great visibility for retailers. After all, search engines are the starting point of 96% of all web searches. A “Buy Now” button will definitely up the convenience factor for shoppers and help bridge the gap with Amazon. And while price competition may be a concern, it’s not one limited to Google Shopping and shouldn’t deter retailers from giving it a shot.
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
Amazon has been stealing share of product search from Google for years. According to Forrester, more people search for products on Amazon than Google. “Infinite” selection and great product content make Amazon a compelling destination for product research.
Google can’t afford to lose such a key search market, so it’s investing deeper and deeper into the e-commerce value chain—even developing its own last-mile logistics play to support retailers.
The new Buy Now button is another way to position Google as a destination for product search/research. As Amazon raises the bar for convenience, expect Google to continue to enrich its offering.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery—and retailers’ desperation to copy the market leader.
The Buy it Now or one-click buy button will only be successful long-term if there are great backend systems that fulfill consumer expectations for service after the sale.
Amazon is still far and away the online leader in the holistic experience that comes with one-click. Google, Alibaba, eBay and all of the rest will be measured against Amazon service levels by consumers, so the shipping and support had better be as good as the one-click to purchase.
There are pluses and minuses for partnering with Google Shopping. The pluses:
The minuses:
Looking at the pros and cons, I’d say the pros win. Consumers are going to compare prices anyway.
With 39 percent of online shoppers beginning their search on Amazon, merchants, particularly small merchants, needs to band together. Google is offering this opportunity. The problem is that it may be too late to make a difference.
It’s a little disappointing to me that Google, of all companies, is resorting to merely copying Amazon’s ideas. Regardless of the issues that retailers must overcome to be willing to work with Google (all valid in my mind) it would still be more beneficial if Google, and retailers, found their own ways to drive business.
Amazon is not a perfect model and there are needs that Google and retailers can fill. Retailers can use loyalty cards, bonus offers and more targeted selections to reach their customers. Google can improve its shopping interface by highlighting price comparisons and recommending similar products with more more features or a better price.
On a side note: I find it interesting that online shoppers are moving towards a more in-person style decision making process (see it/like it/buy it) while retailers are spending a ton of time and money investing in technology to give shoppers the benefits of online shopping while in-store (reviews, similar item searches, etc.).
It makes perfect sense for Google. Shopping is one of the major sources of traffic on the web, and losing that traffic to Amazon is a significant ad revenue loss for Google. Google Knowledge Graph, Weather, Travel, etc., are all examples of Google adding more experiences on Google properties that keep that traffic from visiting other sites on the web. The Google buy button is a similar concept.
The question is if it’s good for the retailer. It could offer a lower-friction experience that some shoppers might benefit from, but it’s a bit like paying a third-party a commission to sell your products on the street in front of your store. You’re giving away margin to shoppers that likely would have visited your store anyway and you’re keeping those visitors out of your store where you could have build a stronger relationship with them and helped them discover other purchases.
At the end of the day the lesson for retailers is that you can’t rely on other businesses like Google or Facebook, Wanelo, etc., to be your primary traffic driver (because they have their own business interests that may eventually conflict with yours). Retailers need to build their own audiences that use properties the retailer owns as a destination.
I don’t know why a retailer would not do this. Great exposure. Ease of sale. Isn’t that what retailers are in business for? I did not see anything where a retailer could not participate in both Google and Amazon.
The process is all about clicks. Minimize the clicks and sell. The reason product search has moved from search engines to Amazon is because searchers discovered that they ended up on Amazon through the search engine. So why not just go to Amazon?
If not Google, is a shared retailer aggregator website the best way for merchants to compete with Amazon? Google has the critical mass. Why build another aggregator website that would pale in comparison to Google’s reach?
Partnering with Google gives retailers a deep pocketed resource to help compete against Amazon. Amazon has shown that it wants as much market share as it can get so this could help retailers push back on that. It aligns retailers with a partner who on the surface doesn’t appear to have a conflict of interest with them, as Google is primarily trying to maintain its search ad display business which none of them compete in, but it’s always worth reading the fine print.
Good question on the shared retailer aggregator website. Have to be careful there depending upon how it takes shape, but that could be a possibility. The challenge is the company running the aggregator website has to be really savvy and be able to manage thousands, if not tens of thousands, of merchant relationships. Reminds me of what I was working on in the mid-’90s at NetMarket.
Amazon is just another retail channel for retailers to promote and sell their products. They are obviously the leader and frontrunner in this area. Not sure how long it will take for Google to reach a critical mass where the “one-click buy” button will be popular enough to pull share away from Amazon. And just like Amazon, the Google program will simply be another channel for retailers. There will be others that choose to get into this area and they may come and go—or have staying power. Depending on the cost of entry, a retailer may consider Google or others. The retailer should also consider where the people/shoppers are. That will help make a decision if a retailer should participate on Amazon, Google or any other retail platform.
There might be some slight advantage to a retailer. Personally, I don’t trust my “buy it now” information to Google and would probably never use a Google “buy it now.” The catch up game is not something Google does well. In other areas, Google’s need to catch up has resulted in gluts that have damaged many of their partners. (Seemingly unrestricted access to and use of its Android operating systems have made the prospect of any profitable premium smart phone unlikely. Samsung is reorganizing right now to address this situation).
Google may have some difficulty establishing enough trust with suppliers to gain much traction. Competing with Amazon is not a matter of aping the Amazon functions. To compete you have to exceed the Amazon package. Google will be hard pressed to make this happen in my lifetime.
This might be an opportunity, but perhaps the real question remains…why partner with Google when you can more easily (and successfully) partner with Amazon?
There is nothing but opportunity for more shopping channels than Amazon. Although there is initial retailer hesitation, I would recommend adoption of the Google button or something similar to offer a wider choice and greater control of the shopping experience by the consumer. Merchants need to be everywhere today. This is just one more avenue for them to create awareness of their offers to their audience. This is definitely at least something to try.
For small and medium sized retailers, this can generate incremental demand. For the leaders, the solution to Amazon isn’t creating another Amazon, unless they’re willing to sacrifice the long term for short term gain.
Google the good guy? Retailers are cool for good reason. As Jason said above, when companies get as big as Google, Amazon, Apple, or Facebook, they become retailers’ biggest competition. When Google is successful, the fees for using “buy online” will escalate just like PLAs.
Retailers need to be careful they don’t further drive customers away from their sites to make purchases on Google. The path to aggregating demand is not built in a day. There is the independent web of bloggers and mid- to long-tail publishers that companies like CJ and Shoppable access.
I hope Google is willing to absorb the blowback from Google’s largest customer, who happens to be Amazon.
Google Shopping can provide great visibility for retailers. After all, search engines are the starting point of 96% of all web searches. A “Buy Now” button will definitely up the convenience factor for shoppers and help bridge the gap with Amazon. And while price competition may be a concern, it’s not one limited to Google Shopping and shouldn’t deter retailers from giving it a shot.