| 1:23 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Whats your take though Mr T?
| 1:33 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
At this point, it simply doesn't matter. Larry 'dozer' Page is doing whatever he wants regardless of what the public thinks. They are here to make money. It is their ecosystem to bull doze.
| 1:49 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I hadnt realised people (well it looks like you included) were actually feeling the same as me. (LOL you are more polite I guess).
I think the days of living in fear are almost over - they have done the damage so people are speaking up more.
I understand completely they are entitled to do as they wish. Just sucks being on the wrong end of their requirements though.
And do what might we?
Simple - I dunno.
| 4:22 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Have you tried Bing, Yahoo or Blekko?
| 4:24 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
For advertisers that are not ranked in the top three organically, this is good news. For those that are, this is bad news. Usually those lines blend so there are going to be winners and losers for every keyword.
| 4:42 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Yes - binghoo is nice, blekko - not tried that one.
Why is it good news for those not ranked in the top 3 organics?
Why is it bad news for those that are ranked in the top 3 specifically?
| 5:23 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
This looks like a way to persuade those at the top of the organic SERPS to buy an ad: every time I have seen these, there have been organic site links to the same site right underneath.
| 8:28 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Advertisers using ad site links now have the opportunity to achieve higher CTR with enhanced format. Three lines will push down organic listings and that will be reflected in their decreased click share.
|Why is it bad news for those that are ranked in the top 3 specifically? |
This is for the organic listings, just so I'm clear. It's bad because they will lose traffic when advertisers implement another ad site link due to the increase in CTR.
Let me know if that makes sense.
| 10:02 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Now that I've seen a few, it seems to me that in most cases those who are bidding for they're own brand are going to see their ad spend climb ever so gently...
Bad example search for "priceline" -
Ad Sitelinks look cleaner, right in your face, and so more tempting than the organic sitelinks.
Good example search for "kayak" -
they're not bidding on their own brand so you don't see Ad sitelinks (at least for exact match "kayak") letting organic results do their job, for free.
| 11:20 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'm noticing a lot more pictures in the adwords ads too. I expect them to continue trying to make the ads more attractive, at the expense of the also-rans, er """organic""" listings.
| 11:59 pm on Sep 6, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Get ready for more. Google has to hire more people and spend more money to fight and pay for stealing Android IP and the multiple anti-trust investigations for being an illegal monopoly. It's quite possible that Google is low on cash. How? IIRC, most of their remaining cash (after paying for Motorola) is outside USA due to their tax scams and they need to pay 35% or whatever the US tax is to bring it in USA.
Paying $500 million from shareholder's money so Larry wouldn't go to jail [online.wsj.com...] didn't help them either. AAPL and MSFT are also ganging up on Google, and so is everyone that wants a fair search engine. Finally Google has met its match, it's easy to bully site owners. Go and pick on Oracle, AAPL and MSFT with close to $150 Billion in their balance sheets. Loot Google, your time is running out...your offices were raided today by Korean authorities [ft.com...] and that's just appetizers.
Look what they said before they became Greedy Monster Inc:
|Since it is very difficult even for experts to evaluate search engines, search engine bias is particularly insidious. A good example was OpenText, which was reported to be selling companies the right to be listed at the top of the search results for particular queries [Marchiori 97]. This type of bias is much more insidious than advertising, because it is not clear who "deserves" to be there, and who is willing to pay money to be listed. This business model resulted in an uproar, and OpenText has ceased to be a viable search engine. |
But less blatant bias are likely to be tolerated by the market. For example, a search engine could add a small factor to search results from "friendly" companies, and subtract a factor from results from competitors. This type of bias is very difficult to detect but could still have a significant effect on the market. Furthermore, advertising income often provides an incentive to provide poor quality search results. ....In general, it could be argued from the consumer point of view that the better the search engine is, the fewer advertisements will be needed for the consumer to find what they want.This of course erodes the advertising supported business model of the existing search engines.
| 1:41 am on Sep 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Support those who support your goals, it's good business. All too often of late Google is coming up short... the young tech geek has grown up. If a monopoly isn't servicing your needs it needs to be avoided, unfortunately I see a lot of companies spending more to maintain instead of moving their business elsewhere until the playing field is leveled.
| 3:45 am on Sep 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
It's turning in to GoTo.com v.2. The web community essentially handed Google all their power. Site owners took the free candy and now maybe it is starting to sour. Gmail, Analytics, Checkout,, etc... And handed them all the data they have. Before Google analytics, if someone came into your business and asked to see all your business info they would have been tossed out of the store, especially if it was the salesman who sold the business all it's advertising. Google walked right in and everyone just handed over all the data!
Don't like what Google does, stop using their products and services or at least log out of them when you are done checking email or whatever.
| 6:11 am on Sep 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Now there's a shocker...
| 6:20 am on Sep 7, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'm not so bothered about this update as I am with google Places taking up premium shelf space. I know it's a bit off topic but that's where I feel Google has really overstepped their boundaries.