If you were to google the phrase "Google dominates," you would be greeted by at least 24,000 different links, while "Google dominates search" would yield some 1,400 results. Clearly, Google's supremacy is a hot topic.

Despite vigorous competition from formidable search players like Microsoft and Yahoo as well as also-rans like Ask.com, Google's market share -- namely, its percentage of total Web searches -- continues to balloon. In the last three years, Google's share has climbed from 43 percent to a decisive 56 percent, per Nielsen Online.

Can Google's Kleenexian supremacy be good for business? Certainly not according to Microsoft, now in hot pursuit of Yahoo!. "It's like if one TV station was in charge of selling advertising on all other stations," says Ellen Siminoff, chairman of search agency Efficient Frontier, which reports that of every dollar of its new search business, a whopping 97 cents goes to Google.

Media buyers watch the race for search share with a wary eye on Google, but have yet to sound any alarms. "In any sort of business ecosystem, anytime someone has such a large share, it does present challenges," says Robert Murray, president of the Boston-based search firm iProspect. But, he adds, "Multiple challengers keep things moving, keep things innovating, keep things honest."

Were this any other media segment, any player that had amassed a near-60 percent share could be guaranteed to hammer buyers on price. But Google's auction-based selling model essentially prevents that, since the market, not Google, sets rates. "This isn't a negotiation-based market," explains Neeraj Kochhar, vp, director of SMG Search. "That's the difference." And since most Google advertisers optimize their ad campaigns based on some sort of return-on-investment measure, they are constantly keeping the dominant player honest.

That's not to say prices aren't on the upswing. According to Efficient Frontier's analysis of its clients' business, Google's average cost per click surged by 22 percent in fourth quarter '07 year over year, driven by a tweak in Google's vaunted search algorithm -- making it tougher to bid for top ad slots. By comparison, CPC rates on Yahoo and MSN in the same period inched up less than 3 percent.

Buyers say they've yet to see signs Google is abusing its power. In theory, Google could require higher minimum bids or larger increments between bids for advertisers buying keyword ads, forcing clients to burn through budgets faster. The search engine's quality score measure, which impacts such bidding, is "not entirely transparent," says Kochhar. But some see little reason to worry, even as Google's share keeps growing. "It's not vastly different than other years. It's still very early," says Jeff Herzog, CEO of the search agency iCrossing.

That mirrors the position of Microsoft, whose execs claim the company has only been serious about search for four years (coinciding with its growing obsession to catch Google). But despite revamping its search ad delivery technology with the launch of the adCenter platform in 2006 -- and despite running elaborate promotions that offer users cash or prizes just for using its search engine -- MSN has barely been able to maintain double-digit share.



Meanwhile, Yahoo!, which invested heavily in proprietary search technology in recent years via its famed Project Panama, has seen search share fall slightly.

While both companies' new products have been greeted with favorable, if not spectacular, reviews from advertisers, they've meant little to consumers. "Google doesn't even advertise," says Murray. "And it's become ubiquitous…and the switching costs [involved in trying a new search engine] are extremely low -- you just open up another browser. That just makes it all the more confounding."

Making it even tougher for the rivals is that when it comes to getting consumers to use a particular search engine, real estate doesn't matter. "I think that MSN and Yahoo! have better access to users on a daily basis, and they are not turning it into searches," says Roger Barnette, president of search technology firm SearchIgnite.

Barnette points to the company's huge reach via properties including Yahoo Finance, where Yahoo! search boxes receive prominent placement. "Yet people leave to search on Google," he says. "Users are very comfortable with that Google interface." A similar dynamic plays out with Microsoft. Despite the huge reach of the MSN portal and Hotmail, "MSN search, from a market-share perspective, has been remarkably flat," says Barnette.

Yusuf Mehdi, Microsoft's senior vp, strategic partnerships, agrees -- a big reason why he believes joining forces with Yahoo! will help. "The product itself is very competitive," he says of MSN search. "You won't get users to switch unless you have a compelling reason. Those reasons include new features and new value." He believes a Microsoft-Yahoo! combo creates both. In fact, Microsoft is betting merging the players' search enterprises will result in a larger total market share than the combined 30-plus percent they pull in today.

"The way a search engine gets better is that it learns," Mehdi explains. "It gets smarter the more it gets used. When you don't have scale, you don't have the volume to pick up nuances." With the scale of a combined MSN-Yahoo!, those nuances should get picked up more easily, with obscure queries or repeat queries likely yielding better answers. Then, theoretically, consumers use the search engine more, and tell friends. Meantime, Mehdi believes MSN and Yahoo!'s engineering teams can "stop doing redundant things" and instead put more effort toward improving search for video, mobile and other features.

What about the super-small players? If MSN and Yahoo are having trouble moving the needle, many wonder why IAC chairman/CEO Barry Diller even bothers to compete. Ask.com struggles to pass a 2 share, per Nielsen Online, despite big technology investments, a user-friendly interface and a national TV campaign. "Ask is innovative," says Murray. "You wonder, why are they a distant fifth? They get good traffic, but it's still one-twentieth of Google."

Of course, even a small share of a booming market is nothing to sneeze at, says JPMorgan Chase analyst Imran Khan, who predicts a $60 billion search market by 2011. "That's not a bad number to have," he says. "It's a big market. You have to invest long-term. I don't think it's a battle you shouldn't fight."

Despite Google's miles-wide lead, many see the search battle as far from over. (Mehdi predicts the matchup will be "multidecade.") That's one reason why buyers prefer that Microsoft and Yahoo! join forces rather than for Yahoo to throw up its hands and outsource search to Google, as some have speculated. Under that scenario, Google "would have a virtual monopoly," says Siminoff.

Observers theorize several forces could chip away at Google's share. A player like Facebook could find a way to link search to social networking, or a new rival could materialize. Maybe some kid working in a basement somewhere is the next Sergey Brin? "The time of maximum pessimism is good for entrepreneurs," says Herzog.

Google, despite its status, is not untouchable, experts agree. "Something can happen to change people's attitudes," says Murray, whose team already has seen account- services headaches from Google as it manages its hyper-growth. "Google isn't the cute little startup anymore -- the threat to Google will come from within," says Murray.

But for the time being, catching up to Google seems but a dream. In fact, your search "Google's search share plummets" did not match any documents.