Has the Google/DoubleClick acquisition left you with a flurry of questions? Here are some important issues and variables to consider.

Five o' clock Eastern time on a Friday is a really odd time for a major release to hit the trade press, especially for a deal of this magnitude. As I watched the news come across the wires on Friday, as we were wrapping up the week's work at Underscore, my first thought was "Are you kidding me?" My second thought was how oversimplified the comments from the financial industry seemed to be, as they trumpeted Google's new access to online display advertisers.

Yes, Google will now own an ad management system, but DART is merely a tool that can't take the place of a relationship. So "access" might not mean what many outsiders in the investment community might take it to mean.

It's an interesting PR tactic to leave the entire industry hanging for a weekend with a number of critical questions about how the DoubleClick acquisition will affect business. Lots of questions have been swimming around in my head over the weekend, and it was also kind of fun to think about how Google and DoubleClick will merge their tools, services and the inroads they've made into the online marketing business. There are so many questions, my head is spinning.

Here are just a few:

What happens to DART search?
Quite a few agencies rely on DoubleClick's DART Search to manage larger search campaigns in Google, Yahoo and other search engines. Underscore isn't exclusively married to any one bid management system, but there are quite a few agencies that manage search through DART and DART only.

Can DART Search customers expect tighter integration with Google's systems?  Will the tool be further developed so as to provide a competitive advantage over Atlas Search and other such systems? Will DART Search be done away with completely? These are some of the unknowns rattling around in my skull.

Google's ownership of a search management tool might strike some fear in the hearts of Yahoo, MSN and other competitive search engines. While customer privacy is a cornerstone of DoubleClick's very survival, it has to make other search engines nervous that spending information for a lot of heavy-hitting search advertisers is a mere database peek away.

Advantages for publishing customers?
Speaking of privacy issues, it might irk some publishers using DART for publishing that their campaign databases are now housed by a Google-owned company. This could be a good thing or a bad thing. If Google is smart, it will reiterate DoubleClick's commitment to privacy and put publishing customers' minds at ease immediately.

If Google can keep publishers from migrating away from DART, it can introduce a number of tools that can help publishers monetize their pages more efficiently. An optional remnant inventory program that brings AdSense and DFP together is a no-brainer -- so is continuing to develop the ability for publishers to participate in DoubleClick's new auction exchange. What new tools could be on the horizon for publishers that will help them get more money for ROS inventory?

How do these potential conflicts get resolved?
When DoubleClick was originally spun out of Poppe.com, part of the reason for the move was to avoid the appearance of impropriety by having one organization own both ad buying and ad selling operations. Now that DoubleClick is back in the hands of an ad seller, some of the same issues are once again rearing their ugly heads.

To be fair, some of DART For Agencies' top competitors also have ties with selling organizations. Atlas is owned by aQuantive, which also owns an agency (AvenueA) and an ad seller (DrivePM). Mediaplex is a ValueClick company, and if you're a company likely to be scared off by the notion of your advertiser-side ad server being owned by an ad seller, odds are you'll be irked by DFA's competition as well. Still, the degree to which DFA is now on uncomfortable ground for certain advertisers remains to be seen.

More long tail participation?
DoubleClick has tools that help media buyers find sites to add to their online display campaigns. Google can create some revenue opportunities within this arena without too much trouble. Google could fairly easily add every single long tail site participating in AdSense to MediaVisor, making it easy for advertisers to find sites for ad campaigns that wouldn't normally show up on their radar. Google already has a number of these sites rolled up into channels through its display network. It could make buys on the display network easier for advertisers by integrating directly into Mediavisor's Site Directory and DFA itself. This could mean more long tail revenue for independent publishers. A few DFA agencies don't make use of Mediavisor, but enhancements to the service like some of the things I just mentioned might just give them enough reason to use the tool.

Cross-media opportunity?
With Google's forays into traditional media sales, one might wonder how agencies and advertisers could gain access to cross-media packages through DFA's interfaces. Google now has a platform by which to make buyers aware of ad packages that might make sense for their brands. It won't be as simple as laying out all these potential opportunities in front of the media buyers via the DFA interface, but a targeted recommendation engine might make sense here. Google could provide lists of opportunities open to advertisers looking to target a specific demographic, lifestyle or interest, such that they're not bringing attention to opportunities in women's magazines, for instance, when an advertiser is putting together a plan for young males.

This new acquisition leaves people in all facets of the online marketing business with tons of questions. I think the best approach for Google here is to start by immediately assuring their existing customers that the products and services they currently purchase from DoubleClick are not in jeopardy. Once customers are reasonably reassured that the acquisition will bring enhancements to existing products, and not new problems, Google can start to build on what they've bought.

Tom Hespos is the president of Underscore Marketing and blogs at Hespos.com. Read full bio.