Thefind, the search engine, not as clean as we thought

thefind.bmpThefind is cleaner than most comparison shopping engines, we wrote last week, because it doesn’t ask merchants to pay for their products to show up in Thefind’s results.

However, Thefind is not as clean as we were led to believe.

In conversations over the past two weeks, the Mountain View company told VentureBeat that its rising traffic (the company says it will soon hit a million unique visitors) stems from an appreciation of the supposed clean results. Turns out, Thefind is buying some of its traffic with ads on Google. Some of its competitors pointed this out, once we’d published our story. When confronted, chief executive Siva Kumar said he is buying traffic to introduce users to new offerings. There’s nothing sinister about this, because all sites do it. It’s just that Thefind’s story of growth is less compelling that we’d realized. Kumar now says more than 500,000 unique visitors came to the site organically, which is still growth, but not as strong as we thought.

Moreover, Thefind blurs the line between ads and natural results even more than other sites. In the example of a search for “dress shirts” we mentioned in our first story, the two top results were sponsored ads, not natural results — and there was nothing clearly demarcating them. (Indeed, that’s why they stood out so much; they were ads for women’s clothing, which is odd, given that the search was for “dress shirts). Shopping.com, by comparison, shows the ads with a different shade of color in the background. We asked Kumar about this, and he agreed that this was misleading, and apparently has since changed this (we no longer see the women’s clothing).

Finally, many top results come from feeds from merchants with an affiliate program, suggesting Thefind is getting paid for some of its results on a click-per-action basis. Kumar responds as follows:

…We need to have feeds for some of the categories that are fast changing in nature (electronics is a case where prices change daily). As a new site on the market we cannot get direct feeds from the merchants themselves that easily • we have to first prove ourselves first. Therefore if we wanted comprehensiveness and accuracy we need to get these feeds through the only available channel to small companies for these feeds • affiliate network suppliers. Hence some of these items do have the affiliate codes on them. We are actively in the process of contacting the merchants directly now that we have the traffic and we will be able to replace these affiliate feeds with the merchant data.

Again, there is nothing wrong with this. Other shopping comparison sites, such as Become.com, started out this way, too — moving from affiliate programs to normal feeds. It’s just that we originally suggested that Thefind was based purely on its own crawl of the Web and relevance. That’s not true.

Next Story: BritePic — photography may never be the same
Previous Story: Raising money from VCs? Check out Venture Hacks

Bookmark and Share

Tags:

Photo of Matt Marshall

About the Author, Matt Marshall

Matt Marshall is editor and CEO of VentureBeat. Follow him on Twitter at @mmarshall, and follow VentureBeat on Twitter at @venturebeat.

  • Thank you for the clarification - I spent a little bit of time playing with the site after you mentioned it last week and saw some very non-relevant products ranking well on a few queries. I figured it was a problem with their algorithm but they were probably just sponsored ads...
  • TheFind talks a big game, but when it comes down to it, most of the stores they shop come from eBay and Amazon Marketplace, and they're paid an affiliate fee for every sale they refer to these sites. I'm not sure how this is either great technology (as both eBay and Amazon have well-defined APIs) or unbiased.

    They surround their search results with "sponsored listings", which means "content from Shopping.com, because at least they have figured out how to make real money at this."

    They do crawl a few thousand sites, but I've been very disappointed in the relevance of the results they serve. It is a *very* complex problem, and I don't think these guys have the answer yet.
  • Hi Marshall

    I have written a post on our blog to clarify some of the points you have raised about TheFind.
    http://blog.thefind.com/thefind_theblog/2007/04...

    -Siva
  • Dammit
    The first two listings in their search results were paid placement? And they weren't marked as such? That's a big no no on the Web, especially for a company that positions itself as an alternative to all the sell-out shopping engines.

    Quick... cover your tracks, guys!
  • Cay
    I've used TheFind quite a few times and I've had great success with their search results. I'm not sure what all the complaints are about. I've found things there that I haven't been able to locate anywhere else. I find that their sponsored spots are very clearly defined with a banner that says "sponsored". http://www.thefind.com/main/query.php?query=rig... What's the problem?!? They gotta make money!
  • Dammit
    Cay,

    Everyone's gotta make money, baby. But, most of us prefer they do it in way that doesn't mislead. The author of this piece, Matt Marshall, is complaining about deception at TheFind:

    Thefind blurs the line between ads and natural results even more than other sites. In the example of a search for “dress shirts” we mentioned in our first story, the two top results were sponsored ads, not natural results — and there was nothing clearly demarcating them.

    Also, according to this article, after Matt called them on this, they changed their ways. WTG Matt!

    So, I guess I don't understand your point, Cay. Do you think Matt is maliciously spreading falsehoods?
  • Cay
    Honestly, I'm confused. Matt praised TheFind last week and this week he's making them sound like the anti-christ. As I mentioned, I've shopped on TheFind quite a few times and I always see the sponsored spots marked with the little banners (like the URL I posted above). So, I don't think that they're doing anything wrong.

    I don't think Matt's trying to be malicious, but it seems strange that his views turned 180 degrees. I also read what Mr. Kumar had to say on TheFind's blog too and it sounds legit to me (he commented above).
  • Tad Askew
    Cay - your loyalty to thefind is endearing.

    I have also noticed that theFind displays the 'sponsor stripe' on the first couple of results. Which seems fair to me.

    However the issue is that there are many more results on the page for which theFind receives commission. It is pretty easy to peel the URLs and detect the underlying affiliate ids to commission junction, linkshare, etc. My guess is that some competitors brought this to Matt's attention and he published the update.

    No great mystery there.

    Siva Komar's response on theFind blogs looks reasonable - the fault is that it is somewhat belated.
  • Dammit
    I just saw the response on TheFind's blog. I don't think anyone can fault a company for placing ads on a page... that's not my particular beef. I even understand their desire to participate in as many affiliate programs as possible.

    If, however, they were passing off the first two search listings as extremely relevant while in fact they were paid listings but not clearly marked as ads, that suggests something is very wrong, especially at a company that touts itself as unbiased.

    In the example identified by the author, it's a nice comic aside that these two listings happened to be LESS relevant than the other items on the page: women's clothing in response to a "dress shirts" query.

    Unless TheFind's development team plays it incredibly sloppy, I can't believe this was anything but a considered management decision. At a search company, hours of meetings go into the relevance and presentation of search results.

    Ok, I'll get off my high horse now. :-)
  • whycay
    Cay,

    I entered the query "right hand ring" on theFind's home page and the URL is http://www.thefind.com/main/query.php?qS=usr&am.... This is not the same as what you have written. Do you work for theFind?

    To all others,

    If theFind needs to buy traffic from Google, then, can they make profit in the long run? Well, perhaps, only their investors need to be worried about this.

    I am not convinced that their results are unbiased as items on the first page are all from affiliate programs. Nonetheless, they do return LOTS of products on any search I entered. But, the presentation has a long way to improve. Many same products from different vendors are spread out widely. It makes comparison a difficult job for end users. Isn't comparison the primary reason why we come to theFind for shopping?
  • Gary
    To clarify, TheFind has *always* marked the sponsored results with a "sponsored" banner. ComparisonEngines.com posted on this on Feb. 10, 2007:

    http://www.comparisonengines.com/2007/02/10/the...

    From the beginning the sponsored results have been marked. The misunderstanding is that not every search has sponsored results. In those cases, the first two results are unpaid and won't be marked.
  • VC O'Neil
    I'd be interested to hear Matt Marshall's commentary on this. He sounds fairly certain that the first two sponsored results were not marked as such in his tests.

    From the article, above:
    In the example of a search for “dress shirts” we mentioned in our first story, the two top results were sponsored ads, not natural results — and there was nothing clearly demarcating them.

    I see that comparisonengines.com said, in February, that ads from shopping.com will be clearly labeled. But I see that, as of early April, Matt found otherwise. He even confronted TheFind's CEO with this specific issue, and the CEO confirmed it. Again, from the article above:

    We asked Kumar about this, and he agreed that this was misleading, and apparently has since changed this (we no longer see the women’s clothing).

    It smells like TheFind was caught red-handed and is now scrambling to rewrite history. Either that, or VentureBeat was irresponsible in its reporting.
  • Not sure what you want me to say. I reported things as I saw. Kumar agreed that it was misleading and has since changed. The sponsored ads were not clearly marked, and that's why I felt misled. Gary is wrong to say they were clearly marked.
  • Hi there,
    You may want to read this to get a feel for the company: http://sramanamitra.com/2007/04/03/thefind-life...
    Sramana
  • Comparison Shopping Lord
    In A.D. 2007 Comparison Shopping War was beginning.

    CEO: What happen?
    CTO: Somebody set up us the bomb.
    CTO: We get signal.
    CEO: What !
    CTO: Main screen turn on.
    CEO: It's Search Engine!!
    Search Engine: How are you gentlemen !!
    Search Engine: All your organic clicks are belong to us.
    Search Engine: You are on the way to destruction.
    CEO: What you say !!
    Search Engine: You have no chance to survive make your time.
    Search Engine: pay us more for clicks now ... HA HA HA HA ....
  • adhesive Xin chao cac ban,
    adjoint adjurors admires adnoun .adopters Chung toi ban phan mem quan ly nha hang:
    adorns adsorber advancer advisees .adzuki abc abc aegises aerators aerobic aerosol .
  • tortious torsion Sarasota Vacation Rentals .