I see your point, but I would disagree that Google wasn't an easy pitch. Example: "We're the best search engine. If we're better than everyone else and easier to use, more people will use us. We'll use those eyeballs to make money."
Ah, but there were many search engines touting themselves as better. Better won't cut it. Google was so much better that people were willing to switch from Yahoo and the others, and that's an empty pitch. You would have to back that up, and to back it up means already having achieved your goal. Of the two, in my opinion, pets.com had the better pitch.