Google Toolbar to Add Google Suggest Feature

I am not sure what percent of Google's queries are from the Google Toolbar, but their toolbar auto updates, and will soon be offering the Google Suggest feature directly from the toolbar.

This may lower the percentage of traffic to short queries and consolidate many of the searches people perform for some of the longer queries to the most common versions.

This could have large implications for PPC ads:

  • the consolidating traffic could cause people to bid up the most common 3 to 4 word versions of queries;

  • which could lower the traffic available from random low search queries;
  • which could make some business models which relied heavily on underpriced PPC leads no longer viable;
  • which may boost click fraud
  • In the past longer search queries were also associated with great implied intent. Auto filling a portion of the search query for searchers may create many more specific searches that did not have as great of an implied intent.

this could also have large implications for regular search traffic:

  • there will be less generic searches;

  • which means there is even less reason to go after the most generic terms (since they usually convert poorly anyway, and targetng some of them can cause your linkage profile to look too unnatural and get your site filtered out of the results);
  • some of the search variations in the suggest lists may get more traffic, but overall I believe this will have a consolidating effect on search traffic, causing the most common & best converting 3 to 4 word phrases to become even more valuable

This toolbar update will have a net effect of consolidating traffic to more the most frequently searched targeted terms. The search engines provide far more relevant results if searchers know how to search, and Google Suggest is an attempt to help teach them. They also can sell ad space for a much greater price on highly targeted searches.

Google Investing in Current Communications Group, a Start-up Broadband Firm

US Laws have been favorable to big players who own the information pipes. In order to avoid getting in some way marginalized Google wants to help people bypass those lines.

From the Journal:

Current Communications says its uploads are as speedy as its downloads. That could come in handy for Google's video-search functions. "As part of our corporate mission, we are interested in promoting universal access to the Internet for users," Google, of Mountain View, Calif., said in a statement, declining to provide any further details about its investment.

The article also reports the FCC also likes the idea:

Officials at the Federal Communications Commission have expressed support for power-line services because they could expand the availability of broadband and would give consumers more choice of providers, perhaps lowering prices.

Reuters stated:

Current, a closely held company, offers its high-speed service in the Cincinnati area and is expected to use its new investment to expand, the Journal said.

Becoming the Noise You Once Replaced

For a while I was a big user of RSS & feed readers, sometimes reading over 100 sites a day.

Ever since I went to WMW New Orleans I have not fired up the old feed reader. Each day I neglect it it becomes harder for me to want to turn it on. Many of the posts (and I am just as guilty as everyone else) are things you can get here or there or everywhere else, so on the whole, in some ways, I think blogs are starting to become the noise they replaced (and that does not even include the spam journals).

There is something cool about a clean slate, but that fear of missing something means that in a couple days I will probably read a half of month worth of posts on about 150 blogs.

This has nothing to do with search, but has everything to do with how people organize and digest information. It would be great to see a feed reader that bolded or highlighted posts which were well cited or deemed popular or important by other user set criteria.

Why doesn't one of the feed reader creators partner with Technorati to help create a feed reader that helps point out what is important and needs to be read. Also it would be cool if feed readers would learn reading habbits and help you optimize your way through reading your long list of posts.

There are so many obvious ways to extract meaningful data that are just waiting to be developed. Has Google only ignored this market opportunity because it does not have an associated proven business model yet? Do they not think AdSense for feeds works well enough?

Sorry for the noisy rant post. :)

Mobile Search Wars

Yahoo! launches their SMS service

the new Google toolbar added a send to phone feature

not too long ago Google became the default home page for T mobile

Business 2.0 recently posted an article about the looming mobile search wars:

According to the Pierz Group, Americans spent nearly $2 billion on directory assistance from their mobile phones last year -- at an average of $1.25 a call -- which suggests a healthy demand for information on the go. And that's just a fraction of the overall mobile search market. Providing instantaneous answers to a wide range of queries is what will make mobile search invaluable. And whoever figures that out is golden.

Yahoo! Hot Jobs Searches the Web for Jobs

Yahoo! is leveraging their knowledge of the web to try to increase activity at Hot Jobs.

Searching using the job engine at Hot Jobs now searches various job posting sites accross the web, which could increase Hot Jobs exposure, but could also cause their listing fees to get marginalized as people could opt to list jobs at some of the smaller databases that will now get more exposure. I believe Craigslist offers free job postings. If Hot Jobs searches those types of sites will their business model erode?

Monster.com has been doing fairly well in the market the past few days, due in part to analyst upgrades. Not too long ago they announced their founder was leaving to start a secret project which Monster.com is also backing.

When will Google creates vertical searches for things like jobs, and how open they will be? How many vertical markets will general search engines create and destroy as search advances? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

From John, who also points out a couple other small players in the job market.

Professionalism, Ethics, Emotion & the Evolution of Search Spam...

I omitted my friends name, but recently I had a chat with a friend via IM. I asked him if it was cool for me to post a bit of it and he said sure. The chat went like this... friend: there are so many people out their calling themselves seo professionals
me: well its an arbitrary title
me: am i a professional
me: if so why
me: etc
friend: your right.......
friend: I looked at that excel file earlier. why have you spent less time keeping it up?
me: because why should i
me: why should i promote shitty biz models that are not forward looking
me: help a few sketchy webmasters be lazy and greedy
friend: true.....
me: and bust my ass to do it
me: for free
friend: true
me: better things to do w my time
friend: I have noticed a lot of them becoming link farms anyway
friend: they are dropping everyday also
me: almost all of them are shit
friend: I have focused more on good qaulity article submissions
friend: those suckers are viral if you have good content
friend: I can incraese your list of article submission locations if you need more.....
me: well if its easy to import the data sure :)
me: in the end though
me: most of those will get spammed out and deweighted too
friend: I took the liberty of adding sites to the excel file you sent me, ie. article subs and press release subs. it doesn't get any better than that.;-)
me: cool
me: well if you want to email it through thats cool
me: :)
me: but the thing is
friend: it seems like all of the good marketing outlets are getting lost in the shuffle because of spammers
me: I cant be the central maintainer because I thought that would scale but it does not ... so I can accept contributions, but its too hard to keep up with
me: not really
me: i dont buy that at all
me: good marketers evolve
friend: you just said a second ago that you thought article subs and press release sites will go down also. it sounds like you agreed with what i said.. i am confused
me: not the good marketers dropping off
me: just the lazy easy channels
friend: i was just venting in terms of spammers screwing it up for the rest of us
me: well my take is we are all spammers
me: is the stuff you are promoting uniquely inovative and useful? if it was you probably wouldnt need to rely on article submissions
friend: promting useful information doesn't always get you a spot in the top. Why do we try so hard to get links pointing in our direction if that were an absolute?
me: well what do people want
me: you need to serve multiple needs
me: what people will buy
me: + what people want to market for you
friend: thats where i think we are. I don't think articles should be writtien to spam. But, they can be written professionally to get better exposure online.
me: right. but your opinion doesn't much matter in the grand scheme of things
me: as mine doesn't either
friend: opinions are like butt holes, we all them and they sometimes stink....
friend: so how do you propose meeting the many needs of the masses?
me: well thats the point
me: each needs to decide
me: there should be no mass system
me: mass system = spam
friend: meeting the needs of the mass isn't spam if you are doing ethical work, su as putting toegether great content as you have put it many times on your site.
me: thats the whole point
me: if the content was so great
me: it wouldnt need an automated type system
friend: it seems as if we have very similar ideas
friend: i haven't been talking about automating things in our industry. I am just interested in gaining some insight as to your opinion about helping others online.
friend: thats all
me: well my insights are this
me: create something useful that people are interested in
me: and then be creative from there
friend: i know you have always taken the stance at emulating a users experience online. I have learned a lot from taking that mind set. believe me
me: so that is where I stand
friend: cool
me: the basic thing that is screwed up
me: is people think that online they can just get links
me: without thinking about the social aspects etc
me: sure it can work
me: but longterm it is way easier if people want to link to you or if you have a legit brand off the web
friend: i know you are big on the community aspect. this is a safe bet on or off line. I deal with people online like I would in person. This has also helped out a lot
friend: i remember you saying on the phone that after you reached a low point from circumstances in your life, your outlook was changed for the better
me: ok?
me: :)
me: i still am bitter mean and evil often
friend: you remind me of one of my best friends. he too is kinda outspoken and ruff around the edges. but, underneath it all, i know what he is all about. You are the same way

----

I didn't leave that last part in there to pump myself up or pat myself on the back, but more to show the emotional bond.

The guy I was speaking with I spoke to on the phone for about 10 minutes about a year ago and have emailed a few times, and yet he feels he knows and understands me. He may or may not (I sure don't!), but either way it is a good deal for me.

People with emotions create algorithms by which search engines function, but their job is so grand in scale that it is hard for them to care about ones and twos.

As search algorithms advance in some fields it will become easier to manipulate other webmasters and web users than it is to try to manipulate the algorithms directly.

It is the same reason there are so many 50 page sales letters, because like selling stuff, ultimately selling the idea of people giving you quality inbound links or recommending you is one person and one conversion at a time.

I am not saying that everything you do should have manipulation in mind, but it is easier to do well if people want to help you, and it is easier to win over 1 person at a time than it is to fake relevancy across all the major engines, at least if you are hoping to have a longterm business model.

Keyword Intelligence Official Launch

A while ago I posted about Keyword Intelligence. Well today they officially launched. I got to see a test demo of it, but could not post about it until today due to embargo.

You gain access to the same data as HitWise with a few exceptions:

  • the database depth is smaller (100 for basic and 1,000 for standard)

  • you do not get access to the competitive intelligence data
  • Keyword Intelligence is much cheaper than Hitwise, starting at about $1,000 a year.

Keyword Intelligence allows you to grab top terms by industry, lets you enter the root search term and see what other search terms are returned, allows you to manage your keyword terms inside their product, and offers terms by geographic region.

Click Fraud Testing

Danny pointed at MarketingExperiment's recent piece on click fraud (free registration required).

They tried click fraud on test campaigns, clicking 10 times on each. Below is the number of clicks Google charged for from each test set:

Individual clicking on the ad: 0
Individual clicking on the ad with Anonymizer: 1
Clicking on the ad with a different computer, same IP address: 1
Clicking on the ad with a different computer, different IP address: 1

They mentioned impression fraud and looked at alleged click faud in three real accounts, which showed that fraud tended to increase as click cost rose.

They also gave tips on how to avoid click fraud or minimize its effects. The article is worth a peak if you plan on swimming in the PPC market. They also have a 50 minute audio I have only listened to a few minutes of.

I am not sure why they did not test other engines as well. They should have at least done Overture. It would be interesting to compare how various engines fight (or do not fight) click fraud.

Whoever is big in the click fraud prevention market should really use some a / b / c comparison testing as the cheap marketing opportunity that it is.

Andy Beal Endorses LookSmart?

Search Engine Lowdown is sponsored by LookSmart, and in their advertisement post it sounds as though Andy is endorsing their service:

If you want quality traffic at a lower cost than other leading pay-per-click search marketing programs, check out their LookListing service.

I guess quality is a broad word, with many meanings, but from my experiences that post sounds a bit economical with the truth.

Ocassionally I have thought about taking advertisers on this site, but it would take a lot of money for me to say nice things about LookSmart's traffic quality.

If LookSmart believed in their own products would they be displaying AdSense ads on their sites like FindArticles and Zeal? When I just checked even LookSmart itself was serving up AdSense ads.

From your internal testing does LookSmart provide quality traffic cheaper than leading pay-per-click search marketing programs? If their network traffic quality is high then why do they need to outsource their ad sales to Google? In spite of contextual ad click fraud why are some people willing to bid more on AdSense than on LookSmart?

Google Duplicate Content Filters & an Interview of Dave Naylor

Get seen First:
DaveN posts about how Google duplicate content filters have a tendancy to reward the first spotting of content.

Interview:
Interesting stuff Dave. I should interview him, oh wait, I just did :)

I think the key takehomes from his interview are:

  • trust & friendship are HUGE in the SEO space

  • the importance of collecting data

but the interview is well worth reading for all. Thanks again for the interview Dave :)

Pages