prediction: Florida-like Update Before End of Year

[Brett_Tabke]

Larry Page has been at the helm coming up on six months. According to various reports, LP has put alot of faith back in the algo nerds. I look for a Florida like update on the organic side before the end of the year.

[walkman]

Prediction: We may see one but not because the "algo nerds" figure out how to show the best sites.

Larry is the CEO and needs to make his mark, and you do that with $$$$$$$$.Just look at the difference between Larry's first earnings [forbes.com...] and second earnings speech [techcrunch.com...] . The second quarter, IIRC, was 100% Panda and the newly minted CEO was all smiles, even took time out of his day to sit and talk to investors that hold some $100+ billion of his company's stock. So Panda is a hero to the CEO and to all Googlers that hold stock /options.

The days when they run it on math and "the earnings would come" are long gone, IMO. Now you're talking quarter to quarter earnings and to justify a $150-$200 Billion market cap they must increase by 20% or so a year.

Google, through Schmidt, already told us what will happen: ID is next, after brands. So maybe they'll push way up those pages with Google verified accounts as the author. Of course to push Google's own property.

P.S. i will change my mind when Google says that 'earnings this quarter were hurt because of an algo update. Our relevancy increased drastically but earnings suffered but long term this is the right path.' I m not holding my breath

[nomis5]

Walkman,

ID is next, after brands. So maybe they'll push way up those pages with Google verified accounts as the author

You're talking about Mr Page being interested in earnings first. Why do you think that "ID" will earn them more money? I can't see the connection.

[indyank]

"ID" is a big one, huge one. You can see a lot of connections there...it is a 'secret' project that has the potential of giving them more money through their traditional business and the cost might also be covered by 'secret' grants/aid. (substitute it with whatever you may like)...

do you know of any other project that not only gets the funding but also gets you all the money?

[edited by: indyank at 3:33 pm (utc) on Sep 6, 2011]

[indyank]

Brett, so what do you think will be the primary objective of this update and who will be the targets?

[Content_ed]

Brett,

I'd love to see a Florida, 2003 was one of our best growth years if I recall. But I'm skeptical of the logic for it unless it involves a rolling back of Panda which I see as unlikely given reports that Google's Q2 revenue shot up without higher web traffic:-)

BTW, one of our three sites has fully recovered from Panda, year over year comparisons within a couple percent every day after being down well over 50%. Didn't make any changes to the site, though I dropped some links to it from our site hardest hit by Panda a little before the recovery.

[wheel]

I'd welcome an update frankly. Might bump me up back to #1. I'm getting there under my own steam, but an update might make it happen all at once.

And lol at the update prediction :). That's like predicting market increases or decreases. You're almost always going to be right eventually :).

[walkman]

You're talking about Mr Page being interested in earnings first. Why do you think that "ID" will earn them more money? I can't see the connection.

You have to understand Google not by reading their press releases or seeing their USSR style videos. Google is NOT an "innovative company," relatively speaking. They are reactionary, almost panic when someone comes with a new idea, and use search to try to destroy their competitors. How? By stealing their ideas and code and giving them away for free. Search $$ and reach makes it possible. What was Google's latest innovation or killer product? Don't bother thinking about it, it took place some 10+ years ago.

So, now we're at Google's latest thing: a rip off of FB, Quora, Twitter and so on. The only way people will sign and stay would be if G used the search muscle behind it. So they will force me and you to add their +1 buttons to our sites, label our pages with our Google ID /Author Tag and do the promotion for them. This is why search will be manipulated so we're blackmailed to help Google +. It is so important to them (or they think it is) that a nice chunk of the employee bonuses are tied to it. Yes, that search engineer that writes the algo will get a bonus if G+ "succeeds," just as he benefits when Goog stock goes up.

What value does ID hold? Hmmm...if Google knew your exact name, home and e-mail address and know what sites you visit, what searches you type in, don't you think advertisers would pay way more than if they knew you by 255.255.255.78 ? Then there are transactions, wallet payments through Android etc etc.

Google has no more ethics or less hunger than Goldman Sachs. Follow the money

[indyank]

What value does ID hold? Hmmm...if Google knew your exact name, home and e-mail address and know what sites you visit, what searches you type in, don't you think advertisers would pay way more than if they knew you by 255.255.255.78 ? Then there are transactions, wallet payments through Android etc etc.

Walkman seem to have explained just one objective of this project - improving their returns from their well known traditional business. :)

But irrespective of whatever Google does, Baidu will rule china and Yandex will probably rule Russia (isn't USSR dead?). Google will never be allowed to gain the upper hand in those markets and you know why.

[edited by: indyank at 5:05 pm (utc) on Sep 6, 2011]

[indyank]

And lol at the update prediction :). That's like predicting market increases or decreases. You're almost always going to be right eventually :).

but hasn't he mentioned "before the end of the year"?

[outland88]

The countdown begins on that prediction. I predict they'll slowly abandon Panda or run it less and less. The last swoop of it may begin during the holidays.

[tedster]

I think Google will continue to revise Panda - with an eye on the originally stated "quality" objectives that are, so far, only partially achieved. In some cases, as we know, the quality goals are still hurting badly.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if there's a major "son of Panda" update that becomes the kind of Florida-like disruption that Brett is predicting. Part of the new update should be (at least I hope so) something more capable of dynamic scoring as sites and content change.

[chrisv1963]

I predict they'll slowly abandon Panda or run it less and less.

Maybe they should concentrate on being a REAL clean search engine again.

5 months ago (!) I sent DMCAs to websites that copied content. The website owners deleted the violating pages almost immediately. However, those non-existant pages are still in Google's index.

Also, when I enter a cetain 2 words seach term (80 million results), a term that also my kids could enter, the second result on Google is a URL that starts with f*ck and it directs me to a website with crap text and some nudity. Is this quality after Panda? It probably is because that website gets a lot of "long clicks" from people that want to check many pages to find more nudity. Probably a low bounce rate and many page views! The fact alone that the "f*ck" word is in the URL should ring a bell.
I reported this site to Google more than 2 months ago, and of course it is still there.

[wheel]

Yeah, but the dude's on the 2012 Mayan calendar, so everything's all apocolyptic.

[nomis5]

So should we all give up and find alternative employment? That seems to be the jist of your post.

Absolutely not, I'm not giving up just now thank you. Many of us are earning a living from the internet and there is no way I'm going to lay down in the middle of the road and let Google flatten me.

Don't let the pessimists put you off. With a huge effort and a bit of savvy the internet can still a major source of income for all including the uneducated and the the under-privileged.

Some may be going down the plug hole but not everyone is and possibly not the majority.

[wheel]

I didn't get that from his post. Just a prediction we may see another 10.2 on the reichter scale shift. Old sites get moved out, new ones moved in.

So is it going to be a shift towards quality, or away from spam? And how are we all prepared for that? Got the backlinks, content,and signals to justify a bump up instead of down?

[chrisv1963]

Got the backlinks

I never bought links and got hit by Panda. Maybe it is time to start buying links?

[randle]

I look for a Florida like update on the organic side before the end of the year.

Thanks for putting that thought into my head as I try and get to sleep tonight. There has never, ever been any shake up close to the degree of Florida; most people still dont even understand it.

One positive fallout from Florida was it forced me to learn how to make money pay per clicking. Prior to Florida I hated PPC, it was just constant frustration. Now its 60% of our revenue.

[edited by: randle at 9:59 pm (utc) on Sep 6, 2011]

[walkman]

Don't let the pessimists put you off. With a huge effort and a bit of savvy the internet can still a major source of income for all including the uneducated and the the under-privileged.

Some may be going down the plug hole but not everyone is and possibly not the majority.

No one is talking about giving up :). We're just saying what we see, good or bad, pro or anti-Google practices. I agree, the internet and opportunities for masses will be here despite Google's best efforts.

Thanks for putting that thought into my head as I try and get to sleep tonight.

Brett's guess may be more than a guess, he hears things from time to time.

[Reno]

unless it involves a rolling back of Panda which I see as unlikely given reports that Google's Q2 revenue shot up without higher web traffic
...
Maybe they should concentrate on being a REAL clean search engine again.

If anyone still believes that Google rolls out their major updates without an eye totally fixated on the bottom line, well, I have a bridge to sell you. They are a rich & smart company and they can hire the very best people to create computer economic models that can almost certainly predict to +/- 1% how much profit any given update is likely to generate. I have to believe that going into Panda they knew perfectly well that it would make more money with no additional (or even less!) "clean" results. Money won, quality lost. The money will win next time, and the time after that. The old days are gone and they're not coming back. That's the new reality, and all the wishing & hoping & complaining & raindancing we do won't bring those pennies from heaven ever again, no matter who is in the CEO chair.

......................

[MrSavage]

I can say this. I welcome another ground breaking update. I can't think of a less enjoyable time in my webmastering life than right now. I say that with a minimal loss in overall revenue, but it's the direction that leaves me with pessimism regarding Google organic traffic. So if there is something else coming, I say how much worse could it really be? Could it be any more confusing than things right now? Could it be any less transparent than what is going on now? I say no to all those questions.

To mention regarding the bottom line, I believe the algo changes are all done with good intentions. Keeping the bad guys out and the good guys in. However, Cutts passing somebody from the Adwords team might result in a passing smirk or high five. I've said it's not like Cutts would get his ass spanked if their algo (the standards for getting a lot of Google organic traffic) forces people to pay for Adwords in order to get any real traffic to their site. I'm not smart and I can figure that out. Set the bar really high on the profitable high traffic keyword phrases and there is only one option to get people to your website. Ooops. Alternatively you could hire a writing staff and get cracking on content so you can get those +1's and social indicators that mean your site is amazing.

[netmeg]

We live in interesting times.

[AlyssaS]

unless it involves a rolling back of Panda which I see as unlikely given reports that Google's Q2 revenue shot up without higher web traffic

Why are you all assuming that the reason G's Q2 revenue increased was because of Panda? If you go back to the threads when Panda rolled out, everyone predicted a fall in revenue as the content farms who display Adsense got pummelled - and the content farms didn't then go out and spend on Adwords - have you seen any ads for Mahalo, eHow and others? I haven't.

Plus sites are still ranking at #1 - different sites to be sure, but they haven't removed sites from the serps and just left the space as a big blank.

I read the Q2 increase in revenue to be nothing to do with panda and entirely down to offline factors. It's horrible out there in retail world, people arn't impulse shopping, people are avoiding the shops altogether because they haven't the money to spend.

The only way to survive a climate like that is to advertise to the few people who are untouched by the economy - make sure your goods are first in line, right in front of their noses. The best way to do this is advertising on the search engine, as people typing in "buy golf clubs" are actually looking to buy golf clubs, they arn't affected by the downturn. Television and magazine advertising are both more expensive and not targeted.

So I'm not at all surprised that more mainstream businesses are bidding on Adwords because from their point of view it's the cheap survival strategy. Of course increased numbers of advertisers means CPC goes up and G's revenues along with it.

The exact same thing happened in 2008/9 during the financial crash. Mainstream advertising fell back, as it is expensive and mainly about brand building, while search advertising which is cheap and targeted, continued it's 20+% growth per annum.

This will continue to happen in every single recession, Panda or no Panda. The targeted traffic thing makes G recession proof.

[edited by: AlyssaS at 1:55 am (utc) on Sep 7, 2011]

[AlyssaS]

P.S. regarding how lucrative search traffic is, see this interview with the guy from Blekko:

[businessinsider.com...]

Here's what he has to say about why he is trying to make it with a search engine:

Search is one of best businesses on the Web. Search traffic monetizes really well. It can be 50 to 100 bucks per 1,000 page views (CPM).
When I was the CEO of Topix, a local news aggregator, we were doing pretty well monetizing local page news, about three or four bucks per thousand. We were getting one dollar even on forums, and those ads are generally worthless.
If you go to a social network like Facebook, CPM can be 15 cents. People aren't in buy mode. They don't possess intent to buy. But if you go to a search engine and type in "Palo Alto Real Estate," you've declared your intention to buy a house in Palo Alto. So real estate agents buy as many clicks as they can possibly get.

Our intent is to put search ads on the site. We can be a profitable company with far less traffic if you were running a local news site. $50 is much higher than $3.

You don't need a ton of traffic - you just need the economic conditions in place so that mainstream businesses, small and large, some of which have never dabbled in web advertising, are looking to get hold of your targeted traffic.

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

I look for a Florida like update on the organic side before the end of the year.

I too look for an affiliate website DECIMATING change to be made shortly, in the next 6 months, Google wants to be the only middleman in the biz. If/when that happens I hope those webmasters realize they need to make their sites Google free (tracking/analytics/search box etc) and start supporting the next best engine.

One change I'm seeing now is that the traffic to ONE site can be affected by the things going on with your OTHER site as if all sites owned by you are somehow taken into consideration when adjusting individual site ranks. Google is profiling webmasters to give an overall rating of your site portfolio, I got my first taste of this when I simply deleted a hobby site I had run for 6 years when Panda took a bite of it (it never made money but traffic was steady). I only have what I would consider moderate data to support this, nothing definitive, but it makes sense and can't be discounted post Panda/+1.

5 months ago (!) I sent DMCAs to websites that copied content. The website owners deleted the violating pages almost immediately. However, those non-existant pages are still in Google's index.

I filed a DMCA two months ago, the offending site removed the content within 24 hours, search results still show the site in rankings but clicking on the link leads to a 404 error page. 2 months ?!

[minnapple]

Yet another heart attack in the wings?
Please, Larry give me a warning so I can check myself into hospital prior to the launch.

[tedster]

The targeted traffic thing makes G recession proof.

Exactly - and the targeted traffic goes away if Google intentionally manipulates organic search trying to drive site owners to buy Adwords. It's organic quality that fuels the whole search business and Google is too smart to undermine that with quarter-to-quarter manipulations. Even at IPO, they put the investing world (and their board) on notice that they would not be that kind of company.

And yet the Adwords conspiracy idea is the idea will not die. It first showed up almost immediately after the Adwords program was launched. And several times every year since then, someone from the organic team makes an unambiguous statement that their team does not even have an income related KPI to use in evaluating the effectiveness of their algo changes.

This kind of manipulation might be something most businesses would consider - but Google is not most businesses. After all these years, if the official statements were bald-face lies, wouldn't some engineer, present or past, have spilled the beans and leaked the story?

I'm not talking about layout changes here - clearly some of those are aimed to encourage attention to the Adwords areas. I'm only talking about the organic ranking algo itself. Its purpose is to keep the average user happy with Google's results.

[walkman]

Conspiracy theories don't die becuase it's obvious to reasonable people that manipulation is happening, so it's not a conspiracy theory. Search for a popular e-commerce item and see.

Google doesn't care about "Javascript minifier" or "Steve Jobs got a liver transplant" type searches, they'd be broke if it was up to them. The money is in manipulating commerce searches, something they have mastered.

The idea that the average user will be upset enough to leave to Bing if Macy's shows up #1 for "wedding rings" vs another store that is not a Google advertiser is a joke. Most will click on the ads /products that make 90% of the page anyway. Others can easily scroll. Rankings would change normally anyway, why not make some money while at it?

Why hasn't anyone come clean? Mmmm...maybe because it's not done in "manipulate organic search to earn another $0.875 billion this quarter" memos but indirectly like "what if we favor brands to sort the web? Wow! Great results. You're a Google Fellow now. Brilliant!". Those penalized will have to spend a fortune to get back up and the current brands even more to maintain their rankings, like buying ads even if you are #1 almost as insurance.

Even then that is a poor defense, no Googler came out that they were breaking the law on pharma ads, or that they were openly stealing code from Oracle and taking chances of being sued instad of paying for it, or that Android is being used to force phone makers to carry Google products, etc. Only legal discovery got them out, not the supposedly superior ethics of Google employees. God knows what they are hiding. The google myth is being exposed and no one buys the crap Google said in 1999 or 2007, people are looking at results and at what they do.

They have been exposed more than once as liars, arrogant thieves and plain greedy b@stards, all while playing the underdog card and bombarding us with propaganda. That's the truth.

[tangor]

Given Panda, wouldn't another Florida (I vote for "California" this time around so it tanks with a real world example, too!) be a breath of fresh air? :)

[AlyssaS]

walkman - do a search for "wedding rings" on Bing - ads at the top, ads at the bottom and ads on teh side - and for the record I don't believe Bing is manipulating their results to "force" people to buy these ads either. Business is buying ads on every single search engine they can because their offline sales have fallen off a cliff and they are hoping to recoup and shift stock online.

Regarding brands - you are assuming that brands are ranking well because G is favoring them - but has it occurred to you they are ranking well in spite of G, because they are doing astonishing amounts of work (and spending huge amounts of money) to make sure they rank well?

Here's a small anecdote - a friend of mine has been writing paranormal fiction for years, and finally finished his magnum opus and decided to self-publish online. He uploaded to Smashwords and to Kindle, and then asked me for some help to get him to rank in the search engines (while he did the social promotion).

I assumed that the Amazon listing would do better as they are a huge branded site, etc etc, but no, the Smashwords listing ranked out of the box and only needed a little work to get it to page 1 for the title. The Amazon listing was nowhere, despite similar promotion. This makes me think that G is actually "helping" the smaller player. But when my friend starts accruing sales (via his social promotions), Amazon will suddenly send a ton of internal links to his book which will propel it up, despite G.

It amazes me when people assume that Amazon, Walmart and other brands are absolutely passive and that G has to actively help them! If you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you. Nah, these guys are ranking despite G, because they are targeting big guns at the SERPs. G can only correct to a certain extent - as with my smashwords example - but after a bit they can't because the Serps would look weird.

This brand thing will only get worse - I agree with everyone about that. But it's because business has finally realised that ranking well can potentially protect them from loss in sales in their offline businesses and are pouring in money and effort with a view to dominating the SERPs.