Anyway, I found it clear that Schmidt wasn't saying that he thought Bing was going to beat Google. He said there are others who think that. You can call that misleading or slippery, but it's by definition not a bald-faced lie.
As far as I'm aware, there is nothing to suggest that it is at all likely that Bing is going to start taking large amounts of share from Google after no record of having done so to date. Do you disagree?
One major player going away, another losing something like 9 Billion, and one or two minor players stepping up isn't exactly a volatile industry.
Most sources I follow -- and from colleagues that work at both Google and Bing -- Bing is operating in the mid to upper teens as a percentage of the market.
It's referring to Bing and Yahoo traffic, since Bing is the backend for Yahoo search now.
"Since Microsoft entered the market, Google has nearly doubled its share at both companies' expense, but for the last year or so Bing has gained a few fractions of a point every month -- at least in the U.S.
Worldwide, Google still dominates with between 80% and 90% share, depending on who's measuring."
Not to pick on the result, but BusinessInsider is a poor choice as a reference. At least they point to results from Experian.
(1) gets another 4% from Google over the next year due to IE defaults and advertising;
(2) gets another 2-4% from the FB deal;
(3) signs a deal with Apple to become default on iOS (2/3 of mobile = 5%+) and desktop Safari (4%+).
That could potentially put them around the same market share as Google. None of those propositions are crazy either.
I just don't see Google in position to lose much more share to Bing is all.
Saying Schmidt lied to Congress is the bald-faced lie.