The text is stating: "Come inside and see how SQL Server 2005 can make your business leap forth"

I said to my self this can`t be happening and I checked the link behind the ad and, really, there was a link to Google`s ads site, http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/ , and the final link redirects the user to a page praising Microsoft`s SQL Server, on Microsoft Israel`s web site.
The final link was similar to this one: http://www.microsoft.com/israel/sql/default.mspx?gclid=CNTt7-S90owCFQW6XgodkVmv1w

An attempt to perform a direct search for Microsoft ads within Google`s ad site did not succeed, I guess because the site is instructing search engine crawlers not to crawl the site (using its robots.txt file).

So, either hell froze over or the lion is lying down with the lamb (and you match the moral to the allegory) or someone at Microsoft Israel is going to get it…

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A few days after the original post (above), I felt such an out of the ordinary event deserves an official response from the giant and so I turned to Microsoft Israel.
Here is the log of events:

15-June-2007 – I sent an email to Microsoft Israel customer care, to ask for a way to contact its official spokeswoman.
 
17-June-2007 – I received an email response asking me to pass the number of my mobile phone so she can call me. I sent back the number on the same day.

19-June-2007 – A phone connection was made with Sigal, Microsoft Israel`s spokeswoman. I explained to her, in a general way, what this issue is about.
Without her knowing the issue with details, she didn`t reject upfront the idea of Microsoft cooperating with a competitor and noted IBM as an example of Microsoft cooperating with a competitor.
I told her that my opinion is that this issue is less likely with Google since the companies are direct rivals in the areas of search and advertising.
See asked me to send to her by email a link to my post and she will check it out when she will return from abroad.
I sent the requested email that same day and of course I immediately received an "out of the office" automatic reply stating that she currently has no access to email, until 24-June-2007.

25-June-2007 – I sent Sigal a reminder email.

One of first days of July 2007 – I initiated a phone call to Sigal, and she asked of me to give her more time to check a few more things and that she will be back with an official and neat email answer by the end of the day. Such email never came in.

4-July-2007 – I sent another email to Sigal, reminding her of our last conversation and her promise, asking her where the promised email is.

8-July-2007 – I phoned Sigal and since she didn`t answer I left her a bit of an angry message in her voice mail, telling her that if she wishes not to comment on this issue – at least she can declare this officially and stop avoiding me, and if I will not get any official response from her, I will explore other options, located higher up the ranks, and maybe they will come up with a response.
At an early evening hour of the same day, a fellow named Jacob phoned me and introduced himself as the PR person of Microsoft Israel (he is a worker of a PR section of a large Israeli advertising agency, not a worker of Microsoft) and said to me that Microsoft Israel is not wishing to respond to this issue. So the official response is "no comment"? I suggested. He agreed, "no comment".
I wondered to his ears why it took so long to get a "no comment" answer (over two weeks, or 11 business days to be fair). I didn`t get a good answer.

It puzzles me why an official spokeswoman (who was my initial and main contact) chooses to deliver the final answer using the company`s PR person, which is not a company worker. Make your guess.

I definitely appreciate the sincere reply of "no comment" (seriously, not cynically).
This reply indicates to me of a balance between telling the truth (or, if you wish, not telling a lie) and a lack of will to officially admit a strange act, not to say disgraceful, by the ones who should know the advertising market and should tell who is a clear and significant business competitor of the company they work for.
On the other hand, the attempt to avoid response, making me "chase" the spokeswoman in attempt to get an answer – does not give honor, to say the least, to Microsoft Israel.

To conclude, all of the activities, mentioned above, that were needed to achieve a response and the response that was finally given, only reinforce my initial feeling that someone from Microsoft Israel really messed up big time by advertising using the company`s greatest advertising rival, and so, not only transferring money to the rival but also "declaring" that Microsoft is thinking that Google`s advertising is the right one to do the job...

(This post is translated from two Hebrew posts, one and two)