Did the ads direct users to the wrong website?
Nope, not at all. There were no technical issues with the ads or anything else.
Answer:
In the late 1990’s, Ebay was developing a presence as an auction site. The fear in the company was that if they became too well known too quickly, a large company with greater resources would be able to quickly replace them by duplicating what they do. Yahoo* was the company they were most afraid of.
Basically, the idea of an auction was so basic, they feared promoting themselves would awaken richer companies to do the same thing.
Ebay decided to operate in silent/stealth mode and to focus on treating their sellers well. The pulled any and all advertising to not alert wake the sleeping beast of Yahoo. They built a large base of sellers and were able to rely on the base they had to generate growth.
I was generally looking for:
The pulled advertising to work quietly and not alert larger companies of their presence.
*Yahoo did create Yahoo Auctions, but Ebay was able to not engage them in ad wars an win.
@Chronos - go for it!
I wonder when and why they abandoned this policy.
(Apologies that I won’t be able to answer for a few hours; posting this via email)
The other day, I was dealing with some objects. I threw one away, then I threw away two at a time. I then threw away two at a time many more times. Finally, I threw away one again, and I was done with what I was doing.
What were the objects, and why did I throw them away in this pattern?
Is it relevant that you threw the singles away first and last? That is, could you have thrown them away in the middle of the process instead?
Had those singles once been parts of pairs, with their partners having already been lost or discarded?
Were the two-at-a-timers natural pairings, like gloves or salt and pepper shakers, or whatever kind of objects might come in pairs?
Did this have anything to do with book design?
Were they physical objects?
Is it more efficient to work with these objects when you have an odd number of them?
Is dealing with the first object tricky, but they’re easy enough to deal with in pairs after the first is out of the way?
Were the pairs physically joined together?
Was the only purpose of this activity to get rid of the objects?
Do the objects themselves have a purpose besides throwing them away?
When you say threw away, do you mean disposing of them in the trash, or did you mean that you physically threw them somewhere?
Did everything get thrown away in the same.place?
Would it help to know where this activity took place?
Would any of us likely do this activity in the same way?
Is so, is it likely we have done so?
Had the objects served a purpose as part of a pair?
Had the objects served their purpose or could they have still been used?
Would a change in the total number of objects (while staying odd) have changed the pattern.
When you were “done with what you were doing,” had all of the objects been thrown away?
Did the thrown away objects get replaced?
Do they come two-to-a-set, and you used one to prop open a dumpster lid — or the door leading out to the dumpster, or something — and then threw away the other one, and then threw away twosome after twosome until you could easily throw the prop in and walk off, calling it a day?
Nice !
…but …
we have to guess the objects, and in your scenario it could be anything…
Huh.
Were cards being dealt, and thrown away? Like for a specific game, or a magic trick?
I think I’d say Yes to both.
I threw them in the trash.
Re-examine that question…
Surprisingly close, but no
No
Answers in bold.
Did the objects come joined in pairs? Or did you connect them? Alternatively, did they come connected in a chain and you separated them into pairs?
I guess it’s just taking folks a while to notice that I’ve started answering?