| 6:43 pm on Jan 31, 2004 (gmt 0)|
ever wonder if rankings were tied to - say, clickrate via the toolbar? Ever consider that when you buy adwords, that naturally your click rate is going to go up?
| 12:42 am on Feb 1, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I thought page rank was the only determination of popularity. If they are using the toolbar to measure popularity, google better modify there info page, and say that adwords does (or may have) an affect on Google placement in the free listings.
| 3:17 am on Feb 1, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Exact timing would be great to know.
Are you sure drop was not caused by Florida update (November 14?, 2003) and the improvement was not caused by Austin update (Jan 24). Many sites that dropped in Florida have mentioned coming back in Austin.
| 11:17 am on Feb 1, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|ever wonder if rankings were tied to - say, clickrate via the toolbar? Ever consider that when you buy adwords, that naturally your click rate is going to go up? |
I was not aware that the takeup of the toolbar amongst joe public was that great yet.
Also, click-through rate is not a measure of user satisfaction. Whilst I don't doubt Google have considered this technology, I do doubt that it would improve already good results. Of course, with current results .....
Also, using click-through rates to modify SERPS is rather like positive feedback. Normally this is to be avoided since it reduces stability, however, with search engines, ironically, it would cause greater stability. Is that a good thing?
| 1:06 am on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>I was not aware that the takeup of the toolbar amongst joe public was that great yet.
Pollsters can get a pretty good idea what the population as a whole in the US thinks by interviewing a sample of 2,000 people or so. Main concern for Google would be how representative of a sample of all Google users those with the toolbar are?
| 1:42 am on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Most of the people with the toolbar are probably involved in SEO...not exactly representative.
| 5:45 pm on Feb 2, 2004 (gmt 0)|
A lot of the average joe's/jane's at the office (never quit my day job) has installed the toolbar, for the sole purpose of being a great popup blocker.
So yes it is getting popular (as a popup blocker),
but not for it's intended purpose
| 10:45 am on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
The real question would seem to be, are Toolbar users clicking on Adwords?
| 10:56 am on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Anyone fancy starting a toolbar clicks exchange?
I'll click your page if you'll click mine. I recon a few hundred of us spending 5 minutes a day should get this one cracked.
Do we need to clear the google cookie on a daily basis though ;o)
| 11:28 am on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
im surpised brett is teasing us with this again...googleguy already directly replied to his past post that the data was not being used..are we saying we cant trust googleguy?...imagine if we had to read between the lines of googleguy postings....like we do with the bible...it means basically we could interpret googleguy as saying just about anything we wanted to hear....i can hear the cults beginning to spawn even now......
| 2:39 pm on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
See no fault
Hear no fault
Talk no fault
We got the perfect engine. Everything else is our fault.
| 3:08 pm on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
HissingSid, I'll try anything once.:-) Count me in. However i think Google would eventually figure out what was happenning and possibly ban an ip address to the offending users. Just a thought. I could go to the local public library and use their computers though. (I'm Sneaky)
| 11:33 pm on Feb 10, 2004 (gmt 0)|
What if Google actually measures the TIME spent on a site per user using the toolbar? Wouldnt that be a more decent way of knowing how good a site was? i.e. If 5 visitors all spend 10 minutes on a site, then surely there must be something right about this site? however, if 5 visitors all leave the site within 1 second, then surely this site sucks?
Number of visits wouldnt mean much if you 'traded' clicks, had lots of advertising $, etc etc, but the time spent on a site, relative to the amount of traffic it receives.. now that might work, no?
just my 2cents...
| 12:10 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
How long you stay on a site is not necessarily a measure of satisfaction. It may just mean that it's a nightmare to navigate and eventually you realise that it's rubbish and return to the search.
As I've said before, analysing user behaviour to measure site relevancy is close to impossible. Certainly, this is true with current technology. However, I bet there are loads of people out there that reckon they can write software to do it but they'll want big bucks.
Twenty years ago, reading handwriting by computer was an impossible dream - now such technology is well advanced (though far from perfect). Analysing user behaviour is just about possible, but do we really want that kind of software spying on us - I don't think so.
| 12:49 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Hey! My site's rank went from #2 to #12 after I started an Adwords campaign - I want my money back. ;)
| 1:06 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Based on the information the Alaxa toolbar captures I have to believe the Google toolbar is that complex and then some. To me it makes sense, if a web browser visits 5 websites and on 4 of them looks at 1-2 pages and on the 5th site views 20-40 pages, I think it is safe to say the user may have found the 5th website most useful. Again, if this is true it comes down to content and ease of navigation.
| 2:11 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|...on the 5th site views 20-40 pages, I think it is safe to say the user may have found the 5th website most useful. Again, if this is true it comes down to content and ease of navigation. |
Or it may mean they're poking all around the site trying to figure out why their keywords aren't there and why the site appeared on their search when they can't find anything relevant. I have frequently spent more time on unrelated sites for this reason, and I doubt I'm alone.
On the other hand, on a well-designed site I should be able to find the piece of information I seek almost instantaneously. Then I can move on.
A more useful metric would be to track which site is the last site they visit on the search, without coming back to the search page. That should mean they found what they are seeking.
| 2:53 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Or.. a combination of these algorithms.. im not saying at all that Google is doing such a thing, but it COULD be done.. and algorithm that works off site visits including time spent, last visits - which could also just mean the user got sick of looking :) and so forth.
Yes I agree that a badly structured site could make user visits longer, but wouldnt you rather visit a competing site that had a better site structure? Hence most users searching through a number of sites would skip one over the other.
Or how about repeat visits to a site? If user1 found a site via google serps and then repeated to visit the same site over and over again, would that not mean the site was at least popular to him / her? Now if 10,000 visitors all visit the same site over and over, spending 5 mins a day, not visiting any other similar sites for longer than 30 seconds, can we not assume to a high degree that this site is more popular than its competitors?
Just speculation i know.. but im not trying to convince, my intention is to speculate...
| 3:27 am on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Google can also use this information about the pages you have viewed to improve functionality or quality, or add new features. |
| 4:42 pm on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Or how about repeat visits to a site? |
This may be something they are tracking, but is a dangerous metric. It would kill focused niche sites that usually offer the best information and benefit the bloated Silicon Valley behemoths.
If that happened, the serps would look like . . . hmmm, about what they look like now?
| 4:47 pm on Feb 11, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Google is a business. It makes logical sense, that they would follow AdSense ads and transfer page rank. This would help give PPC Advertisers an added benefit most would not even notice - except that their sales increase when they use PPC. A wise move by Google!