Forum Moderators: open
Business Week Online - Web Searches: The Fix Is In [businessweek.com]
After he demanded to know what happened, Spooner learned from Inktomi that his site contained editorial flaws that hurt his ranking. And he would have to become a paid-inclusion customer to learn what these flaws were. All this, while his pages remained well ranked on Google. "I lost a quarter of my traffic," says Spooner.
When you do a search on the name of the "victim's" website Ink doesn't list it until position #16. However, his site is heavy on the JS and Image Maps, and pretty short on content. I can see why his website dropped in the serps, although Ink should be capable enough to show his site in the top when you're actually searching for it. Ask Jeeves and Google place it in first place, AV has it in spot#2.
The obvious question: Is Inktomi incapable of doing a simple search or did they penalize the guy?
The trouble is, if paid inclusions are hidden, readers could grow to dismiss Internet search as nothing but a pile of ads.
It's getting there, isn't it.
By adhering to it's mission of providing relevant results Google is in the forefront again- hurray for Google! Some other folks are letting their pursuit of greater profits color their vision. Tsk, tsk.
Gets a little old hearing the engines that offer these services telling us how its all in the interest of providing better search results.
....and Ink offered $0.10/click - some definite advantages to going straight to Ink. How long till they dump/swallow the remaining resellers and start optimizing feeds for their own engines?
Another reason to stick with Google.
And in my paranoic scheme I could see the verbiage coming to something like, "Sites that efficiently deliver content and services to the user naturally rise to the top. There's no difference if users click on an ad-link or a page-link just as long as they get what they want as easily as possible."
The trouble is, if paid inclusions are hidden, readers could grow to dismiss Internet search as nothing but a pile of ads.
or it could read...
The trouble is, if paid inclusions are visible, readers could grow to dismiss Internet search as nothing but a pile of ads.
...either way, with the increased rush towards paid inclusion, and mixed results, it could put more and more strain on the time of the searcher. Even Google's sponsored listings at the top of SERPs can make the user believe that they are 'normal' unpaid listings.
And yep the rankings of the little company will suffer I'm sure...
It'd make sense to feed Google-users the sites and pages that make Google the most money.
For the short-term it would make money, for the long-term it would be a disaster to Google. IMHO Google tries to provide the best results and then tries to make money. This is one reason why they have such a favorable view in the public eye (don't forget IPO).
Other companies (cough) Inktomi, have less relevant results because they first try to make money and then worry about results.
About 2 years ago, I bought a bunch of PositionTech INK listings as I was expanding my site and I wanted to test the new pages I was putting up. The contract was for 1 year. I got top rankings on competitive terms, #1 or #2 in many cases, due to redesign of my page internals.
When my PositionTech INK contract was up for renewal I was curious if I could stop the Paid Inclusion and maintain my rankings. I read up about others experience here at WebmasterWorld, and concluded that dropping out of Paid Inclusion was safe.
Here now a year after stopping paid inclusion, I still have the same rankings for my competitive keywords. Occasionally things move up or down a postion or two as you would expect with any search engine. But in no way have I been penalized by dropping out of INK's paid inclusion system.
When INK upgraded their system about a year ago, it was a big improvement, and I have been quite pleased with it.
The BWOnline story mentions Rob Spooner's site dropping in the rankings late last year. Speculation: its possible that his site dropped in rankings due to the INK changeover to their new database and search algo last fall.
The BWOnline story also mentioned the Lamps plus guy couldn't understand why he wasn't at the top of MSN. We'll under the current MSN system, you have to buy your way to the top through Looksmart. That's the way MSN is today - a hybrid of a directory and a search engine. That doesn't mean the search engine restults are tainted. Its just a different setup than Google.
You aren't paying for inclusion, you are paying for visitors.
Well yes and no.
It's like those clip joints, the massage parlors and encounter studios of the seventies:
The asking price is $75. The guy thinks, "Whoa, that's a lot of money." So he asks the sassy French girl collecting the money, "So, what do I get for my $75?"
The French woman knits her brows and squints at him, obviously displeased as if she thought he should have been smarter than that. She says, "If YOU, are in a private room weeth a pretty young girl and don't know what to do... THAT is your problem."
Of course, the $75 is slapped on the counter faster than you can say "Raised Expectations."
Unfortunately when our hero reaches the room he discovers it's not so private and the pretty young girl isn't as... willing, as he had hoped. But she tells him that they have a special room in the back, and for a hundred dollars more... And it starts all over again.
Same thing with PFI: You aren't guaranteed to receive what you expected to get. You were never guaranted. PFI is a little more explicit. You're just going to get spidered more often, that's all.
He only pays if one of his selections gives him what he wants. While there are no guarantees, the business wants to maximize revenue and keep the customers coming back.
The folks that pay as they go like this often tend to get better treatment than those who buy a one time VIP card and have no additional revenue potential.
Personally, I think INK is honest and doesn't fix the results.
I think that there are many members here who utilize the Inktomi XML feed, myself included, that will strongly disagree with you.
Fix, maybe not. Give a lot more weight to the CPC XML feed customers? Absolutely.
If you want proof, there is plenty.
The folks that pay as they go like this often tend to get better treatment than those who buy a one time VIP card and have no additional revenue potential
Well - you guys seem to know a lot about marketing in the "french girl business" - thanks for sharing... :-D
I was one of the ones interviewed. Enough said? However, I have to say the AJ/Teoma feed beats INK hands-down for "no advantage" ;)
Pleased to say, the author also lurks here - but then, who doesn't!
Indeed, out of 20 advertisers and online marketing pros interviewed by BusinessWeek, 10 had experienced firsthand a boost in search-engine rankings when they signed up for paid inclusion.
Also, the word "rankings" is misleading. Rankings for what? Do they mean words tehy already ranked for they now ranked better for? Or is a better word "traffic", as in they got more traffic.
The classic example of the latter is a job site. Jobs only last, in some cases, hours. So, if those that last more than a day are indexed, surely traffic will increase, even if most jobs only get one or two clicks, that is one or two more clicks than they would otherwise have got.
[edited by: Woz at 12:56 pm (utc) on Oct. 10, 2003]
[edit reason] spelling [/edit]
Here is what I would like to see happen.
Every Advertiser opens up a Commission Junction affiliate program and establishes a target CPA rate. Inktomi joins every Advertiser affiliate program at an agreed upon CPA rate. Inktomi then takes all of the Advertisers URLs which include CJ tracking and submits them to the search engines. Whenever an included URL via a natural search is clicked on it can then be tracked to conversion via CJ. If and when sales/leads takes place Inktomi is then paid a commission. Inktomi optimizes included URLs based on conversion which implies a high level of relevency. Net results is search engine get high relevent URLs, Inktomi gets $, and Advertisers get advertising on a CPA basis.
Am I off base here or does this make some sense? I am not sure and I would like to know what other people think.
That depends on which program you are talking about. If you are using Ink's Search Submit product, then yes you are paying for indexing. If you are using Index Connect, then you are not paying for indexing. They can refresh your listings every 10 minutes, but you don't pay a dime unless someone clicks on the listings.
In order for Ink to make money, they must send you a visitor. In order for them to send you a visitor, the listing must show up where the potential visitor will find it.
So the real question is should search engines be required to disclose all listings that they receive direct compensation for?
Seems like this was the gist of the whole (in the USA) FTC thing & search engine advertising so long ago...in some ways, I think a few members of my family only continue to use Google because they *know* which links are ads & which aren't.
Anybody in their right mind, when designing a CPC system where they got paid per click, would put the pages at the top (or near) that they were getting paid for on the click. Else, why offer the program, as it would just create extra overhead & potentially never yeild a dime?
About a week ago our site just about completely disappeared from MSN. I think we're somewhere in high 100s for the single word search and in the 60-80s for just about all multiple keyword searches. We haven't touched the site in weeks and we've never implemented any spam techniques like several other related sites we've seen come and go.
How we can go from solidly in the top ten for dozens of multiple keyword searches, to "un-findable" (if that's a word), is beyond me.
Luckily MSN has always generated a minimal amount of our overall traffic, so it's not completely disasterous, but it makes a guy scratch his head.
We currently and always have had solid standings on Google, other than the odd spam site coming and going and minor shuffling.
I emailed PT 4-5 days ago, but haven't heard back from them. Has anyone had any luck on contacting anyone that can shed some light on what's going on and how to remedy things?
Unca
I'd like to comment on this and similar views. I believe there is a distinct way to circumvent Google's relevancy using affiliate marketing. While researching a phone on Google today I searched this phrase: "<snip>" If you do the same you'll find that 8 of the first 10 listings are to Amazon affiliates. This is true in many, many product categories. Amazon knows that they don't have to do anything to spam the SE's, all they have to do is continue building their affiliate program and make it as attractive as possible for their affiliates. The affiliates in turn do all of the SE placement. It may not be Paid Inclusion but it's definitely a form of advertising.
[edited by: WebGuerrilla at 4:41 pm (utc) on Oct. 13, 2003]
[edit reason] removed specifics [/edit]
things that make you go hmmm...
anybody care to comment on what has happened to me...offer suggestions?
I understand merchant sites, etc should be listed, but why not list affiliate sites...?
Inktomi does list affiliate sites. Here is what Inktomi says [inktomi.com] about affiliate sites:
The only way is to create a great site rich in original (not copied) content, which in and of itself offers a great value to the user. This usually resembles a "labor of love" and is difficult to do on a large scale. Some affiliates cut corners or make cookie-cutter sites; we do not want such sites in the index.
