The Citigroup (C) analyst spoke with PubMatic and the Rubicon Project, two “optimization” firms that help publishers manage inventory they hand over to ad networks. And both say they’re seeing continued upticks in sales and demand.

Pubmatic, for instance, says pricing has increased every month this year, and Rubicon says that they’re seeing demand from–believe it or not–travel and auto advertisers. Just as encouraging, buyers are actually making “longer-term” plans, which was unheard of in the darkest days of 2008 and 2009.

Both firms also reiterate the conventional wisdom that we’ve been hearing for the past 12 months: The money that is being spent is increasingly going to “performance-based” ads, which are paid for only when someone interacts with them. That’s another data point in favor of Google (GOOG), whose core product is performance-based.

Again: Things were so lousy a year ago and through the spring of 2009 that it’s prudent to take these kinds of data in stride.

And if you really want to be half-empty about it, you can note that the inventory Rubicon and Pubmatic sell is the cheapest real estate publishers have to offer. Which means it’s hard to say how various sites’ high-end real estate–the stuff they sell themselves–is doing.

We’ll get a better sense of that in about a month or so, during Q3 earnings season, when we get color from Web publishers like Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL and the New York Times (NYT).

But, as I said, this is supposed to be an optimistic post.

Anmuth says his research shows an increase in pricing for Google’s search ads over the past few months, particularly in the battered retail and auto sectors. His note comes a couple days after Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney raised his Google estimates, citing a dramatic improvement from mid-August to mid-September.

Other Google bulls: Investors, who have been pushing up the company’s shares since March (they’re now hovering near the $500 mark again), and CEO Eric Schmidt, who declared this week that “it’s clear that the worst is behind us.”

The tempered enthusiasm isn’t limited to Google’s chances, by the way. Mahaney also had good things to say about Yahoo’s (YHOO) chances as the economy recovers. While Yahoo is handing over its search business to Microsoft (MSFT), Carol Bartz and crew still dominate the display ad business, and that should be picking up as well, he said.

It is worth noting that Yahoo executives themselves were more cautious this week when asked to describe market trends: At an Advertising Week press conference, Bartz brought out her “still bumping along the bottom” line, while EVP Hilary Schneider said ad sales had stabilized but that she “wouldn’t go so far as to say as we’re seeing a full recovery.”

Top line for Google’s Q2 earnings: Net revenue of $4.07 billion and earnings of $5.36. The Street was looking for net revenue of $4.05 billion and earnings of $5.05.

CEO Eric Schmidt isn’t overly effusive: “Google had a very good quarter, especially given the continued macro-economic downturn. While most of the world’s largest economies shrank, Google’s year-over-year revenues were up 3%. These results highlight the enduring strength of our business model and our responsible efforts to manage expenses in a way that puts us in a good position for the economic upturn, when it occurs.”

Meanwhile paid-click growth was up 15 percent, and the company continues to clamp down on expenses: Google’s headcount actually shrank in the last three months, from 20,164 to 19,786 full-time employees.

I’ll be listening in on the call and occasionally updating here.

• Schmidt: “Youtube is now on a trajectory we’re very pleased with.”
• “Too early to tell when the recovery will materialize.”
• CFO Patrick Pichette: Still hiring, but decrease in headcount came from previously announced layoffs.
• Product SVP Jonathan Rosenberg: We’re focusing more than ever on power users.
• Mobile monetization picked up, driven by smart phones. YouTube’s monetized views have tripled in the last year.
• Sales boss Nikesh Arora: Small advertisers have stayed consistent during downturn, and larger advertisers who have been on sidelines are coming back.
• Schmidt on Chrome OS: We’re talking to manufacturers about designing “products that are very, very exciting.” Will Chrome run on existing hardware? Available for download? Still to be worked out.
• Was June soft? Schmidt: We generally don’t parse interquarter trends. On YouTube: Monetizing “billions of views” per months. [Nothing approaching real numbers or real context].
• Arora: “Significant sellthrough” in markets where Google has YouTube homepage for sale. Next phase of YouTube sales emphasis will be preroll ads on short-form videos.
• Arora on YouTube “trajectory” comment: We’re excited about getting pieces in place to drive this forward [i.e., not talking about numbers]. Customers accepting YouTube ads: “It’s becoming accepted user behavior where they’re going to watch premium content that people have invested in, they’re going to watch pre-roll ads.”
• Is YouTube profitable? Pichette: We don’t give out economics. But in the not-too-distant future, we see it being very profitable.

Here again, per Citigroup’s Mark Mahaney, is a crib sheet for interpreting the results (click to enlarge):

And here are the slides from Google’s investor presentation:

2009Q2_google_earnings_slides –

As per Google’s last report card, Wall Street is expecting the company’s revenue to decline from the previous quarter–unthinkable for Google (GOOG) in prior years, but now no longer a shock. But Wall Street will be looking for both numerical and qualitative hints that things are getting better, or at least have bottomed out.

The ever-helpful Mark Mahaney from Citigroup (C) has provided his usual “cheat sheet” to help interpret Google’s results (click to enlarge):

Marketers can buy Google ads instantaneously, without the haggling and lead time that traditional ads require. So conventional wisdom is that the company’s results will work as an early indicator for the general ad market and the greater economy.

But I talked to a search market exec last night who cautioned about reading too much into this afternoon’s results unless there’s a really big upside surprise. This is traditionally a slow quarter for search ads, he argues, so it will be hard to learn much from the results. The real key, he adds, will be the company’s Q3 numbers–if things are coming back, then Google’s September numbers will reflect that.

In the meantime, we can always hope that interrogators are able to get Google executives to provide them with meaningful answers on a wide range of topics, from the performance of Microsoft’s (MSFT) Bing search engine to the never-ending will-they-won’t-they talks with Yahoo (YHOO).

I’ll be covering the call live after the market close this afternoon; check back then for a link to a new post.

UPDATE: Results are in, and they’re okay. If you’re looking for a big vote of confidence in the ad market or the economy, this isn’t it. But it’s not bad, either.

That’s the conclusion Citigroup’s (C) Mark Mahaney reached after taking Microsoft’s (MSFT) new search engine for a spin and comparing it to Google’s (GOOG) and Yahoo’s (YHOO). The result: Google still delivers better results most of the time. In 71 percent of searches, Google either supplied the most relevant answer or tied with other engines. Bing did that 46 percent of the time.

But it’s worth checking out the results of Mahaney’s test to see exactly how the search engines stack up. For one thing, as he notes, Bing’s results are getting better as it matures–it’s only been live for about a month–and as it adds bells and whistles (for instance, it is catering to vanities of certain bloggers by including their Twitter stream in search results).

And Bing also performs better for at least two kinds of searches: Health and travel. So if you need to book a trip, or if you pick up a rash on that trip, you might want to think about Binging before you Google.

First, Mahaney’s methodology:

Over the past two weeks, we conducted 200 queries across the three major Search engines–Google, Yahoo! and Bing. Most of the queries we picked came from Google Zeitgeist, Microsoft’s xRank and Yahoo! Buzz, along with some personal queries. These queries spanned multiple categories, including Entertainment, Health, Local, News, Retail, Sports, Travel and Other. After conducting the same query across all three Search sites, we picked a winner based on: 1) relevancy of the organic search results; and 2) robustness of the search experience, which included factors such as image and video inclusion, Search Assist, and Site Breakout.

And his results. Overall relevancy (click to enlarge):

Relevancy by topic (click to enlarge):

Mahaney’s argument is simple: 1) Media sales represent half of Amazon’s North American business and 2) They have been slowing consistently for a while. Here’s what the numbers look like (click to enlarge):

Why are media sales slowing down? Mahaney, an Amazon (AMZN) bull, throws out some ideas:

This may well be the most discretionary/recession-sensitive segment of Amazon. That surely explains part of the slowdown. But three other factors may be material. First, this segment includes Books, Music, and Videos (in addition to Video Game Software)–products that have had inherently slow overall retail growth over the last few years. Second, this segment includes products that are over-indexed in terms of Internet penetration. And third, this segment contains products that are being rapidly digitized–even the plain old book, thanks in part to the Kindle.

The last point is the most interesting one to chew on because Amazon bulls usually argue that the company is the best-positioned player to adapt to the digitization of media. And they’re probably right. But it sure does increase the pressure on the company to get it right, which will probably involve charging more for the digital music and books than it does now.

I’m pecking this out from the bowels of the New World Stage, where Day Two of the Twitter-centric 140 Character Conference is meandering along. But the most interesting Twitter-related news is coming from outside the conference: Data from comScore (SCOR) showing that Twitter-related search has become both measurable and meaningful.

Well, measurable, at least.

From Citigroup (C) analyst Mark Mahaney:

Twitter Becoming Meaningful–Search volume on Twitter in May was 30.1MM, (.001 percent U.S. market share), with 4.2MM searchers, and 39.4MM Result Pages, exceeding the 22.2MM searches conducted on Time Warner Cable.

Normally, we don’t even bother to dismiss companies that have less than one percent of U.S. search market. We never write about them, period. But given that Twitter boosters continually try to position the company as a real-time search engine–one that theoretically can threaten Google’s (GOOG) search monopoly, if you listen to some pitchmen, this may be the single most important metric to watch for the next few years.

It’s certainly more important than the number of Twitter followers of Oprah or even Twitter’s overall growth rate, which is going to spike up and down over the next few months as the media hop on-and-off the story (it’s back on again this week, with the Tehran protests, but we’re entering the dog days of summer, and us media folks have twitchy attention spans).

And it’s probably more important than any revenue Twitter generates over the next couple of years–the Twitter dudes have raised $55 million and have spent little of it, so they have time to create a business.

But if Twitter really is going to become an important player in search–or at least an attractive acquisition candidate for the likes of Google or Microsoft (MSFT)–it’s going to have to show a steady increase in search share.

And the nice thing about owning .001 percent of the market is that it gives you plenty of room to move up.

So who’s going to emerge as the winner? Easy, says analyst Mark Mahaney: It’s Google (GOOG).

But Mahaney, Citigroup’s (C) longtime Internet guy, isn’t talking about Google’s smartphone platform. He’s talking about Google’s core search business, which he thinks is finally about to see significant lift from mobile users.

It’s a straightforward thesis: As more people use smartphones, which are essentially portable computers that happen to make phone calls, they’ll start using them to do the things that people do with conventional computers — like search.

Our simple point here is that Mobile Internet usage, Mobile Search usage, and Mobile Google Search usage are all likely to be derivative beneficiaries of the “Smartphone Summer.” The So-What here is that Mobile Internet is beginning to emerge as a material Secular Growth driver for GOOG.  And getting back to the basic Core drivers of Google’s financial model, we believe this will show up in the form of consistently robust Paid Click growth in 2010 and beyond.

Want to see actual numbers before you buy into this? Fair enough: Google, like a lot of its peers, has been making a lot of noise about mobile with little to show for it so far. But if it is able to deliver, then the company may finally have that second business it’s always pined for.

Big winners so far include Blue Nile (NILE), up 73 percent; Expedia (EXPE) up 68 percent; and Amazon (AMZN) up 44 percent. Moderate winners, comparatively speaking, include Google (GOOG) up 27 percent; eBAY (EBAY) up 21 percent; and Yahoo (YHOO) up 22 percdent.

Here’s the full breakdown of the 16 Internet stocks Mahaney covers (click table below to enlarge):

I usually steer well clear of opining/guessing about stock prices and the like, but I think it’s worth considering Mahaney’s note, both for his explanation and for the potential impact of the stocks’ run.

The explanation: Part of this is basic what-goes-down-must-go-up market yo-yoing–Internet stocks got pummeled worse than the rest of the market last year so it’s easier for them to bounce back. But Mahaney also thinks that most of the stocks he follows are going to turn in the worst performance, earnings-wise, in the quarter we’re in now. Investors like that because it means that things can only get better.

The impact: Remember the old days when public companies could use their shares as currency to acquire smaller companies? Well, we’re not headed back there quite yet. But a sustained rally sure could kick-start the M&A market, which will make things more interesting for the likes of me, at the very least.

[Image credit: joshmadison]

At first glance, it looks like the company beat them. Netflix (NFLX) posted earnings of 37 cents a share on revenue of $394.1 million. Wall Street had been looking for 31 cents and $390 million, respectively. The company said it ended the quarter with 10.3 million subscribers, which is the high end of the range it had promised to deliver.

And guidance was strong, too. From the company’s press release, here are Q2 predictions:

– Ending subscribers of 10.4 million to 10.6 million
– Revenue of $403 million to $409 million
– GAAP net income of $27 million to $32 million
– GAAP EPS of 44 cents to 53 cents per diluted share

And here’s the company’s revised guidance for 2009 (full year), which it increased:

– Ending subscribers of 11.2 million to 11.8 million, up from 10.6 million to 11.3 million
– Revenue of $1.63 billion to $1.67 billion, up from $1.58 billion to $1.635 billion
– GAAP net income of $96 million to $106 million, up from $88 million to $98 million
– GAAP EPS of $1.56 to $1.72 per diluted share, up from $1.43 to $1.59 per diluted share.

All of this seems to compare favorably with Wall Street’s expectations. Via Citibank’s Mark Mahaney, here’s what investors were looking for (click to enlarge):

Netflix shares have been bouncing around in the aftermarket following the earnings release, and last I looked, they’re just about flat. It will probably take investors a while to figure out if they’re disappointed that the numbers aren’t even bigger.

UPDATE: The stock is now down around 5%, presumably because guidance wasn’t strong enough. I’m back for the earnings call, which I’ll live blog part of: I’m particularly interested in Netflix’s digital strategy, so I’ll be focusing on that.

CEO Reed Hastings: Subscribers renting more DVDs and Blu-rays than ever. Disc rental will continue to grow for many years, so we’re investing in that.

More realistic Blu-ray pricing (previously discussed) of 20% to 25% premium for subs. Though we’re paying the studios a higher premium for Blu-ray. If we can get those costs in line, we can promote Blu-ray more agresssively [i.e. bring down your prices, Hollywood, and we'll push more of your high-margin discs].

We are losing customer to $1 kiosk rentals. “By end of they year, kiosks will likely be our #1 competitor,” as rental stores fail. “Longterm effects,” of cheap kiosks “are not positive for us, or the industry as a whole.”

Streaming: Overall consumer embrace of online video growing. “Not hard to believe that online video will grow substantially every year for a long time”. [Duh]. Important for us to be spending “aggressively” on streaming content. “But that means we are essentially buying many titles twice now”. Buying once on DVD, and again on streaming. Great for content owners, ok for us since costs for streaming are lower than physical distribution.

We believe we’ll get more streaming licenses as TV networks, who control titles, look to increase distribution. We are looking to a day, when we have plentiful content for streaming… “we will simply be a fourth option for consumers and a fourth revenue source for networks and studios”. It’s possible that within a few years, all CE devices sold will include a Netflix component.

It’s easy to focus on the Internet for its distribution abilities, but its important to think about social possibilities. Future of Internet TV is closer to Facebook and social networks than the standard grid lineup. Social, social, social. Long term outlook for Internet TV is very promising.

[Join to pass on most of CFO notes] No “cocooning” effect from recession apparent in DVD usage. Acquisition costs “record low” in part because of depressed online ad pricing.

Q&A: “Tremendous amounts” of hardware partnerships in the pipeline. Xbox renewal? No answer.

Have sub growth slowed at end of quarter? No. Q4 growth back-end loaded because of holidays, and Q1 growth front-end loaded for same reason.

How about a fee-based service for a streaming only service by year’s end? We talk about that from time to time, but not pressing. For now, combination of DVD rental and streaming is what consumers are interested in. A streaming-only service would be a “sweetner” to what we have now. We don’t think it would cannibalize, though.

Can you talk about streaming-enabled devices’ contribution to subscriber additions? No details, but we think it’s helpful to have Xbox, Blu-ray players, etc. “It’s definitely a very positive part of the ecosystem for us”.

What are dynamics to adding more content to streaming library? More money.

Can you talk more about new marketing efficiencies? There aren’t any new ones, really. Weak economy, lower ad prices, plus consumer excitement about streaming product.

What does competition look like on streaming front from Apple and Amazon? Right now, “all three of us are three drops of water in the pool that is watching television”, … “we all recognize in the long-term there will be competition between us” but we’re all “so tiny” compared to TV-viewing that that’s what we’re focused on.

That appears to be it for streaming-related queries. I’ll check back in with the full transcript later on.

In the old days, this might have qualified as news. But for the past year or so, Zenith Optimedia, along with just about every other ad forecaster, has been revising its forecasts downward every couple of months as the reality of the financial meltdown sinks in. So it’s hard to get worked up about this stuff.

More stuff you pretty much knew already: Online advertising is doing better than traditional ads.

Citigroup (C) analyst Mark Mahaney summarizes his chat with the CEOs of PubMatic and the Rubicon Project, which help online publishers sell inventory through ad networks. Their takeaway is that while pricing for online display ads has dropped dramatically in the past couple quarters–by as much as 50 percent in some cases–overall spending should remain flat this year. And as we all know, that’s the new up.

If you’d like to see concrete numbers from the ad market, hang tight until Thursday, when we’ll get earnings reports from two companies at the opposite end of the media spectrum: Gannett (GCI) and Google (GOOG).

Add February’s numbers to January’s data, which showed the same two percent growth rate, and you can make the case that we’re seeing “marginal growth” in online sales, Fulgoni said this morning at the OMMA Global Hollywood.

Best-case scenario? “Maybe we might well have bottomed out with consumer spending,” Fulgoni offered.

Now, all the caveats: ComScore (SCOR) isn’t telling us what people bought, or at what prices, so all we really know is that dollars were exchanged for goods on the Web. And while you can imagine that this data point is good news for Amazon (AMZN), since the online retailer is crushing the competition, it’s hard to point to other likely winners. And I worry that the economy has many more aftershocks, in the form of layoffs, ahead, and that’s going to drag down consumer spending again.

But I’m so starved for good news that none of these asterisks are going to keep me from enjoying this.

Meanwhile, if you have any questions for Fulgoni, email me as soon as you can: In an hour or so I’m moderating an OMMA panel with him, Citibank (C) analyst Mark Mahaney, MySpace marketing SVP Angela Courtin, tech/finance blogger Paul Kedrosky and Michael D. Kelley, a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. There should be some sort of blog coverage here.

[Image credit: rileyroxx]

Fresh off the heels of two search industry conventions (ugh), Mahaney synthesizes a couple different industry reports with his own interviews. Key takeaway: Search advertising spending will be flat at best in the first quarter of 2009, but will rebound for the rest of the year:

As one very experienced Search agency executive put it to us, ‘Flat is the new Up.’ Not surprisingly, specific verticals that were singled out as weak were Retail & Travel. And surprisingly, one vertical that was singled out as stabilizing was Financials. We also picked up signs that February Search spend may be picking back up from depressed January levels. Two leading Search marketing firms separately told us that while January saw client spend cutbacks, indications are firming for a January and March recovery.”

Translation for Google: Mahaney thinks net revenue will decline seven percent for the search leader in this quarter compared to net revenue three months earlier. That will be mind-blowing for the go-go growth company but in line with the seven percent and 10 percent decreases that Yahoo (YHOO) and IAC’s (IACI) Ask have suggested. But Mahaney, a Google bull, thinks the company will end the year up four percent.

Perhaps that should be our definition of a recession going forward–a year when Google (GOOG) posts low single-digit growth–and that’s seen as a good thing.

Can’t wait for the debut of Kindle 2.0, which should arrive around 10 a.m. this morning in New York?

Here’s a splash of cold water, courtesy of Jeffrey Lindsay: The Bernstein Research analyst says Amazon’s much-hyped e-book reader is merely a “niche product”–and that the e-commerce giant wants to keep it that way.

Lindsay’s argument in a nutshell: Electronic delivery of content may be the future of Amazon’s (AMZN) business, but it’s going to make most of its money selling physical goods for a long time to come. So Jeff Bezos and company won’t make the moves that, say, Steve Jobs and Apple (AAPL) might make if those guys were pushing e-books.

Lindsay: “Unlike Apple with the iPod, which cannibalized somebody else’s sales–namely the music industry–Amazon with Kindle is in part cannibalizing sales of its bestselling product, and this must be factored into the economics.”

Translation: Don’t expect to see super-cheap (say, $99) Kindles anytime soon.

Lindsay’s numbers aren’t radically different than those of Mark Mahaney, the Citi (C) analyst who has been notably bullish about the Kindle and its impact on Amazon’s business.

Both men estimate that Amazon sold about 500,000 devices last year. And while Mahaney thinks Amazon’s hardware and software sales will be a $1.2 billion business by the end of next year, Lindsay has a more conservative $900 million estimate.

Even by 2012, when Lindsay thinks Amazon will be selling two million Kindles a year, this won’t mean that much: Amazon’s revenues could actually decline by 0.6 percent because of slower physical book sales, while the company’s earnings would increase by perhaps 2.9 percent, the analyst predicts.

All worthy thoughts to contemplate–a little later on today. But in the very near term, most Kindle-watchers will be focused on more prosaic concerns. Like are those “leaked” Kindle 2.0 product shots real? We should have answers in a few hours, when Amazon holds its press conference at the Morgan Library.

Check back at All Things Digital at 10 a.m., where I’ll be liveblogging the event.

But Mark Mahaney thinks he knows: The Citigroup analyst estimates that Amazon (AMZN) sold 500,000 devices last year. And he figures that the Kindle, which he delights in calling the “iPod of the Book World,” will become a $1.2 billion business by 2010.

Watching Mahaney get to his numbers makes for interesting reading, if you enjoy reading analyst reports: He derives the 500,000 number via a filing by Amazon partner Sprint (S), which handles the wireless service for the e-books. And he gets to the $1.2 billion number by assuming that Kindle adoption will be similar to that of Apple’s (AAPL) music player several years ago, and that Kindle owners will buy a digital book each month. (Click chart to enlarge)

Also worth noting: Mahaney’s larger thesis, which is that Amazon is making great strides at anticipating and adapting to a future where most of its inventory is delivered digitally. And as with Netflix (NFLX), that doing so isn’t an option–it’s required:

The structural challenge facing Amazon is that approximately 50% of its revenue is generated from the sale of books, music, and videos–three  product categories that are all in the process of being digitized. If Amazon can’t successfully jump the chasm from Internet-ordered/mailman-delivered media products to Internet-ordered/digitally-delivered media products, its financial fundamentals and its stock price will be significantly challenged.”

But maybe you don’t care about revenue models or stock prices. Maybe you just want to see shiny new gadgets. OK. Mahaney has a little something for you, too. Here’s what he envisions for Kindle 2.0:

• Longer and thinner than Kindle 1.0
• Less crummy key pad and buttons, so it’s less likely that you’ll accidentally turn the page
• No touchscreen
• No color screen
• Price: Perhaps as low as $300, down from today’s $359

My prediction: The geeksugar people are going to be baking a new Kindle cake next week.