At first glance, the stats from free text messaging startup GOGII and its textPlus application sound like they’re too big by an order of magnitude: 3.7 billion messages sent since June 2009. 8.5 million downloads. 23 million phone numbers in the network. But they’re real, and they’re a big business. Today the company is launching two new features that make the textPlus experience even richer, with support for sending images and a nifty new feature called ‘Face Text’.

The first feature is self-explanatory: you can attach images to your outbound text messages and send them for free. The second feature, called Face Text, is related, but it comes with a twist. Upon activating the feature, textPlus will take a photo using your phone’s front-facing camera whenever you hit the send button, allowing you to quickly attach facial expressions whenever you send a message (think of it as emoticons meeting the photo booth — see the screenshot above). You can turn it off and there’s a countdown timer so the feature should never surprise you, and I suspect that the teenage audience that absolutely loves these apps will eat this up.

GOGII is one of a new breed of startup building on the relatively ancient and ubiquitous technology of text messaging. They compete with Pinger’s TextFree, which we wrote about last week and has similarly massive stats, and both companies have grown by leaps and bounds in the last year (interestingly, both Pinger and GOGII are part of the Kleiner Perkins iFund).

GOGII’s textPlus shares at least one major feature in common with Pinger’s TextFree: it allows you to send unlimited free text messages to your friends. But textPlus has a few differences. For one, it doesn’t give you a new unique phone number like TextFree does — instead you’ll have to message your friend’s username to the GOGII shortcode (users will be able to get their own phone numbers in the near future).

Another key differences lies in the community nature of textPlus, which TextFree doesn’t offer yet. The service effectively brings chat rooms to the mobile phone — fire up the app and you can create or join a chat room about, say, skateboarding, which behaves a lot like the AOL chat rooms of yore (around 500,000 communities have been created so far). But you can also elect to receive push notifications whenever there’s a new message, which turns into a powerful tool when you combine the feature with a private community. GOGII says that many people create private communities for their families or sports teams, which can be powerful for staying in touch with a small group: when a member of these private communities sends a chat message, it gets immediately relayed to everyone else in the community.

Advertisers are not the only ones plowing money into the online video space with gusto, you can add large, international investors to that growing list.

This morning, Ooyala announced a $22 million Series D round, led by the CID Group (Shanghai-based venture capital firm) and ITOCHU Technology Ventures (venture unit of the Tokyo-based ITOCHU). The round, which includes previous investors like Sierra Ventures and Rembrandt Venture Partners, puts the video publishing platform at $42 million raised since its 2007 launch. And according to CEO Jay Fulcher, the company is not done. In order to accommodate robust demand (the latest round was over-subscribed), Ooyala will take on additional investors later this year in a second closing.

Impressive numbers but it’s not just about the money. For Ooyala, saddling up with CID and ITOCHU also represents a highly strategic move, as the company tries to expand its footprint in Asia. “It was a conscious point on our part to chose investors who had great ecosystems to leverage throughout Asia,” Fulcher told TechCrunch. “We are doubling down in Asia.”

Ooyala specializes in hosting videos for large corporate and media clients, such as the Telegraph Media Group, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Dell and General Mills ( full disclosure: Ooyala is also a partner of TechCrunch TV). Their primary product is Backlot, a video management system that allows clients to upload and manage content and get access to analytics. Growth has been strong, with the revenue run rate up 300% year-over-year.

Over the last several months, the startup has committed serious resources to its international plans, setting up shop in Japan via its partnership with NTT Smartconnect and, more recently, Australia. Last week, Ooyala appointed John Treloar (formerly of Adobe) as Managing Director for the Australia and New Zealand region. Although the European and North American market still make up 80% of Ooyala’s business, Fulcher says Asia’s potential for online video demand is tremendous. “We’re quite bullish on the entire theatre, we’ve been in Japan now for some time, the pipeline suggests that there is more and more demand for this kind of technology to power online video,” Fulcher says, “Japan, Taiwan, China, Korea, and Australia — those are our top markets”

What is their strategy? Beyond regional investors, Ooyala is in the process of securing new channel partners in Asia and finalizing deals with several “big anchor customers,” Fulcher says. “The kind of clients that will give us deep access into the area.”

Of course, Ooyala is not the only one. A bevy of video players are also rushing into the far corners of Asia— with fistfuls of cash. Rival Brightcove has raised a whopping $103 million, and has had a strong presence in Japan for several years (the company currently has roughly 100 publisher deals in Japan). In August, Brightcove also announced the appointment of Dennis Rose (a veteran of Citrix) to VP of the Asia-Pacific region.

(Source image: Flickr/David Z.)

This morning’s somewhat vague statement by Apple on updates to it’s developer agreement brought a flurry of questions. Did Apple just allow Flash-powered Apps into the App ecosystem? Will third-party anlaytics companies like Flurry still be blocked? And one important question—did Apple rescind its terms that effectively prevented ad networks that are owned by a device or OS manufacturer (ie Google’s AdMob) from serving ads on iOS devices? According to MediaMemo, it looks like Apple did, in fact change its terms to include non-independent ad networks, such as AdMob, in being able to serve ads on iPhones and iPads.

And Google has just released a statement on its Mobile Ads Blog addressing Apple’s apparent inclusion of AdMob: “Apple's new terms will keep in-app advertising on the iPhone open to many different mobile ad competitors and enable advertising solutions that operate across a wide range of platforms.”

Apple's developer licensing agreement in June allowed only "independent" ad-serving companies tol be able to serve ads. AdMob, because it's "an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple" (i.e. Google), was restricted from serving ads on apps for the iPhone. AdMob CEO Omar Hamoui confirmed this inn an official response from AdMob. But as we learned in July, Apple didn’t enforce this policy, as AdMob was able to serve ads on iOS devices. This could have been because the FTC was rumored to be sniffing investigating Apple because of these anti-competitive practices.

If Apple was allowed to continue its exclusion of ad networks that are owned by device or OS manufacturers, the effects could have been disastrous for the mobile ad ecosystem.

But Google appears to now be in the clear and can fully reap the benefits from its $750 million acquisition of AdMob and this $1 billion market without the fear of Apple’s wrath.

In April, we announced that French startup fund, ISAI, officially launched with some 24 million euros. The "French entrepreneurs fund" brings together some of the 60 hottest names in French tech, including PriceMinister's founder Pierre Kosciusko-Morizet and the former Editor of TechCrunch France, Ouriel Ohayon. The fund announced a first investment in June, putting 1.25 million euros into the France-based, European carpooling platform, Covoiturage.fr - and has just announced a second investment in InstantLuxe, a marketplace for certified authentic luxury goods. InstantLuxe was founded in 2009 and allows individuals and professionals to buy and sell high-end, second-hand goods from brands like Chanel, Louis Vuitton, Rolex, Bulgari, etc. All items sold on the site are delivered with a certificate of authenticity after being inspected by a network of experts. The site sells everything from jewelry to leather goods to accessories - plus, users searching for a particular item can request it for free.

Glam Media is flexing its M&A muscle overseas. Today, it is acquiring German men’s Web property Fantastic Zero from the digital division of German media giant Holtzbrinck and European marketing agency Publigroupe.

Fantastic Zero is a collection of 50 male oriented sites with a reach of 5.5 million unique visitor a month in Germany, and 10 million overall. The acquisition price is not being disclosed, but it is a decent sized acquisition for Glam, which started in the U.S. as a collection of female-oriented sites and a larger ad network. Glam is already the the sixth largest Web property in the U.S. with a reach of 98 million uniques in August, coming up fast on No. 5 AOL’s 107 million (comScore). Fantastic Zero won’t help in the U.S., but it will worldwide, where Glam has a reach of 170 million uniques.

The acquisition helps Glam not so much on the numbers, but in its attempt to broaden out to men. A year ago it launched Brash, and more recently, BrashSports.

Glam raised $50 million last February, and hired a big-gun CFO in former Microsoft executive Bruce Jaffe last May. Glam’s M&A machine is just getting rolling. Expect it to pick up more properties to expand its reach both in the U.S. and abroad as it tries to unseat AOL.

Mobile social network Flirtomatic ("the world's number one flirting company") today announced somewhat of a milestone: It's passed the 3 million global user mark and, perhaps more noteworthy, recently surpassed 1 million users in the U.S. Furthermore, citing a study by the mobile media measurement firm Ground Truth, the London-based company says that over the summer, Flirtomatic accounted for 65% of the season's audience for mobile dating in the US (I didn't know dating sites had seasons), out flirting traditional players such as eHarmony and match.com. That's impressive although it also speaks volumes to the vulnerability of said players, many of whom charge for access as well as an additional premium for mobile.

The black box that is the Apple review process is creaking open. In a very brief release, Apple has essentially relaxed the requirement that developers use Apple’s own development tools “as long as the resulting apps do not download any code.” They’ve also published some review guidelines, allowing programmers to understand just what will go on behind the curtains in Cupertino.

What does this mean? Well, in the updated SDK license, circa April of this year, a number of paragraphs essentially banned outside development tools including systems that ported Flash, Silverlight, Java, and other platforms to the iPhone. Now, presumably, any app that runs on the iPhone, regardless of source, will be considered. The language is so mushy that it’s still unclear what this actually means.

Read more…

Crossing the wires now—the Amazon Kindle will be available in Best Buy stores sometime this autumn. This probably makes sense for a few reasons.

Lookout, a company that offers security data backup services for smartphones, is growing rapidly. Less than two months after the startup surpassed one million users, the company has crossed the 2 million registered users mark. It took just over six months to reach 1 million users.

Lookout, which recently raised $11 million from Accel, Khosla and others, says the growth in smartphone adoption, mobile app downloads and increased consumer awareness of mobile security threats have made consumers aware of the security threats on mobile phones.

While smartphone use is growing rapidly, there are security risks associated with the increased data and application usage on these devices. Similar to a PC, users need to protect their phones from malware, viruses, data loss and more. Lookout's web-based, cloud-connected application indentifies and block threats on a consumer's phone. Users simply download the software to a device, and it will act as a virus protector much like security software downloaded to a computer.

Lookout also recently launched the App Genome Project which identifies applications that carry the same characteristics of established dangerous applications, quickly isolate them, and protect users. To date, Lookout has analyzed over 300,000 apps.

In less than one year in business, the company has also found lost or stolen phones for users more than 700,000 times, with a phone found every 15 seconds over the past two months. And Lookout has backed-up over 130 million photos and backed-up over 625 million contacts.

Lookout is of course riding on the growth in smartphone adoption, and the increased use of apps on these phones. For now Lookout, which is on more than 400 mobile networks in 170 countries, is only available for BlackBerry, Android and Windows Mobile devices. Lookout has over 80% of its users on Android and BlackBerry with the remaining users on Windows Mobile. And 70% of users are in the US.

Today, Amazon Payments, the company’s PayPal competitor, has made its payments feature on third-party sites much more streamlined. Checkout by Amazon, which allows anyone with an Amazon.com account to make purchases on a third-party merchant's site using their Amazon.com account credentials, don’t have to leave the site to access their payment information and address book when completing a purchase.

Previously, consumers had to leave a merchant’s site after clicking the checkout button, and were redirected to Amazon if using Amazon Checkout. Now, consumers can access their Amazon address book and stored payment methods directly on a merchant's site.

The new version of Checkout By Amazon is already being used by Geeks.com and clothing site WetSeal. Amazon says that this small feature will be able to make the checkout process easier for its “tens of millions of Amazon.com account holders.”

There’s no doubt that not having to leave a merchant’s site could help with the conversion process at checkout. Of course, Checkout By Amazon is not nearly has popular as PayPal, which seems to be growing by leaps and bounds, and is adding one million new accounts per month. And PayPal has been allowing users to checkout in merchant sites for some time now.

This past weekend, I wrote a post wondering if Android was surging in the U.S. market because Apple was letting it? The main thought was that by remaining exclusively tied to AT&T, Apple was driving some users to choose Android, which is available on all the U.S. carriers. In the post, I posed a question: if it’s not the iPhone/AT&T deal, why do you choose Android? Nearly 1,000 people responded, and a large percentage focused on the same idea: the idea of “openness.”

You’ll forgive me, but I have to say it: what a load of crap.

In theory, I’m right there with you. The thought of a truly open mobile operating system is very appealing. The problem is that in practice, that’s just simply not the reality of the situation. Maybe if Google had their way, the system would be truly open. But they don’t. Sadly, they have to deal with a very big roadblock: the carriers.

The result of this unfortunate situation is that the so-called open system is quickly revealing itself to be anything but. Further, we’re starting to see that in some cases the carriers may actually be able to exploit this “openness” to create a closed system that may leave you crying for Apple’s closed system — at least their’s looks good and behaves as expected.

Case in point: the last couple of Android phones I’ve gotten as demo units from Google: the EVO 4G and the Droid 2, have been loaded up with crapware installed by the carriers (Sprint and Verizon, respectively). Apple would never let this fly on the iPhone, but the openness of Android means Google has basically no say in the matter. Consumers will get the crapware and they’ll like it. Not only that, plenty of this junk can’t even be uninstalled. How’s that for “open”?

And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Earlier this year, Verizon rolled out its own V Cast app store on some BlackBerry devices. This occurred despite that fact that BlackBerry devices have their own app store (App World). From what we’re hearing, Verizon is also planning to launch this store on their Android phones as well in the future. Obviously, this store would be pre-installed, and it would likely be more prominently displayed than Android’s own Market for apps.

Does V Cast have some good content? Probably. But most of it is undoubtedly crap that Verizon is trying to sell you for a high fee. But who cares whether it’s great or it’s crap — isn’t the point of “open” supposed to be that the consumer can choose what they want on their own devices? Instead, open is proving to mean that the carriers can choose what they want to do with Android.

It’s too bad, but there is now a very real risk that the carriers are going to exploit the open system Google set up in order to create a new version of the bullshit proprietary ecosystems that they had before the iPhone came along and turned the market on its side.

And it’s not just Verizon, it’s all the carriers. One of the great features of Android is that you can install apps without going through an app store, right? Well, not if you have an a Motorola Backflip or a HTC Aria running on AT&T — they’ve locked this feature down. How? Thanks to the open Android OS.

Oh, and how about tethering? It’s one of the truly great features of Android 2.2, right? Well, not if you have a carrier that doesn’t want to support it. Google has to defer to them to enable their own native OS feature. It’s such an awesome feature — in the hands of Google. Once the carriers get their hands on it — not so much.

Speaking of Android 2.2, you know it’s out there right? You’ll be forgiven if you don’t because a whopping 4.5 percent of you Android users are currently running it, according to Google’s dashboard. And again, that’s not Google’s fault, that’s all the carriers. Incredibly, over 35 percent of you still aren’t even running any version of Android 2.x. It’s pathetic.

Apple gets crap for not supporting phones that are three years old with OS updates — the open Android system can’t even upgrade phones that are only a few months old in some cases — again, all thanks to the carriers.

The excuses for why this is run rampant. They need to tweak their custom skins, they need to test the new software, etc. It’s all a bunch of garbage. This is an open platform and yet you’re more restricted than on Apple’s supposedly closed one.

What happens when Verizon won’t update your phone to the latest greatest Android software — not because they can’t, but because they want you to upgrade to a new piece of hardware and sign the new two-year agreement that comes along with it? The game remains the same.

My point is not to bash Google — what they’ve created is an excellent mobile operating system. My point is that the same “openness” that Android users are touting as a key selling point of the OS could very well end up being its weak point. If you don’t think Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint are going to try to commandeer the OS in an attempt to return to their glory days where we were all slaves to their towers, you’re being naive.

“Open” is great until you have to define it or defend it. I’m not sure Google can continue to do either in this situation.

And before all of you pros storm the comments with how great it is to root your Android phones, consider the average consumers here. They are the ones being screwed by this exploitation of “open.” Anyone with the desire to do so can fairly easily hack an iPhone too. Open is not a reason to choose Android + carrier vs. iPhone + AT&T.

Update: Oh, and one more great example Michael Prassel reminded me of in the comments — do you want Skype on your Android phone? Well, I hope you have Verizon because otherwise you won’t be able to install it. “Open.” We’re only going to see more of this, not less.

[photo: AP]

The market for web-based translations is estimated to be worth around $3 billion currently, and big markets tend to attract investors. One of the newer companies in that area, Tokyo-based myGengo (which we previously profiled as “Mechanical Turk for translation”), just raised a $750,000 seed round from some high-profile backers.

What’s interesting is that the round was extremely international, as its total of twelve participants cover eight nationalities and currently reside in eleven different countries. Investors include Dave McClure (who made a personal investment earlier this year and now added myGengo to his 500 Startups fund), last.fm co-founder Felix Miller, Delicious founder Joshua Schachter, Brian Nelson (CEO at Japan-based affiliate marketing firm ValueCommerce), Pageflakes co-founder Christoph Janz, Benjamin Joffe (CEO at China-based tech consultancy Plus Eight Star), and a number of Japanese angels.

myGengo offers crowdsourced translations in nine different languages. The main bullet points are that all translations (from short sentences to long texts) are handled by certified human translators, entirely over the web and up to 70% cheaper when compared to professional translators. In April, myGengo rolled out an API that allows developers to plug on-demand human translation directly into websites, apps, widgets, social networks, and other products.

The company is on a roll, saying that since April, the volume of words translated per month grew five-fold – just like monthly revenue did. myGengo now intends to use the fresh money to expand its multi-lingual site tool "String", create API plugins for a number of popular frameworks, and build its US enterprise sales operation.

I typically hear from VCs these days when they are either doing a big, growth capital round, a follow-on funding, an investment in concert with a syndicate or.... bleeeeeeeeep (as in not at all). The rise of the "Super Angels", a trend TechCrunch Europe was first to call in 2008, seems to be putting paid to VC's involvement in early stage. Or perhaps not. Venture capital house Eden Ventures appears to be on something of a roll and has taken to co-investing with angels like a duck to water. Today it announces five (count'em) new investments, which range in size from £100,000 to £1 million.

Ok, so not only is Google Instant rejiggering how we think about search, but it is also a clever way to create instant music videos. We saw this with the official Google Instant version of Bob Dylan’s “Subterranean Homesick Blues” (where the lyrics on the flash cards get typed into Google and create a stream of related results).

But now the same thing has been done with the “Instant Elements” song in the video above. The lyrics to Tom Lehrer’s song, “The Elements,” are typed into Google Instant, and it creates a visual accompaniment to the song, showing search results and images for each element like magnesium, silicon, and gadolinium. I think we have a meme here. You can do this for any song, and now people will.

The video was created by ad agency Whirled, the same one behind the famous Pulp Fiction Google Wave video.

Zynga has been taking it on the chin from the SF Weekly the last few weeks. First there was a four part series about some stickers that Zynga’s ad agency put on the streets of San Francisco – lame but not exactly Third Reicht territory. But the last two days the newspaper has focused on Zynga’s penchant for stealing game ideas from other companies. FarmVille, FishVille, PetVille, Café World, and Mafia Wars were all copies of other company’s games. That warranted a cover story.

The SFWeekly even gave this copying thing a name – Farmvillians. Which is kinda catchy, although it’s no Scamville if you ask me. Scamville was major league evil. Copying business ideas is just being part of Silicon Valley.

All this got me thinking about the quote “Behind every great fortune there is a crime” and the tendency of some people to go legit just as soon as they’ve won the game. Then they hope that they can wipe the slate clean and be accepted in the better parts of society.

I’m not talking about some real world gangster who moves into a more legitimate role as real estate tycoon and starts giving money to charity. I’m talking about the startups all around us. They all have stories. Some are worse than others, and Zynga has a particularly troubled past. Facebook may have done a better job of avoiding direct video documentation of some of its more interesting ethical moments, but they aren’t squeaky clean, either. Microsoft was famously evil for the first 25 years or so it was around. It’s just too easy to do the wrong thing in business, there are very rarely any consequences.

Should we just let the past go and wipe the slate clean once a company decides it makes more sense to be clean than dirty?

Here’s what I think. If they’ve sincerely changed, give ‘em another chance. It’s worked for the Catholics all these years, and I think it works well in our world, too. Plus, the stuff the Catholic Church has forgiven itself for is way more impressive than, say, putting stickers on a sidewalk or ripping off a few tens of thousands of clueless Farmville players.

That’s the rub though. Whether or not they really are sincere about not being evil any more. I’ve got no answer for that one.

TechCrunch-reading football fans may remember a nifty, free online game we wrote about last year called Quick Hit that puts you at the helm of a virtual football team. The game doesn’t involve the twitchy gameplay of gaming goliath Madden, but is instead built around strategy and play calling (though it does feature rich, 3D graphics to keep things interesting). You may also notice that the game’s logo looks a little different from last year’s: it now sports the official emblem of the NFL. And that’s a big deal.

You see, when Quick Hit launched last year it didn’t have the NFL license. That meant it didn’t have any of the official NFL teams, so you’d have to coach generic squads that don’t actually exist. Which, to put it lightly, is a big buzzkill when you’re trying to pretend you’re Bill Walsh and are reigning over the fictitious San Francisco Tigers. But now Quick Hit has forged a deal with the NFL that gives it rights to all of the real teams, uniforms, and stadiums. And today it’s launching a totally overhauled version of the game, including a premium edition that includes an improved 3D graphics engine.

The game itself is best described as a football RPG. First you choose a team and build out a roster of players. Gameplay revolves around deciding which plays to run — after picking a play, you take a step back as the computer acts it out (remember, this isn’t Madden, so you aren’t going to be mashing buttons as you try to steer your players down the field). This might not appeal much to hardcore console gamers, but Quick Hit is betting that there’s a much larger market for more casual gamers (like the millions who play fantasy football).

As you continue through the game you earn various upgrades and special plays which you can use to improve your players. You can also pay real money to purchase these upgrades, which is one of the game’s revenue channels.

The year’s version offers a premium upgrade, available for a one-time $15 fee or as part of the game’s monthly subscription option, to convert its 2D sprites into 3D using the Unity browser plugin (the screenshots are of the 3D version). The result is pretty impressive for a browser-based game and the engine also allows players on the 2D version to play an opponent running the 3D version without any issues.

In addition to the rights to use NFL teams in the game, Quick Hit is also going to be promoted on NFL.com, which should lead to a major boost in distribution. QuickHit CEO Jeffrey Anderson wouldn’t talk about the terms of the deal, but given how much exposure the NFL is giving the game, there’s a chance that the league now has a stake in the Quick Hit.

Unfortunately it isn’t all roses. Quick Hit has the rights to the NFL, but it doesn’t have a deal with the Players Association or Coaches Association, which means you won’t be commanding a roster of your favorite stars. Quick Hit has signed deals with some individual players like Donovan McNabb, but the majority of names in the game are fictitious. Still, having the actual uniforms and logos throughout the game is a big step forward, as is the distribution deal — expect Quick Hit’s popularity this season to be a big gain over last year’s.

If you want to try the game for yourself, be sure to use the promo code TCKICKOFF, which will earn TechCrunch readers an extra 2000 coaching points.

I don’t know why but I just can’t stop re-reading this exchange. Poor AT&T shoots itself in the head today by emailing customers and asking them to provide feedback in one centralized place. Customers promptly complied, and the tower of hate is almost overwhelming. Someone at AT&T will likely be cleaning out their desk tomorrow over this, and frankly I can’t believe they didn’t see it coming. It’ll be hard for AT&T to argue that the vast majority of its customers are happy when nearly all the comments are hugely negative, some violently so.

Some commenters were particularly incensed that they had to “like” the page before commenting.

I do pity the poor sobs who are being tasked with actually responding to all of these comments. They’re writing so fast that they can’t keep their grammar straight. And they’re trying, heroically, to defend the company against this self inflicted wound. Mostly they’re asking for specific feedback instead of vague but strong vitriol. And in this case they succeeded. Michael Tejada went from calling them the devil to simply requesting a no cap data plan. And even thanks them at the end.

Sometimes all people need is to know they’re being heard. Of course, the guy who said he has never successfully completed a call on his iPhone from his office may need a little more than platitudes.

Google made it clear at its press event today that Google Instant will not change way that company will rank ads or show ads. From the Google blog:

“We recommend monitoring your ads’ performance the same way you usually do. Google Instant might increase or decrease your overall impression levels. However, Google Instant can improve the quality of your clicks since it helps people search using terms that more directly connect them with the answers they need. Therefore, your overall campaign performance could improve.”

At the event, Google Ad Evangelist Frederick Vallaeys went into detail with us why the new feature might in fact improve Adwords campaign performance, and also debunked some of the easily made assumptions, which he outlined:

* Google Instant will greatly increase ad impressions: Impressions will go up, because of the new “3 seconds counts as an impression” rule as well as the rule that any page engagement also counts. But, from an advertiser perspective, that “20 times as many searches” statistic tossed around today is going to be more conservative.

* Increased impressions means increased costs: Most Adwords campaigns are cost per click, advertisers are not paying for impressions.

*  Advertisers will need to buy more keywords: Because Adwords are sold on the whole predictive text not partial queries, an advertiser still will be buying the same keywords, there’s no need to buy more keywords in order to to optimize performance.

“Because of the interactivity the feed, people will actually get close to the results that they want to see and are more likely to covert to becoming a buy.”

Google is banking on Google Instant users “learning how to search better,” or getting closer to the thing they were searching for, in essence optimizing the ad. “When the advertiser gets a click and they’re still paying the same amount for that click, they’re actually much more likely to get a sale from that,” says Vallaeys. The behavioral theory here is that normal non-instantly updating search is kind of hit or miss, and the more Google can serve up exactly what you want, the more you’ll actually want it or put your money where your mouth is and buy it.

Will the 350 million hours of user time per year saved negatively affect advertisers? According to Vallaeys, No. “We’re the only company in the world whose goal it is to get users off our site as quickly as possible. And ultimately we do monetize for a when a person finds the ad they were looking for and clicks off of it.”

But this doesn’t necessarily mean less searches, says Vallaeys, “What I think will happen is that users will be taught how to search better,  and do more searches if they’re finding that the searches actually work and they get results. That usually means that more search is happening. And usually that means more opportunity for advertisers to connect to users.”

Not surprisingly, Vallaeys refused to speculate when asked for an estimate of how much revenue this improved Adwords campaign performance could mean to Google. My guess: A lot.

Image: Audrey Fukuman

In this video we find AT&T’s rep, Seth Bloom, reaching out to New Yorkers in particular and explaining, as simply as possible, why their calls suck and how AT&T is trying to fix the problem. Wow.

Essentially AT&T is starting to move some calls to the the 850 MHz band for more in-building coverage. The best thing about this video is that Seth the AT&T Blogger Guy looks like someone you’d want to give a noogie to (that’s a good thing) and they show you whats inside those crazy switch boxes on top of buildings. Double rainbow.

Read more…

After Google’s search event this morning, TechCrunch TV got a chance to catch up with Marissa Mayer, Google’s VP of Search Products and User Experience, in the demo pit.

In our brief video interview, an enthusiastic Mayer touts Google Instant as a “whole new way to search,”a game changer akin to the introduction of power steering in the automotive industry. It’s certainly a neat feature that optimizes the search experience, but the real question remains: how does Google Instant fundamentally change consumer behavior, and in turn SEO and Google’s ad sales.

Mayer was more tentative on this front. See video above. Apologies for the muffled audio on my end, only one wireless mic was working at the time.

There has been a lot of debate as to how Google Instant will impact Search Engine Optimization. By effectively compressing the time of each individual search and allowing users to edit searches in real time, Google Instant has the potential to radically upend the current mechanics of search and the discoverability of sites. According to Mayer, it’s too early to determine how the new feature will affect the company’s bottom line and she believes there will only be a “small change for the SEO community.”

That said, she does expect consumer usage patterns to dramatically shift, including her own. For Google, the hope is that the net effect is not just faster searches, but more searches: “One of the things I’ve seen in my own personal usage,  is that while each search is faster, I spend more time doing searches. Because I actually see the results coming in and out as I’m doing my searches… I learn things as I go. And after I’ve actually fulfilled my query, a lot of times I’ll see interesting suggestions, so I’ll scroll around and learn different things and so I think ultimately, it may increase engagement of our users.”

Mayer also told us that Google Instant will eventually hit the other sections of search within the next few months, including Google News and image search.

Bonus footage: After Mayer’s interview, we got a chance to talk to Steve Cheng, a product manager on Google’s Mobile team, who gave us a quick demo on Instant on mobile and discussed their upcoming rollout strategy. See video below.

John Seely Brown and John Hagel are two of the most respected technology and business thinkers in Silicon Valley. Seely Brown is best known as the long time Chief Scientist at Xerox Parc, while Hagel is the author of a number of influential business articles and books including Net Worth.

As the co-chairmen of Deloitte's intriguingly named Center for the Edge, Seely Brown and Hagel have just come out with a new book called The Power of Pull: How Small Moves, Smartly Made, Can Set Big Things in Motion which is a big-picture attempt to conceptualize the shift from the old industrial economy to today's revolutionary digital economy.

The great change in contemporary economic life – what Seely Brown and Hagel call the "big shift" – is between the old centralized command-and-control industrial economy and today's democratized edge economy. Sometimes sounding more like Marxist revolutionaries than Deloitte consultants, Seely Brown and Hagel see the pull economy as fundamentally changing every aspect of 21st century life – from business to education to politics to social activity.

This is a big, bold take on the digital revolution which has elicited highly favorable reviews from Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, Joichi Ito, Richard Florida, Eric Schmidt and Walter Isaacson. As Seely Brown and Hagel argue in the The Power of Pull: "The ultimate promise of pull is the opportunity to reclaim our individuality and pursue our potential in a was that were never feasible in a world of push…. For the first time ever, we have the real opportunity to become we are, and more importantly, who were meant to be."

On Xerox Parc and the Center for the Edge

On why the power of pull represents the end of the command and control economy.

On the role of education and the power of imagination in restructuring business and society.

On the profound long-term shifts in the global economic system

On the cloud.

Earlier today, Google launched a new feature that could fundamentally change the way people go about searching the web: Google Instant. The feature, which is rolling out now, shows results for your search queries as soon as you begin typing them — oftentimes you’ll have the information you were looking for before you’re even finished typing your query. You can see our full coverage on the launch here.

Such a major change will impact the way people conduct their searches, and that will lead to repercussions for the search ecosystem. Steve Rubel says that it will make Search Engine Optimization (SEO) — the dark magic that helps websites appear higher in search results — totally irrelevant. Now Matt Cutts, the longtime Googler who is in charge of Google’s webspam team and often speaks publicly about SEO issues, has weighed in on how he thinks things will change. And change, they will.

Here’s one key passage from his blog post:

Q: Will Google Instant change search engine optimization?

A: I think over time it might. The search results will remain the same for a query, but it's possible that people will learn to search differently over time. For example, I was recently researching a congressperson. With Google Instant, it was more visible to me that this congressperson had proposed an energy plan, so I refined my search to learn more, and quickly found myself reading a post on the congressperson's blog that had been on page 2 of the search results.

Cutts goes on to further discuss this tendency to continuously refine your search queries — a concept that came up during this morning’s announcement. On ‘old’ Google, most users run a search query then browse through a page or two of results to see if they find what they’re looking for. With Google Instant, it’s more common for them to quickly tweak their query on the fly, or to flip through the suggested results by simply hitting the arrow keys. That change is important — it may make it even less likely that a user will see your site if it’s listed at the bottom of the results page, or a page or two deep.

But Cutts goes on to say that this doesn’t mean SEO is dead:

I've said it before, but SEO is in many ways about change. The best SEOs recognize, adapt, and even flourish when changes happen.

Also worth noting: Google Instant will have an impact on advertisers as well. Before now, it was straightforward to measure an ad impression — the user ran a query, and your ad either showed up on the page or it didn’t. But because of the constantly updating nature of Google Instant, ads will now often appear for a fraction of a second. To account for this Google is changing the way it measures impressions (it only counts if the user hits the ‘Enter’ key to complete their query, looks at the page for over three seconds, or they click on a link from the results page). But Google is also preemptively warning advertisers to expect some fluctuations:

With this change, you might notice some fluctuations in AdWords impression volume and traffic for organic keywords. For example, you may find that certain keywords receive significantly more or fewer impressions moving forward.

We’ll have more on these issues, including an interview with Google VP of Search Product and User Experience Marissa Mayer, later this afternoon.

Earlier this year we wrote about TechCrunch 50 company Localbacon’s relaunch as Jibe, a next-generation job board that leverages Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter to help job seekers find the best positions in the job market. Today, Jibe, which has been in private beta since March, is launching to the public, with job listings from Conde Nast, MTV Networks, Amazon, Equinox, and Church & Dwight.

On Jibe, job seekers sign in with Facebook Connect. The platform will pull in their work and education history from their Facebook profile and from LinkedIn and Twitter to pre-populate their Jibe profile. Then for every job posting, they can see if they are connected to anyone at that company. Jibe allows members to message those people directly to ask for a recommendation or job advice.

Jibe uses a credit system that allows applicants to apply for jobs. Applicants can earn credits by linking their Jibe account to their various social networks, broadcasting their job search, sending private messages through the system, or updating their work history profile. They can also buy 500 credits for $5.

Each job listing is ranked based on how many times it's been viewed, saved, or applied for. The jobs that rank higher turn up at the top of job searches. Employers can post jobs for free, but pay $15 to unlock an applicant's profile. By unlocking the profile employers get to see the applicant's name, who else they are connected to in the company, and they can send them a direct message. Candidates whose profile gets unlocked the most appear on a leaderboard.

Jibe, which is incubated in Dogpatch Labs in New York City, closed an $875,000 seed round led by Polaris Venture Partners (which runs Dogpatch Labs) with Lerer Media Ventures, Zelkova Ventures, Jason Calacanis, and Josh and Jared Kushner participating in the round.

With the seed funding, Jibe has expanded its team with some key hires from the online job board and technology industry. Jibe’s new Director of Enterprise Sales, Lisa Kloster came from The Ladders where she was their top outside salesperson in 2008 and 2009. JIBE’s Director of Engineering, Andrzej Lawn came from Gilt Groupe and was previously at the New York Times.

As current job boards falter with pure listings, it makes sense to allow users to tap into their social graph in the job search. And since the site is targeted at the under-25 crowd, many users have already built enough connections on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter to make Jibe beneficial.

Earlier today AT&T sent out a “Special Message From AT&T” email highlighting a 18-19 billion dollar investment in their network as well as plans for other improvements. The email provides a link to their Facebook page an avalanche of comments like this cropped up:

“”Im only sticking out my contract because I dont have the money to pay a termination fee at the moment. “

“I switched to AT&T solely for the iPhone. I have such terrible reception in my neighborhood that I can’t actually use it as a phone. My coworker received a FREE microcell for this very reason, apparently he is a “valued AT&T customer” whereas I am not. I spoke with several people at AT&T on multiple calls trying to receive one also, but they all insisted “no one” has ever gotten it free. I know this is untrue because I saw the letter from granting him a free microcell at any AT&T store and was there as he received his complimentary device, “as a valued customer.” Sad that your company had to develop an VoIP device so people could use their phone for it’s intended purpose, especially in a major city like San Francisco. Perhaps spending 10s of billions of dollars on your network is not such sound footing, for when the iPhone goes to different carriers, surely so will your entire iPhone customer base. Let me know when you’re ready to send me my free microcell.”

“I don’t want a NATION WIDE response. I want a LOCAL targeted response. Tell me what you are doing to improve service in San Francisco please. The iPhone capital of the world is pretty much the wrong place to have bad service. I lose my service in our elevator at work: SOMA. I have no service in my apartment: LOWER HAIGHT. My roommate sits there on his Droid / Verizon & has a whole conversation without saying “oh wait can you hear me?” and losing his call 5x. I have to go outside to our porch, or lean out the window to make a call or send a txt. I literally get frustrated with AT&T almost EVERY SINGLE DAY. Make a change, and announce that change locally, with measurable results via feedback from people & you get to keep me as a customer when Verizon/iPhone comes out.”

“The coverage here in Denver is mortifying. On a scale of 1-10, my service here is a 3. I used to love your service, best of all time, was never happier…now it’s a joke. Support is a joke. Customer Service, a joke. They said they would give me a discount once my service got better..I pay $150 every month…after 6 months of dropped calls, lost business, missing everything, they offered me a $31.00 discount off 1 month.”

I HATE ATT!!!!!!!!

Here’s the email that started it all:

The most ironic part of the whole debacle? You have to “Like” the AT&T page to leave a comment, so many of the people expressing their anger and frustration were actually giving props to AT&T.

Update: Seth Bloom from AT&T tells TechCrunch that the company appreciates the feedback whether positive or negative, “Our letters today – in addition to thanking customers and outlining what we’re doing to make sure our service continually improves – asked for feedback and we’re getting it. We engage with customers all day every day on Facebook. We don’t delete comments, we answer questions and complaints directly and honestly, and we have a separate team of customer service managers who engage one-on-one with customers who post specific problems.”

Over time, we’ve scooped things ranging from Facebook Places to various Chrome OS features simply by digging through code put out there in public. What’s great about doing this is that it negates the inevitable non-denial denials from companies when you ask about these features. Code doesn’t lie. Neither do images. And the latter may reveal two upcoming features destined for Google Search.

Check out this image. It’s a file Google uses in conjunction with CSS to style their web results pages. On it, you’ll notice all the major navigational elements currently found on google.com are there — but there are also two extra ones: the question mark and the people icon.

Now, it’s certainly possible that these are simply icons that Google is no longer using in their search navigation but has tested out in the past (they do so many little tests). But I can’t recall ever seeing them, and neither can anyone else I’ve asked. Further, you’ll note that the name of the file is nav_log16.png — Google actually iterates these file names when they make nav changes, so this one is pretty new. If you want to go back in time in the way Google search looked, check out nav_logo7, for example. Or nav_logo3.

So what are the question mark and people icons? Judging from their position, they seem to be destined for the left side bar navigation on Google Search results. Could it be that Google is thinking about re-starting their (since-retired) Google Answers product? Remember, Google bought Q&A service Aardvark earlier this year for $50 million. Might they use it to populate a new Google Questions product?

Between Facebook Questions, Quora, Formspring and others, Q&A is a very hot space right now — and Google’s search box is still undoubtedly the most-used question submission form in the world. It’s a question (see what I did there?) of “when,” not “if” for such a product.

And what about the people icon (which shows two humanoid figures standing next to each other)? Yes, it looks like the MySpace logo, but that probably isn’t what they’re going for. Could this be the first signs of the mythical “Google Me” social reboot project being led by Vic Gundotra?

Or is it just a better way to showcase social circle searches? Currently, those reside at the bottom of search result pages, while status updates from Twitter are found in the “Updates” area (which is the blue chat box logo).

We’ve reached out to Google to get their non-denial denial. But following the launch of Google Instant today, these may be the next things we see from the search giant.

[thanks Sean]