<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: craigslist to google: we don&#8217;t need you</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/</link>
	<description>Insight and opinion from the world of employment.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 04:01:22 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steven Rothberg</title>
		<link>http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/comment-page-1/#comment-432</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Rothberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2006 20:21:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/#comment-432</guid>
		<description>The good folks at Craigslist and I disagree over whether the entry of Google into classified advertising is a net positive or negative for our job board businesses. They apparently have decided that it is a net negative to work with Google. We feel that it is a net positive. 

Like most things in life, this is not a black-and-white issue. We are working with Google to make jobs posted to CollegeRecruiter.com part of the Google Base listings. While we anticipate that we&#039;ll lose some revenues and incur some added expenses, we also anticipate that we&#039;ll see a significant increase in traffic and that should translate into increased revenues which should be high enough to increase the net.

Personally, I think that the entry of Google and MSN is great simply because it adds two more worthy competitors. Their actions will force all job boards to be better. We also need to do a better job for the candidates and our clients. And if worrying about Google and MSN forces job boards to do a better job, then so be it.

Steven Rothberg, President and Founder
CollegeRecruiter.com job board
http://www.CollegeRecruiter.com 
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The good folks at Craigslist and I disagree over whether the entry of Google into classified advertising is a net positive or negative for our job board businesses. They apparently have decided that it is a net negative to work with Google. We feel that it is a net positive. </p>
<p>Like most things in life, this is not a black-and-white issue. We are working with Google to make jobs posted to CollegeRecruiter.com part of the Google Base listings. While we anticipate that we&#8217;ll lose some revenues and incur some added expenses, we also anticipate that we&#8217;ll see a significant increase in traffic and that should translate into increased revenues which should be high enough to increase the net.</p>
<p>Personally, I think that the entry of Google and MSN is great simply because it adds two more worthy competitors. Their actions will force all job boards to be better. We also need to do a better job for the candidates and our clients. And if worrying about Google and MSN forces job boards to do a better job, then so be it.</p>
<p>Steven Rothberg, President and Founder<br />
CollegeRecruiter.com job board<br />
<a href="http://www.CollegeRecruiter.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.CollegeRecruiter.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gaby</title>
		<link>http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/comment-page-1/#comment-431</link>
		<dc:creator>gaby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2006 18:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cheezhead.com/2006/01/02/craigslist-to-google-we-dont-need-you/#comment-431</guid>
		<description>I bet the base is for future indexing of web content. The way organic search it&#039;s done at the moment could stop working any moment. They have piles of data for each page, only makes sense to allow us to search by those criteria. Sure there will be adds, don&#039;t they stuff that on anything after 2 weeks of beta?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bet the base is for future indexing of web content. The way organic search it&#8217;s done at the moment could stop working any moment. They have piles of data for each page, only makes sense to allow us to search by those criteria. Sure there will be adds, don&#8217;t they stuff that on anything after 2 weeks of beta?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.626 seconds -->
