Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

Divided emphasis on Transactional vs Informational results

         

Sgt_Kickaxe

7:53 pm on Sep 20, 2011 (gmt 0)



This is just my opinion but with an apparent significant change in rankings over the past few days (Sept 16 - 19?) I'm seeing something I thought was worthy of it's own topic.

There are many types of search but the big 2 so to speak would be Transactional and Informational. (I'll leave out curiosity, referral, navigational etc type searches for now)

Transactional = You are looking to buy. A transactional query seeks to complete a transaction on the Web – for money or free – of a product or
service. The user is mainly looking for a resource (NOT information) available via web pages.

Informational = An informational query seeks information on a topic. The user is looking for information on the query topic
(broad or specific). The goal is to learn something by reading or viewing content on the web, such as text,
images, video, etc.

What I'm seeing is this:
- Transactional queries are favoring big brands more than ever.
- Transactional queries are more devoid of informational results than ever.
- The same applies to Informational queries.
- Page title matters less now than ever before.

To test this you can enter a product name and see online shops as results. Add the word 'how' before the product name and you'll see few shops if any, informational ehow and answers type pages dominate. Trust me on this it's more pronounced now than even 6 months ago.

The effect - a divided internet based on intent. If I'm right...
- Informational sites will see less buyers.
- Transactional sites will see less information seekers.
- advertisers will have to figure out what type of sites get the best return.
- Sites that try to be both transactional and informational will have their work cut out for them to establish themselves in both.

My particular case, which is what has me looking for clues, is that I lost 50% of my traffic since sometime yesterday. A couple of weeks ago I noticed a drastic drop in the number of reported incoming links in my GWT account but no traffic loss, until today. In looking at the pages still receiving links, according to GWT, the pages are almost all informational.

Why that's significant - I made the conscious decision several years ago to have both types of pages. I took pride in my guides and tips and how to's but the shop section (I sell some product) and affiliate pages paid the bills. Today the affiliate/shop pages are seeing but a trickle of the traffic they got even yesterday yet the informational pages are relatively untouched.

I don't have enough information to be 100% sure just yet but the divide is definitely there, at least for me.

Moving forward - Is SEO to now require a strict adherence to "product only" or "informational only" in order for a site to succeed? Are webmasters going to need to figure out if Google thinks a site is informational or transactional before seeking a backlink? Are advertisers going to ned to try and seek the right type of traffic by making sure they get only transactional traffic to their shops? The implications run deep.

walkman

10:26 pm on Sep 20, 2011 (gmt 0)



I always wondered if a better description, say 250 words, can make your site an informational one and ruin you. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Sgt_Kickaxe

11:01 pm on Sep 20, 2011 (gmt 0)



As we enter 'prime time' today I can say with more certainty that the "informational" pages of my main site are slightly up in traffic, 8% or so, but my transactional pages which include both my shop items and affiliate items are down closer to 70% despite being unchanged for years. In fact it's closer to 82% if I look at web-only traffic and not image traffic.

It's pretty clear, the transactional traffic I used to get, and have been getting steadily for 6 years, is gone. My site's been split in two and the pages that earned me money have been buried in rankings. I'm highly unimpressed and it smacks of greed.

What to do? I'm going to robots.txt the shop pages out FOR GOOGLE ONLY and request reconsideration and move on. It works both ways however, Google will need to regain my trust as well if they want their products on my sites. I'm not having this problem with the other engines, or their products.

Sgt_Kickaxe

10:40 pm on Sep 22, 2011 (gmt 0)



Another follow up. I compiled a list of Google keywords I ranked well for using my log files and painstakingly went through them one by one and found HUNDREDS of examples of transactional vs informational changes.

Example:

Burgundy Widgets - Old rank = #1
Burgundy Widgets - New rank = #188
Burgundy Widgets History - Old Rank = #1
Burgundy Widgets History - New Rank = #1 <-- unchanged

or

Popular Widgets - Old rank = #1
Popular Widgets - New rank = #57
How Popular Widgets - Old Rank = #1
How Popular Widgets - New Rank = #1 <-- unchanged

In fact it doesn't matter what is added in many instances. The exact match transactional term with the letter A in front of it, ie: A Burgundy Widget, is enough to make it informational apparently. Only exact match transactional (item, product or service based) terms are affected according to my logs.

Without the word history the term is being considered transactional and ebay is #1 now. With the word history added the search becomes informational, my rankings are unchanged which tells me my site has been labeled informational (and not a store brand in site of the top 20 now!).

I have literally hundred upon hundreds of examples of this, it's staggering how many similar changes I found, and all of it occured roughly 48 hours ago. It's like my site had the "transactional" switch turned off leaving the rest unaffected.

Unfortunately informational visitors don't want to see products which I have on many of the pages coined informational so what should I do?

Option A) Make the site truly informational?
Option B) Fight back and step up the site's transactional value?
Option C) Try and figure out what else has changed and do nothing in the meantime?

I have a sneaking suspicion that ranking for transactional terms has become MUCH harder so SEO's have their work cut out for them. Not only do you need to know which keywords to target you'd better make sure that your site qualifies as one or the other before you target either.

Also - could this be a type of penalty that affects ONLY transactional queries? The effect is the same either way but a penalty I can appeal.

Whitey

12:37 am on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Same here.

A keyword used in a vertical now dominated by Google's own properties dropped disproportionately against other keywords. Location based phrases associated with them also dropped. Keyword combinations not seemigly targeted by Google's held up significantly better.

dickbaker

4:50 am on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I also have a site with a mix of information and sales. I suspected last year that Google was having trouble figuring out if my site was informational or transactional. I decided to start re-writing my informational pages about various models of widgets for a transition to a 100% ecommerce site.

My plan was to have the site ready to switch over next year, with thousands of pages of individual widgets that had better photos and descriptions than the current retailers of those widgets do. I figured I'd have a leg up with the great traffic I already had. Surely, I thought, I could monetize some of that traffic, and at least let those who had been visiting previously know that there was another online store with very competitive prices.

Panda 1.0 changed all of that. I still believe that the mix of informational and transactional played some part. The plan is trashed, though. I'll never get the traffic back.

I'll probably move on to a new site that does something different, taking with me what I've been able to glean so far about what Google wants.

walkman

5:07 am on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)



Also - could this be a type of penalty that affects ONLY transactional queries? The effect is the same either way but a penalty I can appeal.
I have a feeling that Google wants to keep and is keeping those queries to redirect them to ads or Google products. That's their pattern, a classic monopoly.

Shaddows

7:54 am on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



It's a nailed-on fact that ecoms (transactional sites) played by different rules to info sites, since at least Florida.

ecoms could get top-3 positions with a tiny fraction of the backlinks and PR of the info sites that were listed next to (and several pages below) them. It used to be relatively easy to get an ecom ranked (although penalties were also easy to attract).

I agree that ecoms just do not appear in the longtail subset of who/what/why/where/how questions. Referral analysis as well as looking at SERPs shows a clear decline. This seems to be sitewide, regardless of the presence of info pages.

OTOH, our info pages are attracting more convertable traffic (up about 60% from 1.4 to 2.25%) coming in on more ambigous info phrases ("widget advice" ; "best widget for X") - there seems to be a brand new market, a new niche, for information-led transactional sites.

We've had a long, hard look over a period of time at our long-term competitors who have won and lost. For a long time, we could not discern patterns. Now I think we have a good idea.

Sites with siloed informational content (almost a parallel site), which only interlinks to product in a precise and controlled way (either to only one or two product options, or with a strong recommendation after user input) have done well. Sites with a haphazard approach to creating content, with in-depth infomation sitting on the same page as products-for-sale have lost out.

HuskyPup

9:27 am on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)



I feel you're mostly on the money Sgt_Kickaxe.

My widget sites are all informational and whereas at one time I reigned supreme for most terms these days I see more than 50% of Google's results being transactional with some of those site being extremely poor overall but that's another thread subject.

However when checking with Bing I very rarely see transactional sites. It would seem that once Bing has decided you're the authority site for something then it's very difficult to be dislodged.

Does this mean Google is trying to be two-trick pony by serving both types of results together since, in all honesty, they have no idea when someone types in keyword1, keyword2, keyword3, whether that user is in buying or informational search mode unless they specifically state "buy" in their search.

Therefore is it time for Google to separate out the two and offer two search buttons, buy/shop or learn? Something needs to be done since it is very messy at the moment and the last thing I actually want is people trying to buy from me who I cannot supply.

danijelzi

2:19 pm on Sep 23, 2011 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Has anybody noticed that Google now extremely hates informational pages which lead to the related transactional pages on other domains (a product overview with an affiliate link to a merchant's page, for example)?

Sgt_Kickaxe

5:56 pm on Sep 24, 2011 (gmt 0)



Therefore is it time for Google to separate out the two and offer two search buttons, buy/shop or learn?


Totally agree Huskypup. In fact Google has a 'shopping' section with prominent link and that's where big brands belong (they are already there, too). Freezing out any non brand site and even some smaller branded site is pure manipulation since often they are not the most helpful, they are pushing a sale.

Update, 48 hours later. I've gone through thousands of keyword matches now and checked what now ranks for each that I do not and it's nearly 100% brand name stores (most brick and mortar, some virtual only) in the top 10. Also adding even a single letter or character is enough to break the monopoly and return informational sites too, Google has compiled a list of terms to keep for stores, I'm 100% positive of it.

Informational pages with no products, news pages, even guides... all unchanged. I'm beginning to lose image search now, any image on the product related pages are falling from Google images, I guess images changes are a little slower.

Here's some simple code to grab such data from search visitors yourself, analytics could provide this level of granularity but doesn't. Create a database table with term, rank, url and type fields as well as a timestamp and incremental field.

<?php
$query_string = parse_url($_SERVER["HTTP_REFERER"], PHP_URL_QUERY);
if ($query_string) {
parse_str($query_string, $vars);
$term = $vars['q'];
$rank = $vars['cd'];
$url = $vars['url'];
$type = "web";
if (!$url) { $url = $vars['imgrefurl']; $type = "img"; $rank = '99';}
if ($term && $url) {
$host = "host name";
$user = "user name";
$pass = "password";
$dbname = "database name";
$connection = mysql_connect($host,$user,$pass) or die;
mysql_select_db($dbname);
mysql_query("INSERT INTO tablename (term, rank, url, type) VALUES ('$term','$rank','$url','$type') ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE counter = counter + 1;");
$host = "";
$user = "";
$pass = "";
$dbname = "";
mysql_close($connection) ;
}
}
?>

That will assign a rank of 99 on images since Google only provides rank for regular web searches, not images, but will collect the ranking position on web searches. It will store the keywords used, your rank for those keywords, the url the visitor came in on and the type of search img/web. You can place this in a separate file and call on it using...

<?php $refcheck = strtolower($_SERVER['HTTP_REFERER']);if (strpos($refcheck,"google")) { $queries = "trackingfile.php"; include_once($queries); $queries = "";}?>


Now you can gather Google data with zero outside tracking or log file parsing too. I've added additional conditions to mine, such as time on site, IP address and downstream click etc, but that will get you watching your rankings closely. Everyone should be monitoring their rankings like this, you need to know your ranking movement over time to spot this kind of change.

Post Panda it's time everyone watched Google ranking changes, using actual data, a little more closely. Eventually Google will change up their url's and make it harder to gather data but until then the above works.

Note: I've had several hits from the googleplex IP range today, someone's peeking.

Sgt_Kickaxe

7:11 pm on Sep 25, 2011 (gmt 0)



Last update (i'm too busy adjusting my sites to waste more time on this).

Google seems to have settled the results down today, much less churn than over the past 72 hours. Product names result in stores that sell products only. Product names with other words result in mixed or informational sites only(in my niche, at least).

Google's gone and split the internet. I wonder what possessed them to think a store will not be biased into trying to get the sale by omitting information and thinking informational sites (possibly with affiliate links) would not have something more to offer, such as a following or membership.

It's a tough time to be an affiliate, even if you provide unique features the store does not. The playing field not only isn't level, you're locked out from the other side depending on which type of site you have! So wrong...

Sgt_Kickaxe

10:13 pm on Sep 25, 2011 (gmt 0)



Here's an easy way to spot a transactional keyword downgrade.

If you have a page that features a product, and the page title is essentially the product name, copy the entire title and search for the page in Google. If that page is still highly ranked AND the HIGHEST RANKED page on your site for that search it did not receive a transactional downgrade.

If however you perform an exact match search for the title and a)it's not highly ranked anymore AND b)a DIFFERENT page on your site now returns first for that search ahead of the page that used to rank you've had your ability to rank for the product downgraded. To be clear, you won't rank well for a transactional search for that product (product buying keywords) but you may for informational combinations of the keyword.

SO, not a penalty to a page, just to that particular keyword. I have to say that it's extremely odd to perform an exact match search and see the wrong page from your site returned and then if you search for the wrong page's title you get yet another page OR the page you wanted to rank for. Since your best page for a keyword can't rank well for it your runner-ups sometimes beat it. Very strange penalty indeed.

[edited by: tedster at 10:51 pm (utc) on Sep 25, 2011]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]