MSN Brand Audit

Running Head: MSN Brand Audit

MSN Brand Audit

.

George Ray

Redmond Review

Page 1 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

1. Executive Summary

Microsoft Network (MSN), also known as LIVE is a distant 3rd place in Web site

traffic, behind Yahoo and Google. In most portal categories MSN aka LIVE is

competitive; it is the search service where it lags far behind the leaders. My survey

reveals that neither MSN nor LIVE have much brand awareness as search services.

There is great opportunity for MSN to increase revenues, though, because Google

is not a commanding presence in portal services other than search. Likewise, Yahoo is

struggling to maintain operations and is unable to keep current with advancing

technology. Neither Google nor Yahoo have Social Capital with the most lucrative

audience for Web advertising, “Strategic Buyers.” Microsoft does and this is also an

important audience to Microsoft because of its vulnerability to Open Source, Software as

a Service and other future directions.

My recommendation to Microsoft for its Internet operations is first to GO LIVE,

and commit to the LIVE brand name for its portal services. This must be done in

conjunction with an advertising campaign to increase awareness of Microsoft portal

operations in general and promote the new brand name. It should coincide with

marketing communications about the Azure initiative to emphasize the strength of

Microsoft to not only keep up with advancing technology but to define it. Finally, I

recommend a brand extension to reach “strategic buyers” with an Internet service that

Microsoft is well positioned to offer and that neither Yahoo nor Google can attempt at

this time. The extension is for a service that creates customized and searchable

collections on corporate governance, something attractive to “strategic buyers.”Page 2 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

2. MSN Brand Inventory

According to Keller (2008, p 129), an inventory is a “supply-side” view of the

brand, or as Ward (2008a, p 1) puts it “how the company organizes and attempts to

position the brand ….” Both also note that an inventory profiles competitors to

understand points of parity and points of difference.

2.1 Products and Services Offered

From 1995 through 2005, MSN was the umbrella brand for all online services

offered from Microsoft (see Rosoff, 2006, p 1). Beginning in 2006, the Windows LIVE

brand was introduced and applied to certain online properties with a goal of

reinvigorating them to compete more effectively through association with the Windows

brand name. For example, MSN Hotmail became Windows LIVE Mail, MSN Messenger

became Windows LIVE Messenger, and MSN Search became LIVE Search. However,

Rosoff (p1) goes on to note that several of the MSN brand names are category traffic

leaders so that Microsoft decided to also keep the MSN brand for many online services.

Tancer (2008, pp 1-2) works at Experian, and uses the Experian categories for

segmenting online services. MSN has a point of parity in each Experian category, with

the exception of Sports, Employment, and Personality. In terms of total share of Internet

visits, MSN captures 2.4% compared with Google at 7.7% and Yahoo at 13.2%. Both

MSN and Yahoo have portal services that Google does not. SiteSeeker (2008, p 1)

characterizes search as the dominant service in the competition between the three giants.

Page 3 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Rosoff and Tancer have a more balanced perspective that includes a complete set of

online services that draws traffic to the site.

In its SEC 10-K filing (see SEC, June 30, 2008), Microsoft characterizes its

Online Services Business as an online advertising platform. This platform offers

personal communication services such as email and messaging, the MSN portal, LIVE

Search, MSN Hotmail, MSN Mobile Services, MSN Premium Web Services, MapPoint

and MSN Internet Access. Here is a list of MSN properties with sufficient traffic to rank

in the top four sites by category.

Category Brand

Portal Pages MSN

Email Service MSN Hotmail

Search Engine MSN Search

News/Media MSNBC

Business Information MSN Money

Maps Local LIVE

Rewards/Directories MSN Shopping

Music MSN Music

Movies MSN Entertainment

Dating MSN Match.com

Games MSN Games

Now I will review the MSN services that attract advertisers to the site. There is a

parallel set of products and services to support marketing efforts to advertisers, the

Page 4 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

paying customers for the MSN brands. Sterling (2005, p 1) reports that the MSN

AdCenter product is well liked by advertisers. It has advanced demographic and

psychograhic mapping capabilities that allow them to better target communications.

Marketing Vox (2006, p 1) commended MSN on the high quality of its AdCenter

platform.

To help advertisers optimize their return on investment with MSN, Microsoft now

offers a training program and a certification credential. The training program instructs

advertiser staff on different strategies and tactics to use for different marketing

communications to different publics. Zol reports (2007, p 1) that this is important and

needed for point of parity in the category. Keller (p 110) notes that MSN’s service is not

required to be equal to Google to establish a point of parity but rather just “good

enough.”

Finally, Microsoft offers a community forum to assist advertisers with their Web

marketing through commentary by Web analytics experts, software development experts

who talk about the ability to customize AdCenter services through application

programming interfaces, and a variety of other topics. A typical example is Brian

Eisenberg discussing the Seven Biggest Mistakes of Web Analytics (see

http://adcentercommunity.com/blogs/analytics/archive/2008/11/27/7-biggest-mistakes-of-

web-analytics.aspx).

Page 5 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

2.2 Evaluating MSN against Keller’s Six Criteria

Keller (2008, p 140) uses six evaluation factors to study and define a brand image.

The criteria are: 1.) Memorability; 2.) Meaningfulness; 3.) Likeability; 4.)

Transferability; 5.) Adaptability; and 6.) Protectability.

2.2.1 Memorability

Keller (p 147) discusses brand name aspects that can increase memorability and

awareness. Two important aspects are “simple to say” and “easy to spell.” That is the

case with MSN and LIVE. A brand name should likewise be familiar and meaningful.

MSN does have familiarity in that it is a contraction of MS Network or Microsoft

Network. Windows LIVE also has associations with Microsoft. Both can thus draw on

associations with Microsoft. Furthermore, Keller holds that the name should be

distinctive. The word Network distinguishes MSN from Microsoft and the three-letter

acronym nature of the brand name is an orthographic device to distinguish the name with

linguistic characteristics (see Keller, 2008, p 152).

2.2.2-3 Meaningfulness and Likability

The MSN logo has rich meaning. The logo is a butterfly, which has meaning on

several levels. Russell (2003, p 1) notes that it has long been a symbol of transformation.

In the case of both Microsoft and its customers, the transition is to the new world founded

by the Internet. Russell also holds that our fascination with the butterfly is because if it

“mesmerizing beauty.”

Page 6 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

For each market segment there are two types of MSN customer. The first is the

site visitor who wants to use the services offered by MSN. The second are advertisers

who want to communicate with the site visitors. MSN has a mantra for the advertisers:

“Easy to sell, easy to buy.” Experienced advertising professionals at MSN make the

mantra true in actual practice according to Cuneo (2003, p 1) in Advertising Age.

2.2.4-5 Transferability and Adaptability

Keller defines two aspects of transferability (pp 142-3). The first is the ability of

a brand to transfer across categories. For example, how well do the Microsoft Network

brand elements transfer to a news channel? Shepard (1997, pp 35-8) discusses the

marriage of MSN and NBC into MSNBC one of the sub-brands in the MSN portfolio.

She found Microsoft bringing Internet and technology credibility to the joint venture and

NBC the news credentials and trust. This is still one of the most successful Internet news

programs. The second aspect of transferability is to add brand equity across geographical

boundaries. Again, Microsoft Network has done this. Koranteng (2004, p 1) observes

“that Microsoft Network [has] presence in 40 countries.”

Keller defines Adaptability (p 143) as the brand elements capacity to address

change over time in competitors, or in consumer tastes. Both have happened to Microsoft

Network during its history. Its first competitor was AOL, America On-Line in the mid-

1990s. As late as 2001, MSN had still not dispatched AOL as a portal competitor and the

Seattle Times (2002, p 1) reports that Microsoft spent $300M in the launch of the

Butterfly Logo as a campaign against a still powerful AOL. Since that time, AOL has

Page 7 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

faded as a portal site and now Microsoft faces two new powerful competitors in Google

and Yahoo.

Their surprising success resulted in MSN losing its footing. However, it is now

reorganizing and as Kafka (2008, p 1) reports is actually gaining market share on both

Google and Yahoo in the early part of this year.

2.2.6 Protectibility

Keller categorizes two types of protection for brand elements: 1.) Legal; and 2.)

Competitive. A logo such as the MSN Butterfly and the Microsoft Network brand name

can be legally protected especially when unauthorized use is a bad faith attempt to

mislead the public and misdirect trade and economic livelihood from a corporate body

that has invested in that name for commercial purpose (see Wikipedia, 2008a, p 1).

Trademarks and registered names also receive international recognition and protection.

2.3 Marketing Support Programs

Keller (p 131) observes that to achieve the ideal positioning of a brand and obtain

congruence between what customers currently believe about the brand and what they will

value in the brand, a strong supporting marketing program must be in place. Microsoft

Network does have a strong marketing support program and it has evolved throughout its

history. The products are listed above in section 2.1 and will be listed again in section 2.4

below on competitor analysis. The place is the Internet, now including mobile.

MSN has used a variety of promotional strategies over the past 14 years.

Brandweek (2000, p 1) reported on a common marketing tactic for MSN, which is to

Page 8 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

sponsor events that can be reported and tracked on the Internet. Sponsorship is one

aspect to MSN marketing support, and these events helped MSN prove the value of

online tracking.

Carter (2005, p 1) describes how MSN incorporates TV and online advertising

with events to promote the Microsoft Network brand. This work is coordinated by

McCann-Erickson and is coordinated across countries. In the case of the launch of

LIVE’s new search engine, the campaigns in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada,

Australia and Brazil were all synchronized.

Haar reports (1998, p 1) that in its early years, Microsoft had an annual $100M

marketing budget for MSN. MSN does not advertise solely to generate site traffic. They

also market to advertisers and Microsoft believes that its technical skill will give it a

competitive edge. Finally, the MSN advertising engine can be customized for each

advertiser, and so personalization is another marketing support program tactic.

2.4 Competitive Environment

2.4.1 Market Share

According to Tancer (2008, p 1), the market share for Internet visits are:

VendorMarket Share of Total

VisitsMSN 2.40%Google 7.70%Yahoo 13.20%

Tancer goes on to breakdown the total visits into the Experian Web site segments as

follows.

Page 9 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Category Property Rank Share

Portal PagesYahoo 1 71.40%MSN 2 15.43%

       

Email Service

Yahoo!Mail 1 54.63%MSN Hotmail 2 25.54%Google Gmail 3 5.51%Yahoo!Address Book 5 3.87%

       

Search Engine

Google 1 54.90%Yahoo 2 17.28%Google Image 3 5.34%MSN 4 5.20%

       

News/MediaYahoo!News 1 7.38%MSNBC 4 3.84%Yahoo!Weather 5 2.08%

       Business

InformationYahoo!Finance 1 29.15%MSN Money 3 10.14%

       

MapsGoogle Maps 2 22.64%Yahoo!Maps 3 12.84%MSN Maps 4 3.75%

       

Rewards/DirectoriesYahoo!Shopping 1 8.68%MSN Shopping 16 1.15%

       

MusicYahoo!Music 1 6.52%MSN Music 14 1.22%

       

MoviesYahoo!Movies 3 8.33%MSN Entertainment 4 7.11%

       

DatingYahoo!Personals 5 5.22%MSN Match.com 14 1.13%

       

GamesYahoo!Games 4 5.50%MSN Games 5 2.15%

       

SportsYahoo!Sports 2 5.10%Yahoo!Sports NBA 3 2.18%

       Personalities Yahoo!OMG 3 11.65%

       Photography Flickr (Yahoo) 2 12.01%

Page 10 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

2.4.3 Market Segments and MSN Points of Parity

Chickowski (2008, p 2) notes that Yahoo, Google and MSN all offer similar

services, although Google has been far more effective in establishing points of difference

in services that attract high page hits. A chart of favorable brand salience with each group

is based on the studies of Rosoff (2006), Tancer (2006), and Chickakowski (2008).

Microsoft can use this chart to map its competitive brand strategy for MSN/LIVE.

As we will see in the next section, MSN has strong presence in the Editor Collated

Content arena. I propose this area can be exploited to establish rich communications with

strategic buyers by placing noteworthy Editor’s in a Corporate Governance line extension

of MSN/LIVE. In addition, MSN has a valid point of presence in each category.

Like Yahoo, MSN has the same set of tools and applications as those provided by

Google, according to Chickakowski (2008, p 2). Keller (p 110) notes that MSN’s service

is not required to be equal to Google to establish a point of parity but rather just “good

enough.” Finally, the Tancer (2006, p 1) study found that while Yahoo was considered as

a destination site and Google as a search site, MSN/LIVE was both.

Customer Segments/ Yahoo Google MSNInformation seekers    

 Editor collated content POP    PODUser aggregated content POP POD POP

Geographical location seekers

 

POP POP POP

Multimedia content viewers POP  POD POP

Portal Users    

 Portal Destination users POD   POPPlatform Tool Users POP POP POP

Page 11 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

2.4.4 MSN Points of Difference

According to Rosoff (2006, p 2), MSN makes content available that is collated by

editors who work for either MSN or an MSN content partner. As noted in sections one

and four, my proposal is to create customized and searchable corporate governance

collections for customers who are strategic buyers. They will be attracted to Editor

Collated Content that has been customized for them and that regards corporate

governance. This will not only create a rich communication with these wealthy buyers on

MSN/LIVE and thereby enhance the MSN operations, but will also enhance the

communications between Microsoft and these corporate clients, which are increasingly

lured by Open Source and “Software as a Service” alternatives to Windows.

Another point of difference would be that Microsoft has major resources world-

wide that it can utilize to provide customer assistance to strategic buyers. It has a skillful

sales force that is accustomed to fulfilling demanding assignments. It has a well-

organized support structure to disseminate information and software updates as well as a

competent consulting arm (MCS) with a field-tested project methodology that has a

proven record of success. Finally, Microsoft has stable relations with the corporate

world, which makes negotiating and executing contracts straightforward. This is known

as social capital that I will use in section 2.6 of this report.

2.5 Brand Hierarchy

Microsoft Network, MSN is a brand family that encompasses Microsoft’s

network or online services. The Windows LIVE brand was introduced for certain online

properties in 2006 and as a result some of the online services have two names, such as

Page 12 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Hotmail and Windows LIVE Mail, MSN Search and LIVE Search, and MSN Maps and

Local LIVE. For the MSN brand, modifiers are used to distinguish a particular service.

Keller (2008, p 451) notes that modifiers distinguish “different types of items or models.”

MSN Entertainment is an example of the modifier in use. The following chart is a visual

representation of the brand hierarchy.

Page 13 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

3. MSN Brand Exploratory

In a brand exploratory, Keller (2008, p 129) advises us to seek out prior research

studies. EBSCOHOST has proved a valuable tool in this regards and analysis by Tancer,

Rosoff and Chickakowski, among others provided real insight into the external, customer

perceptions of the brand. In addition, Keller (p 129) recommends that interviews with

internal personnel have a high payoff. While not able to do this, I did survey WVU

students.

3.1 Products and Services

MSN/LIVE has two audience categories, the site visitors and advertisers. It has

services for both. With MSN/LIVE, the most important audience is site visitors because

without them, the advertisers will have no interest. The finding I have made in this brand

exploratory is that site visitors like Google and Yahoo while advertisers like MSN. This

will be explained in detail in the rest of section three.

3.2 External Perception of the Brand

According to Rosoff (2006, p 2), the MSN reputation suffers with site visitors.

MSN has ranked last in a 2001 Consumer Reports customer satisfaction survey. Rosoff

holds that MSN deploys technology for its own sake, which can decrease customer

satisfaction with the site. He also finds that MSN editorial content needs improvement.

The MSN/LIVE search service is held to be full featured but the general public

does perceive some deficiencies. It is interesting to note that both MSN and Yahoo used

Page 14 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

the same search engine, Inktomi, until 2004 when Yahoo bought Inktomi. Microsoft then

developed its own search engine for MSN. Wall (2006, p 2) finds that MSN search does

a poor job at link analysis and therefore its results have less relevancy than Yahoo or

Google, as well as a bias to rank commercial sites too high.

Likewise, there are some areas of concern with Hotmail, be it called MSN or

Windows LIVE Hotmail. Arrington (2007, p 1) finds that while it has an intuitive

interface it has slow responsiveness. What is worse, MSN deletes all mail information

every 30 days if the consumer does not login. Rafferty (2006, p 1) expressed concern

with this policy when he lost important documentation as a result.

On the other hand, the general public holds MSNBC in high regards. IQ69

reports (2008, p 1) that MSNBC took the top spot in the University of Michigan

American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) survey. However, the ACSI survey did

note that there does not appear to be a clear differentiator between news services and the

leading brands are bunched together.

One specific public of interest is “strategic buyers.” Large corporations have

made significant investments in the Microsoft franchise. They have end-users trained on

mission critical systems that use Microsoft technology. They have trained their help-desk

staff on Microsoft technology. They probably have significant Microsoft investment in

the server room and with their application development staff as well.

Most importantly, Microsoft has the social capital of existing, defined

relationships that make transactions easy to accomplish. Microsoft sales teams visit

“strategic buyers” periodically and promptly answer phone calls. Microsoft is very good

Page 15 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

at relationship marketing. Every sales team has an architectural engineer assigned to it

with the mission of understanding the information technology plan of assigned

corporations, their enterprise architecture and how to advantageously apply Microsoft

technology to affect solutions. 75% of respondents believe that an edited collection of

information related to this type of understanding would be a valuable service at work.

3.3 Marketing Support Programs

Keller (2008, p 131) emphasizes the importance of marketing support programs,

especially for establishing the points of parity and points of difference. This is essential

to moving to desired brand equity.

3.3.1 Place

Microsoft has a small problem with place for some of its MSN sub-brands. The

introduction of the Windows LIVE brand for some of the MSN branded properties means

there are two places to go for MSN services. As an example, consider MSN Search and

Windows LIVE Search. You can go to http://www.msn.com to begin a search using

Microsoft search technology, or to http://www.live.com/default.aspx?form=MSNH11 .

Both sites use the same search engines. Both parent brands are applied to the

sub-brands. In most cases analysts such as Rosoff and Tancer refer to Microsoft Online

Services using the MSN brand rather than Windows LIVE. 75% of respondents prefer

the Windows LIVE brand to the MSN brand and the remaining 25% are indifferent to

Microsoft in general. Only 12.5% were aware of MSN as a brand.

Page 16 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

3.3.2 Price

The pricing of site visitor services is free while the price advertisers pay is based

on the type of ad and a bid process that incorporates click through rates in the costing

algorithm. MSN is perceived to be fair in its pricing of advertising. Advertisers are in

fact concerned about potential pricing abuse by Google and Yahoo.

According to Harrison (2008, p 1) 400 advertisers have filed a complaint against

Google and Yahoo with the U.S. Justice Department. The Association of National

Advertisers (ANA) comments that Yahoo and Google erode competition with the

potential for higher advertising prices. In the final analysis however, Agarwal (2006, p 1)

summarizes that while advertisers like MSN technology and price, they don’t plan to

spend more with the search portal because it does not draw as much traffic as Google.

3.3.3 Promotion

Brandweek (2000, p 1) awarded MSN a Silver Award for its marketing tactic to

sponsor the NYC Road Runners Club and the NYC marathon. As mentioned in section

two, sponsorship is an important aspect of MSN marketing support. In addition, Carter

(2005, p 1) commends MSN’s masterful incorporation of TV and online advertising with

events to promote the MSN brand. MSN promotion is given high marks by external

analysts.

3.3.4 Personalization

Elkins (2001, p 1) quotes ad execs, “MSN’s strategy of customizing ad programs

to marketers’ specific needs is what company officials hope will give it an edge.” Thus

Page 17 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

personalization is another marketing support program tactic used by MSN. Furthermore,

MSN personalization is held in high regard by advertisers.

3.4 External Opinion about Competitive Environment

3.4.1 Ethical Concerns about MSN Paid Placement Tactics vice Google

McLaughlin criticized Microsoft MSN for its Paid Placement tactics while giving

Google accolades (2002, p 116) for their class and morality. For Microsoft, she only says

“others, like MSN, do a poor job.” MSN was charged with two counts: 1.) Mixing real

content with paid placement to misinform users of its search engine with annoying search

results; and 2.) Rigging search results (p 121-2) by low-ranking competitors, for example

travel sites, while high ranking their own, like Expedia. Google gets high marks (p 117)

in its handling of paid placement.

Paid Inclusion, different from paid placement, is a shakedown racket. Yahoo for

example, charges $299 so its spider does not “miss” a company’s Website. Google

firmly opposes Paid Inclusion (McLaughlin, 2002, p 123).

3.4.2 Google Offers Software as a Service and it has a Service Level Agreement

Kirk (2008, p 1) reports that Google is offering a service level guarantee for users

of its Google Apps suite. This suite is a direct attack on Microsoft’s revenue stream and

it is offered free, supported by advertising revenue. This Service Level Agreement is a

move to attract corporate customers and Microsoft must address it with its own Software

as a Service through MSN. Google does not have extensive social capital with corporate

customers and this is an advantage Microsoft can leverage, at least for now.

Page 18 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

3.4.3 Yahoo Struggling

Hardy (2006, p 1) notes that Yahoo is struggling to keep up with MSN and

Google. The cost of keeping current with the relentless advance of technology is proving

too much. The Associated Press (2008, p 1) goes on to say that Yahoo has deep concerns

over its viability now that Google has withdrawn its offer to support Yahoo with

advanced technology. Google made that offer during the recent Microsoft-Yahoo merger

negotiations.

3.4.3 Content editors: MSN versus LIVE and Google

Rosoff (p 2) notes that MSN is a destination site that supports edited content.

MSN has skilled editors collate collections of information. Other MSN brands also use

content editors to manage information collections germane to the brand. On the other

hand, Google is merely a platform for visitors who want to set up their own links to

information. This information can be aggregated from other web sites or from RSS

feeds.

The advantage of content editors is that they can represent a community of

interest (COI) and create and provide access to information specific to that COI. The

COI then has a place to go for the information they need that has been vetted for

relevance and credibility. It reduces the noise in their searches for information and

increases the trustworthiness of what they do find.

Page 19 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

3.4.4 Analysis of Search Service Offerings at Google, Yahoo and MSN

Google and Yahoo are the search portal market leaders today for an Internet

characterized as an Aristocratic network. This is to say that a small number of nodes (like

Google and Yahoo) are “super-connected” so that most people visit these sites. However,

physicist Mark Buchanan’s report (2002, p 124-7) on mathematical studies of networks

that show the phase of “super-connected” hubs (such as Google and Yahoo today)

eventually gives way to more egalitarian networks from the simple processes of history

and growth. Many nodes connect to Yahoo or Google as a start to searching out

information. However, Buchanan’s conclusion on networks is that “Whenever limitations

or costs eventually come into play to impede the richest getting still richer, then a small-

world network becomes more egalitarian, as seems to be the case with airports and a

number of other real-world networks.”

Niche search sites have established themselves as a brand. Today’s two largest

super-connected nodes on the Internet, Google and Yahoo get the majority of advertising

revenue. However, the trends in marketing may also be working against the continuation

of the current aristocratic nature of the Internet.

Marketing is moving away from the mass advertising of the same message to a

large audience. According to Duncan (2005, pp 211-212) the value of the Internet is the

ability to send custom messages to highly targeted customer segments. The reach of a

specific message to a small but coherent group is higher than a general and therefore

mostly irrelevant message to a large group. As the ability to identify and verify audience

Page 20 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

characteristics for smaller, specialty sites improves, advertising revenue may shift from

Google and Yahoo to this new direction.

The message to Google and Yahoo is that super-connected nodes don’t last. Just

as the few air network super hubs gave way to geographically dispersed regional hubs, so

will the Internet. In short, Google and Yahoo are vulnerable as Amazon is already

exploiting. MSN, like Amazon, has the opportunity to move profitably into the future of

software services, if it acts appropriately.

Finally, Yahoo is already fading fast. They foolishly rejected Microsoft’s overly

generous offer earlier this year, and now on their own again they seem to have lost

control. Their stock price has fallen from $30 per share six months ago to $8 per share

today (see Yahoo, 2008b, p 1). Significant employees have left the company.

3.4.5 Mail comparison: Google the best

Agarwal (2007, p 1) compares MSN Mail, Yahoo Mail and Google Mail

according to five characteristics: 1.) User Interface; 2.) Spam Controls; 3.) Storage Space;

4.) Speed; and 5.) Advertisements. His findings are that Google Gmail is the winner in

four categories: 1.) Spam Controls; 2.) Storage Space; 4.) Speed; and 4.) Advertisements.

Yahoo!Mail has the best User Interface. He also notes that the Windows LIVE Mail or

MSN Hotmail has bugs in it, has poor performance and makes egregious use of

advertising.

Page 21 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

3.4.6 Site visitors prefer Google and Yahoo while advertisers prefer MSN

The Experian/Hitwise survey (see Tancer, 2008, p 1) clearly shows that site

visitors prefer Yahoo and Google ahead of MSN for the search and portal services being

offered. Advertisers, to the contrary, prefer MSN. Blank (2006, p 1) cites numerous

media firms and marketing research companies that express a decided preference for

Microsoft. However, as Agarwal (2006, p 1) notes, advertisers pay more for Google and

Yahoo because of the higher traffic count.

3.5 Perceptual Map

3.5.1 Perceptual Map based on Professional Market Surveys

A Perceptual Map is a marketing tool to graphically compare consumer

attitudes towards competitor companies. Most commonly, two salient characteristics

of the market niche occupied by the companies are used to form a two dimensional

map that shows how each company fares with the customers of that market segment.

Online services is becoming an important business segment for Microsoft. Marketing

Vox (2007, p1) reports that Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO, sees advertising revenue

earned by Online Services as contributing 25% of Microsoft’s business in future.

Such advertising revenues will help support the Microsoft Cloud Computing initiative

code-named Azure (see Mackey, 2008, p 1) and Software as a Service (SaaS)

offerings.

Already its competitors are starting cloud computing and SaaS service that

Gartner believes will soon be “good enough” (see Smith and Austin, 2007, p 1). The

Page 22 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

top two competitors to Microsoft MSN in Online Services are Yahoo and Google.

There are two dimensions I propose to use in assessing corporate customer

perceptions of these three largest Internet sites. The first is the market perception of

the corporate services that are offered by each vendor.

The other dimension is social capital. As I have discussed in the section two,

“strategic buyers” are an important customer segment for Microsoft generally and the

most profitable customer in terms of sales revenues. These customers are corporate

and governmental organizations that would have a major impact on Microsoft if they

shift away from Microsoft to its Open Source or Web Portal competitors because

“strategic buyers” are big buyers. A move like that would reduce Microsoft revenue

while significantly enhancing that of its competitors. In addition, by being big buyers,

they also attract advertisers so that they have significant meaning for MSN

operations. Therefore, the second dimension in this perceptual map is the social

capital each competitor has with corporate customers.

Buchanan (2002, 201-204) gives a laymen’s explanation of social capital as

the “ability of people to work together easily and efficiently based on trust, familiarity

and understanding.” I will use the sales, marketing and consulting employee counts

of each organization as a proxy for the social capital that MSN, Google or Yahoo

have with large corporate customers. This seems reasonable; the greater the

investment in marketing communications between one of the vendors and the

corporate world it serves, the greater the social capital.

Page 23 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

To calculate the correlation strength of each vendor in the social capital

dimension, I normalize employee counts to a percentage by summing all employee

counts and dividing the total count into each company count. The employee counts

are derived from the SEC 10-K filings for each company. Here is the raw data:

Here is the relative percentage of employees dedicated to marketing

communications and services in the three organizations reflecting social capital

strengths:

For the other dimension in this map, the portal corporate functionality, I will

use Tancer’s market ranking comparison of the three sites that is published at

HitWise. However, not all attributes Experian tracks are related to corporate interests.

For example, sports, dating, games, personalities and music would not be. The

following are the Search Portal characteristics I will use in the perceptual map: Portal

Pages, Email Service, Search Engine, News/Media, Business Information, and Maps.

Page 24 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

For the corporate portal functionality dimension, I use a balanced scorecard

approach based on those rankings in Tancer’s survey. The notion is that the current

market share ranking of each Web site reflects the market’s perception of the

company’s ability in each of these categories: Portal Pages, Email Service, Search

Engine, News/Media, Business Information, and Maps.

Here is the score card calculation based on rankings in those categories:

Here is the relative strength of each ranking factor:

Combining the Portal Functionality numbers with the social capital, we then

get the following sets of coordinates for our perceptual map:

Page 25 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Here is a perceptual map based on those coordinates:

I included a desired point in the map that would reflect the combined strengths

of Yahoo and MSN, which is what I believe Microsoft was after in its merger

attempts with Yahoo. For a more complete explanation of how this perceptual map

was prepared see my blog at http://gmrwvu.blogspot.com/2008/11/perceptual-map-

of-msn-yahoo-and-google.html

3.5.2 A Perceptual Map Based on My WVU Survey

I will also relate my own WVU survey results into a perceptual map. The two

dimensions I select for this exercise are the relative strengths of each vendor as a search

Page 26 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

site and as a portal site. My survey results show that for a search engine, seven out of

eight respondents use Google and the other uses both Yahoo and MSN. It also shows

that four respondents use Yahoo for portal services, one person uses both MSN and

Yahoo, and the other three use completely separate services for various portal functions.

Here is a chart of the results:

 Search

FunctionalityAs a

Percentage Portal

FunctionalityAs a

Percentage Google 7 87.50% 0 0.00%Yahoo 1 12.50% 5 83.33%MSN 1 12.50% 1 16.67%

The coordinates for our map then become:

Google (87.5, 0)Yahoo (12.5, 83.33)MSN (12.5, 16.67)

The map shows customers perceive Yahoo as strongest for portal, Google for search.

Page 27 of 41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 20 40 60 80 100

Search Use

Perceptual Map from WVU Survey

Portal

UseMSN

Yahoo

Google

MSN Brand Audit

4.0 Recommendations

My recommendation to increase brand equity for Microsoft’s Internet operations

and services has four interrelated parts. They will redefine the MSN brand. Neumeier

(2006, p 45) recommends that if a brand cannot be number one or two in its market, it

needs to redefine itself. This is the case with MSN.

My first recommendation is to create a brand extension that can exclusively

service an important audience visiting Web portals: “strategic buyers.” Microsoft can

leverage its sophisticated sales teams and its relationships with corporate and government

organizations to provide a necessary service to these “strategic buyers” as Casadesus-

Masanell and Ghemawat label them. It can do this with a credibility that Google and

Yahoo cannot, even if they had an organization in place to perform such a service, which

they do not.

Other recommendations include a promotion campaign, and a final commitment

to the LIVE brand name rather than the current straddling strategy. Microsoft now keeps

both the MSN and LIVE names in play, and they diminish brand equity in each other. As

noted in section 3.3.1, my own survey showed that only a small percentage of Web users

even know MSN is a Microsoft Web portal with search capability. An overwhelming

majority of them expressed preference form Windows LIVE over MSN. The next four

sections explain the recommendations in detail.

Page 28 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

4.1 Brand Extension

4.1.1 How to Extend the MSN Brand

The first recommendation is to construct a line extension (see Keller, 2008, p 491)

for MSN/LIVE by adding a new corporate service, one that creates customized and

searchable collections on corporate governance for “strategic buyers.” The MSN/LIVE

brand will be applied to this new service, which is designed to assist corporate and

governmental IT organizations with specific information search needs. This will be a

point of difference with the existing search portals that cater to a homogenized general

audience. Microsoft can leverage its sophisticated sales teams and relationships with

corporate and government organizations to provide this necessary service and deliver it

through MSN.

Microsoft the parent company of MSN is facing a challenge from Open Source.

There is a growing belief that the Internet is a more interesting place than the PC and that

the next generation of software will be developed on the Internet. The Open Source

Initiative furthers such sentiment because it encourages the sharing and contributions of

the wide audience on the Internet. Open Source software strikes at the essence of

Microsoft, the value add Microsoft gives to the environment is offered for free by Open

Source.

Microsoft must respond to the open source movement, both the formal initiative

and the growing number of adherents in the corporate and government worlds. Open

Source Software is a serious threat to current and future Microsoft revenues and this

recommendation will address the Open Source threat while advancing the MSN/LIVE

Page 29 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

brand. To summarize this threat, if certain publics become “strategic buyers” of Linux, it

is probable that Windows will be driven from the market. This is the conclusion of

Casadesus-Masanell and Ghemawat (2005, p 3), two Harvard Business School

professors.

Microsoft must establish effective marketing communications with these

“strategic buyers.” If Microsoft does not do this, misconceptions or mistrust may

influence decisions that result in the disastrous scenario of that Harvard study. This

recommendation to build MSN/LIVE brand equity will have the collateral effect of

establishing strong and trusted communications with strategic buyers.

It will extend the meaning of the MSN/LIVE brand. Neumeier (2006, p 45)

recommends that if a brand cannot be number one or two in its market, it needs to

redefine itself. Microsoft can leverage its sophisticated sales teams and relationships

with corporate and government organizations to provide a necessary service to these

“strategic buyers” as Casadesus-Masanell and Ghemawat label them. It can do this with

credibility that Google and Yahoo cannot, even if they had an organization in place to

perform such a service, which they do not. “Strategic buyers” have an abiding concern

with corporate governance responsibilities.

MSN can assist “strategic buyers” with corporate governance responsibilities.

Such responsibilities are information intensive. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act holds corporate

senior management personally liable for the accuracy of the information that the

organization communicates to the public (see Wikipedia Sox, 2008, p1). It also

Page 30 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

prescribes a corporate governance framework for fulfilling fiduciary responsibilities to

stakeholders in the organization.

Understanding the detailed aspects of corporate governance is a taxing ordeal.

Microsoft through its MSN/LIVE brand with integrated support from Microsoft

Consulting Services and Microsoft Sales Teams can help customers with this

responsibility. Experts on corporate governance are major influentials with corporate top

executives and decision makers.

Microsoft has extensive experience in establishing enterprise architectures, which

are the basis for corporate governance. MSN/LIVE can be the favored information

librarian and partner for corporate customers, those who are the “strategic buyers.” 75%

of respondents believe that an edited collection of information would be a valuable

service at their place of work. A content edited collection of corporate governance

information would help corporate and governmental senior management fulfill their

Sarbanes-Oxley responsibilities. The Harvard study concludes that these buyers are the

audience to reach for the optimal strategy to increase revenue and to survive. Today’s

search sites seem oriented instead to a child customer public, like those targeted by the

Apple advertising commercials.

4.1.2 What is Gained.

Several important advantages are gained with such a brand extension. First, the

new brand extension can act as a flanker (see Keller, 2008, p 440) to put competitive

pressure on external Software as a Service (SaaS) vendors. This will prevent them from

pushing SaaS too far into the aging Windows software paradigm, at least for the short

Page 31 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

term. Keller (p 445) says that this type of brand redefinition will address problems and

identify other opportunities. If Microsoft acts appropriately, it may turn a black hole

brand into a sleeper brand that has a bright future.

In addition, a successful brand extension will improve the credibility with outside

parties (p 460). It can also lead to attracting more qualified employees and at the same

time motivate existing employees by giving them a believable roadmap to the future.

Finally, as Keller notes (p 454), a successful brand extension can improve the trust and

likability that external partners have with MSN.

4.2 Place

75% of respondents prefer the LIVE brand to the MSN brand and the remaining

25% are indifferent to Microsoft in general. Microsoft introduced the LIVE brand in 2006

as discussed in section 2 above. Currently, both the MSN name and the LIVE name are

applied to several properties. Completely restructuring a brand name is not uncommon.

According to Cole (2008, p 1) many of MSN’s competitors have changed names

including: Yahoo, Google, AOL, and IBM. Alexa is a Web site ranking service and it

ranks Yahoo 1st in site visits, Google 2nd, LIVE 4th and MSN 6th (see Alexa, 2008, p 1).

Combining LIVE and MSN makes sense and LIVE is the better name to go with.

My recommendation is to apply MSN to the Internet Service Provider network

service that Microsoft owns and apply LIVE to the other properties now associated with

MSN. A GO LIVE series of integrated marketing communications including

advertisements would explain that Microsoft is doing this to improve the organization of

its Internet operations to better serve the site visitors. This GO LIVE campaign should be Page 32 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

concurrent with the introduction of Azure technology next year. The GO LIVE

marketing communications would also emphasize the major advance that Azure

represents, one that none of its competitors can match (see Mackey, 2008, p 1).

4.3 Promotion

In a private survey conducted at West Virginia University, my findings indicated

that only 12.5% of the respondents were aware of MSN as a Web portal or search engine.

On the other hand, 100% were aware of Google and Yahoo as Web portals or search

engines. In addition, in reply to a question about MSN and Windows LIVE, almost no

one was able to make a connection between MSN and Microsoft unless they already

knew about MSN. In contrast, they were able to establish an association between

Windows LIVE and Microsoft.

Keller (p 663) advises us not to forget brand-building basics with online brands,

starting with establishing points of parity and points of difference. An important point of

difference for MSN is its capacity and commitment to advancing technology, especially

the cloud computing of the future. With the release of Microsoft Azure in 2009,

Microsoft will provide a framework for truly making the network the computer (see

Mackey, 2008). MSN will be a service in Azure.

MSN has POWERFUL points of difference. Yahoo is unable to commit to

advancing technology, it is falling apart without such expenditure. Google does not have

the portal presence that either MSN or Yahoo have. This needs to be clearly

communicated in Microsoft public relations and advertising.

Page 33 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Keller cites promotional programs as an important element in brand building

(2008, pp 256-9), including online brands. Visitors are rewarded for using search

functions. MSN can reach out initially to its HotMail, MSNBC, MSN Money, MAP

Maps, MSN Shopping, MSN Music, MSN Entertainment, MSN Match.com and MSN

Games with an offer to win a Microsoft Zune MP3 player or Microsoft Xbox game

console for using the MSN Search engine and filling in a short survey.

Keller also notes (pp 229-235) that the integrated marketing element of

advertising is a powerful means to build brand equity. MSN/LIVE needs to work with

McCann-Erickson (see Carter, 2005, p1) to coordinate advertising with other integrated

marketing communication efforts to increase recognition and recall of the brand.

4.4 Personalization

According to Rosoff (2006, p 2), MSN makes content available that is collated by

editors who work for either MSN or an MSN content partner. As noted in section 4.1 of

this report, my proposal is to create customized and searchable corporate governance

collections for customers who are strategic buyers. They will be attracted to Editor

Collated Content that has been customized for them and that regards corporate

governance. This will not only create a rich communication with these wealthy buyers on

MSN and thereby enhance the MSN operations, but will also enhance the

communications between Microsoft and these corporate clients, which are increasingly

lured by Open Source, and Software as a Service alternatives to Windows.

Editor collated content on corporate governance would be edited by experts from

the legal and business professions. The Microsoft sales teams that work closely with Page 34 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

corporate accounts would customize it. The input from this close personal relationship

would include IT plans, Sarbanes-Oxley audit services, Enterprise Architecture services

that have been organized into searchable collections and made available on private sites

of MSN/LIVE and sites internal to the company. MSN/LIVE search technology would

work both within those collections and the general Internet to provide the organization

with information on corporate governance.

As noted above, an important point of difference for MSN/LIVE is that Microsoft

has major resources world-wide that it can utilize to provide customer assistance to

strategic buyers. It has a skillful sales force that is accustomed to fulfilling demanding

assignments. It has a well-organized support structure to disseminate information and

software updates as well as a competent consulting arm (MCS) with a field-tested project

methodology that has a proven record of success. Finally, Microsoft has stable relations

with the corporate world, which makes negotiating and executing contracts

straightforward, a social capital.

Page 35 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

References

Agarwal, Amit (May 03, 2006). Bloomberg spoils the MSN Advertising party in Redmond. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://labnol.blogspot.com/2006/05/bloomberg-spoils-msn-advertising-party.html

Agarwal, Amit (February 05, 2007). Yahoo! Mail vs GMail vs Windows Live Mail. Retrieved on December 3, 2008 from http://labnol.blogspot.com/2007/02/yahoo-mail-vs-gmail-vs-windows-live.html

Alexa (2008). Web Site Rankings. Retrieved on December 13, 2008 from http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites?ts_mode=global&lang=none

Arms, William Y. (2001). Digital Libraries. The MIT Press.

Arrigngton, Michael (February 8, 2007). Tech Crunch. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/02/08/a-comparison-of-live-hotmail-gmail-and-yahoo-mail/all-comments/

Associated Press (November 5, 2008). Google drops Yahoo advertising partnership. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27555004/

Blank, Christine (June 8, 2006). MSN Advertisers Report High ROI, Less Traffic. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.dmnews.com/MSN-Advertisers-Report-High-ROI-Less-Traffic/article/91483/

Brandweek (04/03/2000). Silver Awards. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Buchanan, Mark (2002). Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Theory of Networks. Norton.

Carter, B (2/5/2005). MSN takes on Google with search engine launch. Marketing. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Casadesus-Masanell, R. and P. Ghemawat (June 6, 2005). Microsoft vs. Open Source: Who Will Win? Retrieved on November 30, 2008 from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4834.html

Chickowski, Erica (02/08/2008). Brand Identities After a Microsoft and Yahoo Deal. Baseline. Retrieved on November 22, 2008 from http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Messaging-and-Collaboration/Brand-Identities-After-a-Microsoft-Yahoo-Deal/1/

Page 36 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Cole, Adrian (2008). Famous Name Changes. Retrieved on December 13, 2008 from http://www.famousnamechanges.net/html/corporate.htm

Conrad, Joseph (1904). Nostromo. Wordsworth Editions Ltd (January 1, 1998)

Cuneo, Alice Z (6/2/2003). MSN mantra: `Easy to sell, easy to buy'. Advertising Age. Rertieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Duncan, T (2005). Principles of Advertising & IMC. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Enck, John et al (December 6, 2007). Predicts 2008: The Market for Servers and Operating Systems Continues to Evolve. Gartner, id# G00152575.

Fiering, Leslie, et al (December 20, 2007). Predicts 2008: Changes in What End Users Will Buy and How They Will Pay for It. Gartner, id# G00153163

Haar, S (1998). MSN Holds Back Marketing Bucks Until 1999. Interactive Week. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Hardy, David (May 18, 2006). Yahoo! advertising set to take on MSN and Google AdWords. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.bigmouthmedia.com/live/articles/yahoo-ads-take-on-google.asp/2969/

Harrison, Todd (September 8, 2008). Are Yahoo and Google playing Monopoly? Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://blogs.moneycentral.msn.com/topstocks/archive/2008/09/08/are-yahoo-and-google-playing-monopoly.aspx

HighBeam (February 28, 2006). Google Continues to Increase Search Engine Market Share. Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-142645488.html

IQ69 (August 14, 2008). Yahoo tops Google in customer satisfaction survey. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://iq69.com/index.php/2007/08/14/yahoo-tops-google-in-customer-satisfaction-survey/

Jopling, Elroy (January 4, 2006). Microsoft's Global Consumer Play Begins to Unfold. Gartner, id# G00136841

Kafka, Peter (January 18, 2008). Nielsen: Google, Yahoo, Losing Search Share To MSN. (Not A Typo). Silicon Valley Insider. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/nielsen-google-yahoo-losing-search-share-to-msn-not-a-typo.html

Page 37 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Keller, K (2008). Strategic Brand Management. Pearson/Prentice-Hall.

Kirk, Jeremy (10/31/2008). Google introduces service-level guarantee for its Apps suite. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/10/31/google-introduces-service-level-guarantee-its-apps-suite

Kitagawa, Mikako et al ( Decmeber 21, 2007). Predicts 2008: The Client Computing Market Will Undergo Fundamental, Structural Changes. Gartner, id# G00152660.

Kleynhans, Steven (September 6, 2006). A Road Map to the Next Era of Personal Computing. Gartner, id# G00142369

Koranteng, Juliana (11/20/2004). MSN's Euro Moves. Billboard. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Laszl, Sarah and Kara D. Federmeier (2007) Better the DVL You Know Acronyms Reveal the Contribution of Familiarity to Single-Word Reading. Association for Psychological Science. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Mackey, Kurt (October 27, 2008). Microsoft has head in the clouds with new Windows Azure OS. Retrieved on November 19, 2008 from http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081027-microsoft-has-head-in-the-clouds-with-new-windows-azure-os.html

Marketing Vox, (February 21, 2006). MSN AdCenter Still Getting Better Results than Google, Yahoo. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.marketingvox.com/msn_adcenter_still_getting_better_results_than_google_yahoo-021107/

Marketing Vox, (October 4, 2007). Ballmer Sees Ad Revenue as Microsoft's Future. Retrieved on November 19, 2008 from http://www.marketingvox.com/ballmer-sees-ad-revenue-as-microsofts-future-033446/

McCarthy, T (1/20/2004). The Butterfly Effect. Daily Variety. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

McLaughlin, Laurianne (2002). The Straight Story on Search Engines. PC World. Retrieved on November 19, 2008 from http://www.pcworld.com/article/97431-5/the_straight_story_on_search_engines.html

Page 38 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Mertz, Sharon (November 9, 2007). Report Highlight for Market Trends: Software as a Service in the Enterprise Application Software Markets, Worldwide, 2007. Gartner, id# G00153170

Nasdaq (2008). Six Month Chart of Yahoo Stock Price. Retrieved on November 22, 2008 from http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/dynamic_charting.aspx?symbol=YHOO&selected=YHOO

Neumeier, M (2006). The Brand Gap. New Riders.

Plummer, Darryl, et al (November 28, 2005). Gartner's Top Predictions for 2006 and Beyond. Gartner, id# G00135987

Rafferty, Tom (March 15, 2006). Microsoft Hotmail, you suck! Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.tomrafteryit.net/microsoft-hotmail-you-suck/

ReadWriteWeb (April 7, 2008). Google's US Search Market Dominance Hits All Time High. Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/googles_us_search_market_dominance.php

Romano, B (Nov 17, 2006). Top ad exec at Microsoft appointed head of MSN. Seattle Times. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Rosoff, M (October 23, 2006). The Future of MSN. Directions on Microsoft. Retrieved on November 22, 2008 from http://www.directionsonmicrosoft.com/sample/DOMIS/update/2006/11nov/1106tfom.htm#top

Russell, S (5/24/2003). An Obsession with Butterflies: Our Long Love Affair with a Singular Insect. The Economist. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Scott, David (2007). The New Rules of Marketing and PR. John Wiley.

Search Engine Roundtable (May 24, 2007). Search Market Share Update: Google Rises, MSN Falls, Yahoo Hovers. Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/013595.html

Seattle Time (October 14, 2002). Microsoft Puts $300 Million into MSN Internet Service Butterfly Campaign. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

SEC (12/31/2007). Yahoo Form 10-k. Retrieved on November 26, 2008 from http://apps.shareholder.com/sec/viewerContent.aspx?companyid=YHOO&docid=5760286

Page 39 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

SEC (2/15/2008). Google Form 10-K. Retrieved on November 26, 2008 from http://www.secinfo.com/d14D5a.tvTt.htm

SEC (June 30, 2008). Microsoft Corporation Form 10-K. Retrieved on November 19, 2008 from http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/789019/000119312508162768/d10k.htm

Shepard, Alica (March 1997). Webward Ho. American Journalism Review. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from EBSCOHOST.

Site-Seeker (2007). Search Engines. Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://www.site-seeker.com/seocompetition.cfm

Smith, D and Austin T (June 5, 2007). Microsoft and Google: Who's Going After Whom? Gartner Research, ID G00148622.

Standish Group (1995). Chaos. Retrieved on December 1, 2008 from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NCP08083B.pdf

StepForth (November 2006). Google, Yahoo and MSN Market Share. Retrieved on November 18, 2008 from http://news.stepforth.com/blog/2006/11/google-yahoo-and-msn-market-share.php

Sterling, Greg (March 17, 2005). MSN AdCenter. Search Engine Journal Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.searchenginejournal.com/msn-adcenter-joins-yahoo-and-google-in-search-advertising/1438/ Stuart, Anne (July 2006). Dealing with Microsoft haters. Retrieved on December 1, 2008 from http://mcpmag.com/features/article.asp?EditorialsID=603

Taft, Darryl (October 10, 2007). Ballmer Talks Cloud, Advertising, SAAS. eWeek. Retrieved on November 19, 2008 from http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Enterprise-Apps/Ballmer-Talks-Cloud-Advertising-SAAS/

Tancer, Bill (August 3, 2006). Google, Yahoo! and MSN: Brand Association. Hitwise Intelligence. Retrieved on November 22, 2008 from http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2006/08/google_yahoo_and_msn_brand_ass.html

Tancer, Bill (February 2, 2008). Microsoft and Yahoo!: Putting the Offer in Perspective. Hitwise Intelligence. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2008/02/microsoft_and_yahoo_putting_th.html

Wall, Aaron (June 13, 2006). How Search Engines Work: Search Engine Relevancy Reviewed. Search Engine Optimization. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.seobook.com/relevancy/#short

Page 40 of 41

MSN Brand Audit

Ward, S (2008a). Brand Audit Outline.

Wikipedia (2008.) Microsoft. Retrieved on March 20, 2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft

Wikipedia (2008a). Trademarks. Retrieved on November 24, 2008 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark

Woodie, Alex (January 10, 2006). Microsoft's Partner Channel the Strongest for Software, IDC Says. Retrieved on December 1, 2008 from http://www.itjungle.com/two/two011106-story01.html

Wouster, Jorgen (June 9, 2005).STILL IN SEARCH OF DISCLOSURE. Consumer Reports Web Watch.

Yahoo (2008). What is the combined market share of the Google, Yahoo! and MSN? Retrieved on November 15, 2008 from http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006032905387

Yahoo (2008b). Yahoo Six Month Staock Chart. Retrieved on November 23, 2008 from http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=YHOO&t=6m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

Zol, James (December 3, 2007). Google, Yahoo!, and MSN All Offer Accreditation Now. Semvironment. Retrieved on December 2, 2008 from http://www.semvironment.com/google-yahoo-and-msn-all-offer-accreditation-now/

Page 41 of 41