Forum Moderators: open
In the world of search, the content is the advertisers.
I would put my weight behind the quality of a pfi + algo versus a pure free algo anyday.
I am not sure that everyone will be able to see this, but go to Yahoo and type in a verticle-geo like ~ web design city (your city).
Many of those in major cities will find the following structure in their serp.
1. YAHOO! YELLOW PAGES web design listings near Chicago IL
2. Categories: • Illinois > Chicago > Web Site Designers • Illinois > Chicago Metro > Web Site Designers
3. SPONSOR RESULTS
4.TOP 20 WEB RESULTS
1-3 are all seperate revenues stream for Y and marketing buys for business. 1. YPs represent flat monthly fees (although those are actually back fill results) 2. An annual flat directory fee 3. PPC open bidding and 4. PFI
The future of search is segmentation of result sets based on intent. The closer you get to intent, and the more targeted an SE becomes, the more valuable the ad content is for users and business.
>>Chicago, cold.
I know Caveman, not like me, but this community is so accustom to the *ideal* of free search that the true make-up of today's serps (see above) is about to pass everyone by. PFI and PPC are fundemental to the future of search -product and local et al.
In the world of search, the content is the advertisers.
Only if you believe that most search users are shopping. :-)
Interesting use of the word 'product'. I would have thought it would be like europeforvisitors defined it: content.
>Paying $299 a year to Yahoo for a directory listing does not help get you into search results.
I find this concept a little strange if true.
PFI aside, if the way into Yahoo's index is by being crawled, one could reasonably assume that they would crawl their own directory and start there. Since Y! makes a judgement on a site about whether or not it warrants inclusion into the directory (with no refund of the $299), it seems a logical place to start a base to build upon if one wants relevant results.
Tim responds:
I defined it like that because it could be the same content. You could submit the same content to Yahoo Search as well as Yahoo Directory.
The directory is good content and there is directory content in the index there just isnt all of it in the index.
<added> Meant to ask why the entire directory isnt in the index </added>
The scary bit is this PFI stuff people are referring to. This seems at odds with the idea of ranking sites on relevancy and usefulness.
That does worry me in terms of where Yahoo might be heading. Having said that, what Google has been up to in the last few months worries me as well, although in our area they have now largely fixed it. That has deeply shaken our confidence in Google though.
It is a toss up for us as to which we use as default on our intranet. Will Google revert back to the silliness of last month? Will Yahoo mess up what they have created with PFI? The future is far from clear!
I think a lot of that is being blown way out of proportion. Everyone seems to be freaking out like pfi is just going to take the top 40 listings when I don't think that will be the case.
The directory is good content
You can't really be serious when you say that. Yahoo has accepted so much garbage into it's directory over the past several years it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
Spare the drama. This is about business.
Y! trades on NasdaqNM:YHOO in case you need to be reminded.
They are not an altruistic group of Stanford boys.
I'm paying. My clients are paying. Most small business should pay.
Free. My *ss. Look at the changes that G has made the past two years.
You are fighting a loosing battle.
I beg to differ. My free sites, my free inclusion and my free content are paying for the servers, my gas and meals and working up to paying for my mortgage.
I'm not fighting a loosing battle at all. Yahoo isn't the internet and as long as people have alternatives we have choice.
Not everyone is here to make money. Anyone could take Yahoo on and frankly, i see it coming if it comes down to what you propose.
PFI is a dead horse and a waiste of time and money.
In the world of search, the content is the advertisers.
yeah thats rubbish, everytime a search engines has gone the pay submission route it's been the death of it. Search engines such as espotting, overture etc are just parasites of Google.
Anyone could take Yahoo on and frankly, i see it coming if it comes down to what you propose.
Definitely, all Yahoo uses is feeds from other people. It's only plus point is it's well known due to it's age.
The closer you get to intent, and the more targeted an SE becomes, the more valuable the ad content is for users and business.
So, you are saying that the future of 'searchers' would be using multiple SE base on their intent? One SE for products, another for tutorial, another for forum, another for reviews, another for blogs,etc...
How realistic is that for a user? FYI, specialize search do exists already. We don't need another shopping SE. We need a SE that can go toe to toe with Google other than that this Y search announcement is really old news, nothing to be excited about.
We are at the birth of it being a utility like cable TV, home phones, cell phones, and power. You can not look back at the Internet to make predictions on what will happen in the future. There is no precedent. We can only compare it to what happened to the above mentioned utilities. American Society has proven over and over again that they do not want diversity. They tend to migrate toward one major avenue for what they want. There is then 2 companies that fight it out for second place and then eventually there are only 2 with the third far behind.
Congratulations on the launch! I have a question and realize that you may have to reply along the lines of "no comment", but here goes:
With your investment into search, do you hold out the possibilty of a stand alone property to compete in the "pure search" market separate and apart from Yahoo!? Will branding investments be made into your existing search properties (ATW, etc).
Thanks, and once again, congratulations.
In the world of big league search, all players are commercial companies that need to make money or die. Deal with it.
Google's present strategy is to offer clean SERP's monetized by placing ad content on the top and sides. Plus, distribute that ad content to extend revenues. Yahoo seems to be in the game of monetizing the actual SERP's, and that strategy has proven the be the savior of the commercial Web, so anyone who discounts it hasn't been paying attention for the past two years. Y's strategy and G's strategy are both interesting, viable approaches.
Then there's the whole new wave of local search and YP soon to arrive (as Chicago again has pointed out for those who cared to listen), and that also will be all about the money.
Want free? So does everybody. When you find good, quality free *anything*, please do let me know. ;-)
The fundamental difference between us is this:
You believe that your content *should* be seen. You believe that a major SE like *Y! should enable* your content to be seen *without* associated paid inclusion *fees*. I believe that you do not have the right to make that presumption.
When was the last time a marketing business took hard copies of your company brochure and told you they were going to deliver it to people that are seeking you out for free? Sounds ludicrous right?
You are using Google as your single reference point. G is not the Internet. And the Internet is not a panacea of peace and love. It is an extension of traditional communication, marketing, and commerce conducted thru potentially more effective and efficient channels.
>>my free content are paying for the servers, my gas and meals and working up to paying for my mortgage.
Capitalism hard at work there ~ Sounds great. But with respect, in the end you will be valued not on your ability to manipulate free serps, but on the value you provide to your readers/consumers. The quicker you understand that, the more sure you will become about maintaining the business you created for yourself. PFI will not beat you. You will beat yourself by relying on free serps.
>>you saying..the future of 'searchers' would be using multiple SE base on their intent?
You can go to *one* of the leading engines for intent segmentation. It is already happening if you look hard enough. Although sure, there will be niche SE players that will command some market share moving forward- and I bet you they will be ppc or pfi.
Google has tried to do both by having a few sponsored links set apart at the top and a few adwords set apart to the right but the main index is a list of usefulness based off of their algo at the time. What made Google so popular? They try to give the Searcher what they want not give the web designer what they want.
I can see the Idea that PFI can weed out some spammers is great. Real world has shown me that spammers will work around it. Just look at any incoming e-mail log and you can see the spammers at their best.
The real scare for the future is that all of this will not matter. Once Microsoft get a halfway decent SERP all of this discuss will be meaningless, just ask Netscape. They will push what they think the searcher wants and it will be the default search engine on every new machine sold to every new user. It comes as no surprise to me that almost every user here where I work has MSN as their default homepage. Is it a great site? To me Its ok (I prefer MyYahoo) but most users have no idea on how to change it.
Keep in mind that more than 90% of the searchers on the web have no idea about PFI all they want is content.
Want free? So does everybody. When you find good, quality free *anything*, please do let me know. ;-)
dmoz, google for a start
The future of search is segmentation of result sets based on intent. The closer you get to intent, and the more targeted an SE becomes, the more valuable the ad content is for users and business.
For web savvy users this makes perfect sense, but a good majority of casual users will just be perplexed by segmentation results.
I bet there are a vast majority of casual users that use Google on a regular basis but havent even noticed the "news" or "pictures" search.
Only veteran users understand or notice these options. As more of a hobby I run a Internet beginners help site and believe me this is the case.
dmoz, google for a start
WebmasterWorld :)
such a brown-noser, I know....
Here's the thing. Joe Surfer won't care one way or another if the sites listed in the SERPs paid to get in there or not. PFI (in its current incarnation) doesn't guarantee a high ranking, it just guarantees your site gets spidered. PFI is not Y's problem right now.
Y's problem is that the algo needs a lot of improvement. Spammy sites with keyword-bloat are faring very well in many of the areas I've looked at -- sites that, as was said earlier in this thread, would have been highly ranked on G about 2-3 years ago.
If Y can clean up and improve the algo so it not only finds relevant sites, but finds relevant *quality* sites, it will do fine against G. If it doesn't, well, nice try.
Y's problem is that the algo needs a lot of improvement. Spammy sites with keyword-bloat are faring very well
Hit the nail on the head. The quality is of Google from 2-3 years ago. Yahoo will have to learn fast. If not it's a real shame Yahoo has a high profile because apart from it's directory they just don't deserve it.
I want to find good content not sites with deep pockets.
If you look at the ads on Google the relevancy and quality of them is poor compared to the normal serps. So I am unsure whether ad paying sites make useful resources. Plus product review sites would probably be wiped out. You may get to the source quicker with Yahoo, but the source it not always honest.
Want free? So does everybody. When you find good, quality free *anything*, please do let me know. ;-)
> dmoz, google for a start
You think getting decent placement in G's SERP's is free? I'd love to know your secret! It costs us a lot of time and expense.
Also, I was referring to the larger, quality SERP's and SE's. DMOZ? When was the last time you used that site to search for anything?
When was the last time a marketing business took hard copies of your company brochure and told you they were going to deliver it to people that are seeking you out for free? Sounds ludicrous right?
You forget one thing...Have you heard of symbiotic relationship?
SE provides user access to our site, we in turn provides content to SE...one cannot live without the other.
Sure, Overture and the PPC's industry supply a monetized serp but if you look at it closely the bulk of their revenue is not coming directly from their own site but from partnership with major portals and other content sites.
On their own. Do you think Overture would survive by users coming over to their site and do the actual searching? Wouldn't you rather do your searching at Google?
I spend over 4k online shopping last year aside from Amazon purchases most of my purchase where from sites that were found at Google free search.
However, in terms of internet activities, my actual purchase activity only represent a miniscule of my time spent in the internet. I say less than 10%, most of the time is actually done researching. Which of the SE you think do I go to? I have not shop through Overture site directly and i don't see that happening in the future as well. Would I use Y search now that I know it's a pfi serp? I'll consider paying for inclusion but as a searcher? I'll do my searching on a SE that can offer me a wider choices.
I think what Y is trying to do here is trying to convince its current Y users to use the Y search instead for them going to other SE...a sort of a local search and monetize the result as well.
That's fine but it would just be a matter of time that the same people would realize that there are better SE out there that offers a more wider scope result not just commercial site. Once they realize that, that would be goodbye Y search.
For instance MSN, they have total control of IE and have been feeding MSN users with their serp yet people are coming out and finding Google. How do you explain that?
Look at AOL, for years they have their serp from Inktomi and their very own users are getting tired of it and getting out and going to Google to do their searching. How do you explain that?
But at least, AOL is smart by actually bringing Google result to them thus retaining its own users base thus they are able to monetize with the additional search activities.
Why is people then going to Google? It's all about choices and having the control of where I want to go. Give me a SE with a few select sites on it and I guarantee you that I wouldn't use it, even if it's the best of the internet.
You know why? Because you don't know me, you don't know what I want. The only best thing a SE can do for me is offer a wide variety of choices.
Back to Y search, in essence there's so much high expectation for this SE but in the end it just look like a hybrid between Inktomi and Y directory.
What now.
Pay for rapid inclusion at ATW
Pay for inclusion at Inktomi
Pay for inclusion at Y Directory
Pay for inclusion at Y search
not to mention Overture.
Isn't the above 'pay for inclusion' starting to look like a squeeze to you?
What made Google so popular? They try to give the Searcher what they want not give the web designer what they want.
I think that along with your post sums it up.
seasalt
We are. You guys are wanting to turn back the clock and ignore more reality than most people live in their lives.
PFI has failed. Totally, and everywhere. Talking about some theoretical nevernever land may turn you on, but the facts speak for themselves and loudly.
PFI engines put together aren't worth a bucket of spit. An engine that considerd quality first reshaped and dominates the market, and there is absolutely zero... and emphasize ZERO... user/public pressure crying out for pfi searches over best of the web searches.
This is such a trivial issue anyway. Yahoo or anybody else can have PFI, but it certainly can never be the heart of a search engine. That idea is just way too far beyond naive.
Right you are :(
For now, at least.
