| 6:29 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I'll have to swap out my site search from Google search to Bing search if I spot even one such result for a keyword I'm competitive with now, I want my visitors to have a range of the best choices and I'd link to ONE site instead of offering Google search if I wanted this. Stupid move G.
It's funny that whoever is moderating comments on that blog post is apparently approving only the positive remarks too, mine was less full of glee and wasn't approved, even the comments aren't impartial now.
"This means some pages better suited to the results will now be unavailable from page one, correct?"
It was an honest question, apparently one they don't want asked.
| 6:43 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Larger sites will not dominate the SERPS |
I assume you meant "will now dominate".
Actually I just do not see the point in this. There is no need for a search engine to suggest how to navigate through a website. It is the website designer's role to present the information in the most suitable way for the website visitors. Google is going too far with this.
| 6:54 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I can confirm this with a specific search displays from my domain displays EIGHT (8), that's right EIGHT (8), results from my domain alone.
Compare that just to a search in Google for the domain "WEBMASTERWORLD" which returns 6 from the domains webmasterworld, 2 from pubcon, then some various stuff.
Another search on another of my domains, with 5 popular subdirectories looks like this:
We're talking each results a full SERP with dir1-dir5 nested under the primary domain.
Best of all, the traffic leech domain sites, such as Aboutus.org, seem to have been pushed down in the SERPS so they aren't right under your domain anymore.
Ahhh.... gotta love it :)
| 6:59 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Search for just "amnh" and the second result has a search box and Google maps. There's no good reason to then remove the natural next best 5 pages in favor of 5 more from the same site imo.
| 7:13 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
We began a discussion about this last Wednesday (Aug 18) when Senior Member the_nerd reported the first signs of the change - see Google Now Shows Many Results from One Single Subdomain [webmasterworld.com].
A key observation is that this kind of treatment is quite query specific. In other words, Google's metrics must indicate that the user intention for the query is essentially navigational.
What isn't clear to me so far is the example that netmeg spotted - the search [microformat example] which gives the mega result treatment to microformats.org. Important note that both words must be singular. Make either one of the plural and the SERP reverts to "normal".
Very peculiar since the featured domain IS plural - but it can only be triggered by a singular version!
| 8:10 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Can't we start a master thread on how to develop a website without been dependant on google for traffic?
| 8:25 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Let's use this thread to give behind the scene info for our own sites that got lucky.
Our domain name (two words: first generic singular, second "brand" plural) returns this type of result. Small site (less than 40 pages). Search volume on the exact two words word1 word2 averages at 200/month - it drives most of our traffic. CTR is "high" 22% (Google Webmaster Tools) and bounce rate is "low" 12% (G Analytics) on that search. We get Google Suggest-ed when you do word1 w (that's word 1 space first letter of word 2).
If you make the first word plural we still see this new set of results. We actually have 8 results from our domain for both normal search and when the 1st word is plural. Turning the 2nd word singular returns normal SERPs when first word is singular or plural.
Yesterday the main word1 word2 search returned :
us + sitelinks (no www.)
same www.anothersite indented
us + sitelinks (no www.)
www.anothersite (same as yesterday)
same www.anothersite (the indented result from yesterday)
and yes that's 8 results from our domain on page 1 (yay!).
Pages shown are very similar to sitelinks, so this might be a path to follow to do more research on this.
| 9:54 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
This means that google is actually not a search engine.
| 10:14 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
You meant 8 pages Brett, every page has a keyword now that's covered by the obligatory Wikipedia link.
| 11:02 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
This topic was already posted on the homepage and discussed a few days ago.
Brett - You scared me. I thought this newer discussion had meant things had gotten worse since last Thursday. ;-)
| 11:22 am on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
| 12:27 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Why are google hell bent on stuffing small sites in the ass? |
IMO, most of the changes google recently rolled have one major common goal. Kill SEO! and push more and more websites and businesses into the AdWords program. Disgusting realy.
This thing is and no longer a search engine, its a ppc money making machine and the sooner we realize it the better.
| 12:59 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
IMO, most of the changes google recently rolled have one major common goal. Kill SEO! and push more and more websites and businesses into the AdWords program. Disgusting realy. [
Basically, yes. But the writing was on the wall long ago...all you have to do is think "Hmm, if I was running Google and wanted to make even more money how I could do it?"
I wonder if Google sees this as an improvement though. "Hmm, for this particular keyword, people click the first link 80% of the time, so let's just be more specific on the links shown for this page since they're going to go there anyway."
| 1:45 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
In an area I cover, the large (brand monopoly) has only 2 listings. However, competitive keywords with the brand name in them dominate the SERPS with as many as 8 listings.
| 2:03 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I suppose its adwords - yes - silly me.
Of course - once a searcher sees a page full of the same site and its NOT the one the want - then they will probably look right and click on the adwords.
When will someone come along to kick google off the net - does greed know no bounds? I wonder how much cash is enough.
| 2:06 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Ahh, how the worm turns.
Sycophantic webmasters are being to wake up and realize that Google is not their friend but competitor. Google plans to keep eyeballs on their domain using your unique content.
Wait till Google places replaces your website in the results.
Got pictures?, Google will use your content for image compare to funnel visitors to other websites selling merchandise.
| 2:13 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I for one don't think Google is as short sighted as that.
| 2:13 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Trust me - ive never been a google fanboy given that they destroyed my affiliate sites years ago. I saw that coming aswell. Ive known what google are for 8 years - and I cant use that language on here.
| 2:37 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
>then they will probably look right and click on the adwords.
CTR for one word i looked at went from an average of 4% to 7.5% clickthrew since this change.
| 3:01 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I can assure everyone that this doesn't affect all brands, so heaven isn't falling (yet). As an owner of an internationally well-known brand, I would be glad if this change applied to our site too, but it doesn't.
We have first two spots and SiteLinks but the third belongs to the "encyclopedia" that anyone, including 5-year-old children, competitors, psychopaths, and other trolls, can edit.
| 3:30 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
The Adwords argument only makes sense if the incremental budget from the relative small-timers is greater than the lost revenue from the previous Big Spenders who now dominate SERPs
| 3:44 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|In other words, Google's metrics must indicate that the user intention for the query is essentially navigational. |
... and ...
This means that google is actually not a search engine.
I wonder how much this decision is prompted by the fact that a significant portion of the surfing public opens their browser with Google, then types the URL they want into Google -- rather than the browser address bar -- so from Google's POV, that portion of the public must think they ARE the internet. Much like the public's perception of AOL in the old days.
But I'll tell ya', they're coming across as a company that is throwing spaghetti at the wall, to see what sticks. Try this, try that. There was a time when they had a focus, stuck to it, and drove the company to the top. Now there is something new on a regular basis and I wonder if this change of attitude will come back to haunt them. The non-geek public wants familiarity, simplicity, quality choices, and trust ~ will/can Google still deliver that? or as some postings here suggest, has manipulation for the sake of profit moved to the front of the line? If so, they should call Steve Case to see how far a company can fall, and how quickly.
| 4:00 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone seen this search result type for a query for which they would NOT have wanted to go straight to the website in question? (I haven't seen it yet in any of my personal searches, whether I wanted the website or not.)
As to Google wanting to kill SEO - I agree, but can I respectfully say, of course it does?
SEO is something made for search engines, not webmasters. If search engines were as smart as people, then they'd never have needed any SEO triggers to discern relevance. But the ultimate goal for a "smart" search engine like Google is to automate dynamic, organic-like artificial intelligence. To figure out what users want and give it to them using their own "perceptive" abilities, not information fed them by woefully inconsistent, unpredictable, uninformed (who has the data Google has?) and in some cases untrustworthy (well, definitely not disinterested) SEO experts. They tell us what SEO they need, then they try to wean themselves away from it.
I'm not saying I like it, just that's what seems to be happening. In a sense people are search engines - when we're asked a question, we try to figure out what the asker's intentions are, what the underlying question is. Wouldn't you rather speak the same language as the questioner than rely on translators telling you what they think the person is saying?
Getting to that stage will take a while, and yes, it feels unfair, not to mention seriously scary. But every time we use SEO we encourage the search engines to learn more and grow out of our "nurturing."
| 4:21 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Brand Keyword (Single word)
Main Site (with sitelinks)
Main Site/Dir1 (in sitelinks)
Main Site/Dir2 (in sitelinks)
Main Site/Dir3 (in sitelinks)
Main Site/Dir4 (in sitelinks)
Main Site/Dir5 (in sitelinks)
Secondary Site/Most Popular Page
Secondary Site (indented off above)
The results so far in analytics are less than impressive. As far as organic Google traffic there's been no increase over the past 2 days. I'll have to check with our PPC guys, maybe it's costing us less in that area.
| 4:32 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Its not just this latest change that bothers me - its just the fact theres only one door if you like into the internet for users (their choice) and we (the internet) have to suffer the misery of the door owners whims.
Its beyond a joke the control g has - its totally beyond a joke.
Theres really only one mass of people who can change this - site owners - and yet here we are yet again cowering in the corner wondering when our master will look upon us with favour.
They wont. Ever. Period.
Im going to put Bing and Yahoo ads all over my sites now - I hope others do the same. This single doorway system needs sorting and Im going to do my bit.
| 5:52 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|its just the fact theres only one door if you like into the internet for users (their choice) and we (the internet) have to suffer the misery of the door owners whims. |
There are other options available to consumers. The majority of consumers choose Google because the find it useful.
I know my online business is heavily dependent on other companies. That is the nature of the beast we all battle. Moving your chips from one side of the table to the other is not going to make your business any more stable.
| 6:18 pm on Aug 24, 2010 (gmt 0)|
What I'm noticing is that they are disguising the top sponsored links more on some searches. The background color used to be more prominent, but it's barely visable in some of my searches.
searching for: Brand and part number
what I'm seeing
- sponsored link
- manfacturer page
- top search listing (maybe)
- Shopping results 1-3 with an image
- amazon's page for that product
- shopping engine site #1
- shopping engine site #2 (different site)
- shopping engine site #3 (another different site)
- an OLD insecure ecom page from 2006!
- a spammy page of just lists of part numbers by the manufacturer,
- a spammy shopping engine page that only links to amazon or the spammy site above this one.
| 2:27 am on Aug 25, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Im going to put Bing and Yahoo ads all over my sites now - I hope others do the same. This single doorway system needs sorting and Im going to do my bit. |
If only Yahoo/Bing had a proper international AdSense like program., a proper site search and a proper search bar with a proper easy to use spell checker like the mighty g has. If only.....then i would say they (yahoo/bing) have a chance to really turn things around and grab a much larger search crowd.
IMO, right now....the google spybar and the AdSense program are what keeps a large portion of the search market at bay and under google wings. Take that away and we all should have a much better, even playing filed.
The kids at the plex know that and will continue to pump out such destructive innovations, clearly designed to squeeze every penny they can out of their (Do no evil!? democratic!?) SERPS.
Good time to be a Google shareholder by the way, because if this to continue (and stick) then i bet you the next few upcoming reporting quarters are going to eclipse all previous records by a large margin...the ultimate motive.
| 3:56 am on Aug 25, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Yahoo and Bing seem to be preparing for something behind the scenes for the last few days, yahoo itself has been acting abnormal with more SERPs added and some change definitely is happening there, a JIT response to G*'s latest move?
Probably the anticipated roll-out of their search partnership, that sure (if it is) should shake things up a little!
| This 63 message thread spans 3 pages: 63 (  2 3 ) > > |