Local company Entelligence (SEO, web development) has filed a complaint with the South African Competition Commission against Google South Africa for “abuse of dominance in terms of Section S8(d)(i) of the Competition Act
89 of 1998, which prohibits a firm from “requiring or inducing a
supplier or customer to not deal with a competitor” (full release here).
Entelligence is a qualified adwords company, and if their claims are true then Google South Africa appears to have been underhanded and is guilty of dodgy business practice.
Links:
- Google Africa Blog
- Google Africa Discussion group
Update: Mike Stopforth spotted this yesterday… also Elan Lohmann
#1 by Angus on September 1, 2008 - 13:37
Quote
This is the second blog I’ve seen mentioning this press release by Entelligence. I spoke to a friend of a friend at Yellow Pages South AFrica and they informed me that Entelligence has not been up-to-par and that relations over there with Entelligence isn’t great anyway – something related to Entelligence signing a contract with the marketing person at Yellow Pages…and subsequently that person has been fired (??) To be honest…at the end of the day – Entelligence has shot themselves in the foot. Google will probably never work with them again after all of this…and if ppc is their core business…they’re screwed – ha! How can you possibly attack any “partner” so openly and so aggressively? No company, nevermind Google, would ever work with you again if you treated situations like this. Any client of Entelligence should jump ship and work with another agency…it’s clear Entelligence and Google just don’t go together any more! Entelligence…you guys are idiots!
#2 by ewan on September 1, 2008 - 16:25
Quote
Thanks for that – always two sides to a story. We’ll wait and see what happens, my personal guess is that this was kicked off by a trigger-happy legal team… as you say, tangling in public with Google when your business interests mix is probably not wise!
#3 by Lilly Web on September 2, 2008 - 14:12
Quote
What an interesting read
#4 by ewan on September 3, 2008 - 09:13
Quote
… and here we have a classic bad example of SEO practice. Ironic? “Lilly Web” (lillyweb@netage.co.za), you’re a low life link promoter… I’ve removed the link to the site you’re so obviously trying to promote (www.netage.co.za)- this is why SEO in general has a bad name. Ordinarily I’d just delete your comment, but hopefully this will serve as an example.