Google Mobile Algo - April 2015 Roll Out

[keyplyr]

---

System: The following message was cut out of thread at: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4743698.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 3:18 am on Apr 21, 2015 (PDT -8)

---

Different DataCenters probably, but I'm seeing new SERP for everything I search for... that I'm familiar enough with to notice a change. So Cal

[kewlchat]

Traffic has tripled and still climbing on mobile and desktop thanks Jesus for answering my prayers.
Mobile friendly, ssl, fast, Global 5 languages.

[ChanandlerBong]

We've definitely seen an uptick in mobile. It wasn't statistically important at first, but now I can say we're up about 5%. Been fully responsive for 10 months. Nothing earth shattering but if the roll out is continuing, we expect that to improve further. Someone in the SERPS is losing that traffic to us. I'm just glad I'm on the right side of the equation.

[guggi2000]

@ChanandlerBong What was the change for you on desktop this week?

[ChanandlerBong]

pretty flat, up 1%, something like that.

[seoskunk]

Don't believe the hype - what a load of fuss about nothing. As usual Google talks a good game but fails to deliver.

[Dymero]

No change on one of the sites I monitor, though we've already been mobile-friendly for some time, and mobile has completely surpassed desktop+tablet organic traffic combined within the last year.

The other site I monitor I'm a little surprised on. I changed it to mobile-friendly more recently, but given how many times I've been sure I've spotted people on their phone (this niche is B&M), I would have expected more mobile even before this.

Maybe that'll change as this rolls out.

[ken_b]

Found a message in my AdSense control panel tonite saying my site's "mobile friendliness" was now a G Search ranking factor.

Seems like an odd place for a message like that.

.

[rainborick]

I suspect that Google was disappointed at the response to their push on mobile friendliness. A few days ago, Google reported an increase of only ~4% increase in the number of mobile friendly sites since they announced the impending change. When you hang around the various search-related forums, blogs and websites, it's easy to lose sight of just how much of the web is totally oblivious to it all. In any case, I'm sure Google expected a much more significant result so they're continuing to push out the message any way they can - such as in the AdSense message.

[breeks]

Google Mobile Algo = April Fools Joke on publishers

[keyplyr]

Like any update - those that did well, love it. Those that didn't do well, call it a joke. Nothing new about that.

[FranticFish]

Maybe there's going to be more of a delayed effect. I wonder if it's the indirect effect of being not labelled as mobile-friendly that Google considers significant.

Over time, unlabelled websites that are not popular for other reasons (e.g. brand recognition) are going to be clicked less.

I realise that the effect of clicks on rankings is a highly contentious topic, but to me it makes sense that a result in a SERP that is clicked more should receive increased exposure over another that is clicked less.

[7_Driver]

[UK] If it's rolled out - then it looks like a very small ranking factor indeed.

I have a sites that are mobile friendly and sites that aren't - and I can't detect any traffic changes whatsoever on a Google + Mobile segment.

I took a small sample of 10 terms which had one or more non-mobile-friendly sites ranking above our mobile friendly site on 20th.

Of those, we're the same rank on 4, down on 4 and up on 2.

Ok - that sample is very small, but it tends to indicate that so far, the ranking signal is so small it's lost in the general noise of fluctuating rankings.

On the positive side - it's given us the kick we needed to move a design refresh up the To-Do list, so it's not all bad.

[chrisv1963]

but to me it makes sense that a result in a SERP that is clicked more should receive increased exposure over another that is clicked less.

This doesn't make sense.
A result that's is clicked and followed by good user behavior (no use of back button, number of page views, return visits to the site, ... whatever other metrics that give data about user behavior) should receive increased exposure. A result that is clicked and followed by the user hitting the back button and clicking an other result in the serps should get less exposure.

[enchant]

To you people who ARE seeing a change in the rankings. When you do a search, are you seeing the "mobile friendly" tag next to the results?

[Nutterum]

@enchant 2/10 times - did over 50 searches with vastly different keywords and verticals just to be sure I will not get an artifact of search.

[piatkow]

To you people who ARE seeing a change in the rankings. When you do a search, are you seeing the "mobile friendly" tag next to the results?

I haven't done any tests since the weekend but so far I haven't. I have seen suggestions that they may not display it on the smallest phone screens which would include mine.

[breeks]

Like any update - those that did well, love it. Those that didn't do well, call it a joke. Nothing new about that.

The joke is nothing has changed.

My sites have seen zero change. I have responsive sites and old school html sites using tables and ZERO change for any of them.

Was expecting a boost for the responsive sites and getting dinged for non mobile friendly sites.

After one week nothing has happened .

The biggest benefit from this update are web design companies who were able to cash in on rush to mobile friendly.

[EditorialGuy]

In Webmaster Tools, our average ranking position for mobile is noticeably higher than for desktop and tablet, and the graph shows that was true even before the April 21 update. In fact, our average mobile ranking is almost unchanged since late January (the beginning of the reporting period). This makes me wonder if:

- Mobile-friendliness was a ranking signal even before the update, or...

- The update still has a long way to go before being complete.

Of course, there's no guarantee that the WMT information is accurate, but I have no reason to assume that it isn't.

[vphoner]

Non Mobile Friendly Site after 1 week, mobile is down about 16-17%, and very surprisingly tablets down 11%. I thought tablets were not included in mobile algorithm. These statistics are coming from log files, not analytics. Overall mobile phone traffic has dropped from 29% to 25% of total traffic in a week. Earnings have not changed much, which is good.

[Kratos]

@EditorialGuy I've said this before, Google was ALREADY using mobile friendliness as a ranking signal prior to the 21st April, only that it was a very minor one back then. On the 21st it's when they've started to give more weight to that signal and by the looks of it it isn't that strong still. At any given time Google can jack up the importance they place on mobile friendliness and not have to tell us (that's when you will see the true Mobilegeddon or whatever stupid name these pseudo SEOs have called it).

Google has done its job. They've warned us, now it's up to them how much they want to consider mobile friendliness as a ranking signal (and my guess is, that it's importance will continue to increase for the next 6 months, hence why we haven't seen any devastating SERP results... YET).

[Ralph_Slate]

Here's the problem I faced: somewhere between 50% and 70% of my traffic is showing as mobile in Google Analytics. Those are people using my non-mobile-friendly site, and they don't seem to mind it too much.

I derive my revenue from advertising. Each of my pages has 2 ads on it - a Leaderboard and either a Skyscraper or a 300x250 box.

When I contacted each of my ad companies, they weren't that plugged into mobile. They provided me with a 320x50 banner size to replace the Leaderboard, but they don't seem to have anything to replace the other banner sizes, and they didn't seem too keen on me using, for example, a 300x250 box below-the-fold (and just about everything is below-the-fold in mobile).

They couldn't even tell me the difference in CPM or fill rate for the 320x50 banner versus a traditional Leaderboard.

So I was faced with cutting my own throat by going mobile and reducing the number of ads per page by 50% and potentially reducing the effective CPM of each page as well. I estimate maybe a 75% drop in revenue per page. Or I could gamble to see what Google's algorithm change would bring.

Couple that with this time of the year being fairly busy - it made more sense for me to wait until July to start to switch things over.

So far, I'm not seeing a decrease in visitors, although it is hard to know for sure because of unpredictable seasonal swings in my traffic.

[EditorialGuy]

(and my guess is, that it's importance will continue to increase for the next 6 months, hence why we haven't seen any devastating SERP results... YET).

Devastating for some, but a windfall for others.

Change doesn't have to be bad. Sometimes it's an opportunity.

[keyplyr]

Change doesn't have to be bad. Sometimes it's an opportunity.

+1
"He not busy being born is busy dying." - Bob Dylan

[chrisv1963]

Overall mobile phone traffic has dropped from 29% to 25% of total traffic in a week. Earnings have not changed much, which is good.

I'm seeing something similar on one of my major sites. Mobile traffic dropped by about 25%, but earnings didn't drop. This indicates that a lot of mobile traffic is worthless were earnings are concerned. Maybe I should stop investing time and money in mobile friendliness.

[particleman]

I've been watching this closely since the launch. The best I can figure is this still hasn't rolled out fully. I have access to analytics for quite a few sites across many topics and generally there is very little change from mobile friendly or non mobile friendly sites at this point in what I'm seeing. If it has rolled out fully then this was definitely over hyped by google.

[guggi2000]

Didn't they say it was bigger than Panda and Penguin?

[Johan007]

I too can confirm mobile traffic gets very little ad revenue on my content site. Love to know how this can be improved as I am already using an MPU... responsive AdSense too!

[teaandbiscuits]

My main site went from an average 5-7% mobile traffic to 36% today, A big jump,only one day sample,but still significant.

[nomis5]

The question has to be asked again, why would G want us to become mobile friendly? In the broad sweep it would seem that if we all convert to mobile friendly it would benefit other search engines just as much as G.

So exactly what is their motivation?

My take on this is that they have identified a large threat to THEIR income if WE don' become mobile friendly. What is that threat? Facebook, twitter, apps etc?

My money is on apps.

[EditorialGuy]

The question has to be asked again, why would G want us to become mobile friendly?

Because a search engine needs to produce worthwhile results for users.

Why wouldn't Google want to serve up mobile-friendly results in mobile search, now that so many of its users have smartphones?