2015 - emerging trends on search, what are you predicting?

[Whitey]

Here's some things/questions happening recently that I saw :

- Matt Cutt's may have left his previous Google role for good [ is there such a need for a role on outreach with the new algo's ]... what's the signal ?
- Duane Forrester made redundant at Bing [ ditto , following Google ]
- Panda quality algo seems resolute and relatively unforgiving
- Penguin was certainly resolute and hasn't forgiven anyone en-masse
- Mobile growing exponentially at the expense of desktop search
- More competitive platforms strengthening to be seen on e.g. Social / Facebook , Pinterest , Instagram
- Will search engines alone matter as much in the grander scheme of things
- Smarter SEO ?

What search engine trends are you seeing, what does it tell us, and how will your competitors embrace the changes in 2015 .... / thoughts ?

[netmeg]

As evidenced by the other item - a bigger push towards https, even for sites that don't need it.

While that particular item referenced just browser behavior, it's just a short hop skip and a jump to SERPs that say "insecure site" or something equally obnoxious.

[Shepherd]

Looks like google made it's own prediction as to the future of eCommerce searches...

[webmasterworld.com...]

[Whitey]

A growing recognition that Organic Serps = Backfill.

@ken_b +1 - now that's gold dust

FWIW - When I started this thread I had hoped that folks would warm to a varied understanding of where we're at, as a community think tank of ideas and reflective external observations, and where we need to head with our actions, in order to prosper. It's so good to see.

I do, so very much believe that we're in the midst of an early point of a sensational revolution that will effect the SERP's. For me ken_b's comment, and indeed some of the other earlier comments state the threat's, but, BUT - I think there is huge opportunity with innovation around content and mobile for users.

( Think "fill" - you're gone. Think word's, you're gone )

BUT if you're good at "the fill ", Google will follow you like a puppy dog.

So another 2015 prediction -

- more webmasters on WebmasterWorld Google News and Discussions Thread will be speaking about innovative and positive ways of attracting Google traffic back to them. Because people will already be doing it in the SERP's, or indeed have done it. And many of those will be thought leaders on these threads.

- organic search will become much more of a blended strategy with other social platforms

- more innovators of ideas, less followers of other people's ideas

- Consequently, Google will loose it's focus and emphasis amongst the smart SEO's thinking

[Leosghost]

BUT if you're good at "the fill ", Google will follow you like a puppy dog.

If the G properties take up all the above the fold and the "fill" ( including you ) only starts below the fold around what used to be the number 5 spot..the "traffic" that you get from G isn't going to keep you in "soup" let alone fed and housed, watered etc..

Meanwhile G will be busy taking your content to repackage in it's properties that it is displaying in the slots above you..

Look elsewhere for your eyeballs..( and to whitey) IIWY and was in OZ or NZ..I'd be looking to Asia and Polynesia and Indonesia..not to the USA and Anglophone countries..those markets and areas are becoming saturated with webmasters ( and mega corps like G , Pinterest, Facebook et al ) all chasing the same eyeballs as you are, whether you are in ecom or adsense etc..

There are some niches ( both GEO and content or goods ) that G and the other USA SEs will not compete in..They wouldn't fit their image at home..or they won't "scale" so they are not interested..

Fighting with other webmasters for scraps and crumbs on the giants tables will just get your content mopped up for a light snack to feed their own sites, or swept aside..

You eat life ..or life eats you..

A growing recognition that Organic Serps = Backfill.

@ken_b +1 - now that's gold dust

Agreed...Golden phrase ken_b ;))

[EditorialGuy]

A growing recognition that Organic Serps = Backfill.

Sure, for commercial queries. And why not? The Yellow Pages model was around long before the Web and search engines were. People are perfectly happy with ads if those ads supply the information, prices, etc. that they want. Google Shopping is an especially good example of this: They're a win for Google, for advertisers, and for users.

For informational queries? That's a different story. For many such queries, there are no ads or only a few ads on the SERPs, and there usually aren't any "answer boxes" either.

A more reasonable prediction would be:

- A growing recognition that, for commercial queries, organic SERPs = backfill.

[Leosghost]

For informational queries? That's a different story. For many such queries, there are no ads or only a few ads on the SERPs, and there usually aren't any "answer boxes" either.

We all see different personalised serps EG, and those of us who look at them from many places other than just the USA see that there are an awful lot of ads and answer boxes on informational too..

You really do need to realise that the SERPs are not just those seen by 300 million in the USA..and the USA is saturated with webmasters all competing for the same eyeballs..

Most of the opportunities lie elsewhere in markets that are rapidly overtaking yours in numbers of online eyeballs and they too are all in the market for advice on somewhere to visit and other information, goods and services..

It is a simple matter of numbers, even G know this , they make more money from clicks from outside the USA than they do from inside,( read their yearly or quarterly financials ) the tipping point happened a few years ago, economic and "eyeballs power" is shifting..

[Whitey]

Fighting with other webmasters for scraps and crumbs on the giants tables will just get your content mopped up for a light snack to feed their own sites, or swept aside..

@Leosghost +1 - the thought provokes well IMO

Produce content that cannot be scraped [ think about it ]. Differentiate yourself from other US webmasters/business' . Be in the US market, then take your learning and apply them locally. What's your thinking ?

This is a big year coming up. More ....

- I predict desktop 2015 usage as a whole will drop rapidly to between 40-50% of activity globally. In 2016 only 25- 30% of searches will be done on desktop. [ go on challenge me with some facts - I'd love to see them ].

- Of the desktop usage Google will have to squeeze more revenue out of a diminishing segment in the SERP's with more ad saturation. But honestly, what's the difference in landing page quality in many segments anyway. Google knows this.

- Business' are already/ will invest in mobile at the ratio of 3:1 [ depending on the offering ] - go on challenge this again with some research / facts

- Google will be forced to recognise highly popular and innovative business' with great content, that is not necessarily search friendly [ technically speaking] that is not necessarily written well for Google SERP's into their results - because the users will want / expect to see them.

- Google will respond positively to all of these challenges, because they have to prosper, and they will.

- Webmasters will strengthen their respect of organic search leads more like gold dust, than churn and burn of 5 years

- The new breed of webmaster in 2015 will be highly focused and aligned on what the customer / visitor wants, not what they think Google wants so much [ +1 @Netmeg , I was pinging your opening comment ]

This is exciting. I'm so enjoying the refreshing challenges that these Webmasterworld inputs are producing for a better 2015. There seems to be just so much opportunity out there .....

[Leosghost]

If

Produce content that cannot be scraped [ think about it ]. Differentiate yourself from other US webmasters/business' . Be in the US market, then take your learning and apply them locally. What's your thinking ?

was partially to me :) ?

I'm ecom ( manufacturing own brand direct to retail customer ) and also some informational sites..

The ecom is not aimed at all at the USA..I could compete easily on price and quality with other brands in my niche, but selling to Europe ( and France in particular where I am based ) I can mark up by 900% or more over my manufacturing costs ( I manufacture mainly in Asia as does redbar, although we are not selling or manufacturing the same items, mine are primarily apparel and luxury accessories )..In the USA the usual retail mark up for similar items is 300% to 400% over manufacturing cost..except when selling through high end luxury boutiques..

To sell into the USA would require me to organise shipping direct from Asia to retail customers in the USA ( headache ) , or ship from France to them ( expensive )..and all this to make less profit than I do now per item..or open luxury retail boutique(s) in the USA..huge expense, huge headache..no thanks ..we have no "walk in boutiques" in France, did have, closed them, too much investment, rents , staff, local taxes etc, too many headaches..now "online" only..

The info sites, are mainly aimed at Europe and some at Asia, those which are aimed at the USA are selling the readers a little of what they dream/ fantasize Europe ( and France in particular ) is..Likewise the ones aimed at Asia..

They can be scraped ( despite my best precautions ), nothing is truly unscrapable..But I can design and have made new items and source new information text images etc faster than the scrapers can keep up..and the protections that I do apply make most scrapers seek out easier targets..

My advice for those in the USA working to USA markets , diversify, look elsewhere, where the battle for eyeballs is not so fierce, and read netmeg's posts, and those of rhinofish and a few others, some of whom post very infrequently nowadays, ignore most of those who post whose profiles or posts speak of "their SEO clients"..

Those who can..do..those who can't ..teach..or talk about their clients, who don't know that they could probably do better dismissing their SEOs and doing it themselves..

[Whitey]

was partially to me :) ?

Partially ...only :)

I was really challenging the mindset that content does not need to be at risk of being scraped. Personally I cannot be creative or helpful in your vertical, but the sort of thing I'm driving at is, useful widgets, tools, links to mobile only widgets, data filter tools, images / top quality images original copyright code protected [ hmm ] etc etc. For those at the high end, technical inventions that can be referenced to only one source, say a medical monitoring device.

Mobile technology is creating this opportunity.

These may not be great examples, but my drift is along the lines of "do something different". Distinguish one's site. However challenging - then promote / brand away from the SERP's. But that's more of a "how to", rather than in 2015 folks "will do" comment on my part.

[micklearn]

More small businesses will learn about the money that they're wasting on Pay Per Click. Which is a good thing. Larger companies won't catch on until later in the year.

[netmeg]

(Hey, I have SEO clients too)

PPC ain't going anywhere, because (for many) it works.

[EditorialGuy]

We all see different personalised serps EG, and those of us who look at them from many places other than just the USA see that there are an awful lot of ads and answer boxes on informational too.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that someone based in France has a unique view of what's happening around the world, but in any case, what I said was (boldface added for emphasis):

For many such queries, there are no ads or only a few ads on the SERPs, and there usually aren't any "answer boxes" either.

Your mileage or km/l will vary with the query.

But in any case, not all queries can be satisfied with quick answers. And not all searchers are looking for quick answers, even when they're available.

This may be one reason why Google has expressly declared its intention to give a boost to sites that display subject authority or expertise. As answer boxes and other Universal Search features make sites that deliver quick answers redundant, it makes more sense for Google to promote organic listings that complement or expand on Google's "Knowledge Graph" results instead of merely duplicating them. This leads to my next prediction for 2015:

- For information sites, subject expertise and substance will continue to grow in importance (and at the expense of "quick answer" sites and UGC).

[Leosghost]

I'm not sure where you get the idea that someone based in France

I don't only look at SERPs in France,"based" does not mean spend all my time here, ( and as I said I know Redbar also deals with and travels to many other countries, and notices the same difference between USA serps and rest of world serps and between countries even right next to each other, gives one a far broader view than those who target only the USA serps , the vast majority of those who post here in WebmasterWorld ) and I ask my contacts in other countries to check SERPs in their countries for various items and placings..

Must have talked to people in 10 different countries including the USA just this week..and that is just on the phone..not counting email contacts, or traveling at this time of year..

Most countries did not have G try to "purge" shopping price comparison engines from serps for example..In the USA they were decimated..many many other examples of serps in the same SE differing by country..

Google shopping and the knowledge graph don't exist in many countries, and Google is not the prime SE in many areas, even though here it is far more dominant than in the USA..

Then there is searching G in languages other than English, which brings very different serps than when one searches in English, search in Germany in English and you don't get the same serps as if you search in German or in French or Italian or Russian, or Thai, or Urdu, the same "filters" are not applied..

::aside..this is why autotrans is such a bad choice for multilingual sites..you need to think about using different images and different layouts for different markets and languages, culture conditions how people search, how they react to sites, how and what they buy, what and why they click, and what search engines show them::

[RedBar]

Here's one for you and it may also surprise.

A couple of months or so ago I was searching India for extra product supplies and was having a difficult time since all the company results I was getting I already knew.

The following day I decided to check out my Twitter account etc and under new recommendations etc I found a very likely looking supplier. I duly contacted them, my resident inspection team visited and approved their products and the first shipments from them will be arriving just after Xmas.

Yes, this company does have a website however Google has buried it so deep it's unfindable except for its company name but in Twitter there they were...yep, I was surprised too.

[bsand715]

Google will look for sales - not info search - mobile Dominates.

[Simsi]

I'm going to challenge the mobile predictions. Not because I disagree that right now and in the immediate future mobile is worth focusing on, more because if you look further ahead, mobile is less likely to be used as a term relating to the device and instead more likely to be used in relation to activity. And that, while still important in understanding behaviour which does indirectly have SERPs impact, is less important from a vanilla SEO perspective.

Graphene is the key to that prediction (if you aren't already aware of it, I'd recommend some research - it's not only a fascinating innovation but also potentially a huge game changer) and I am sure I don't need to explain why because it's very obvious what effect it will have. Probably not next year but imminent enough that a large investment in mobile development and SEO is a questionable use of time and resources I would say.

Ultimately the line between desktop and mobile (devices) will become so blurred as to simply not exist.


PS. It's nice to finally have a serious and interesting thread here without having to wade through lots of posts complaining about the injustices of Google. Thanks Whitey.

[Whitey]

@simsi - I get your point. The user wants devices that are convenient for portability, in the hand and with flexible screen sizes for different levels of interaction. I believe Samsung and Apple have been feverishly trying to launch a flexible / foldable screen for mobiles, but it hasn't got to a level which is capable of being launched.

So what you are saying kinda reflects the likihood that mobile and desktop will morph into one device.

Question : Will we really search for knowledge as much in 2015 as before, or do we already know where it is? ( I'm having a dig at where innovation sits in SEO ). Are people seeking innovative alternatives ? If so, what kind of things?

[EditorialGuy]

Question : Will we really search for knowledge as much in 2015 as before, or do we already know where it is?

People will still search.

For one thing, if you want to know the capital of North Dakota, the quickest way to find it is to type "capital of north dakota" into Google or Bing and click. Even if they're looking for an article for something in Wikipedia, the quickest way to reach that information is in Google or Bing.

Sure, a hardcore movie fan may know of Internet Movie Database, and a recipe buff may have a favorite recipe site, but much of the time (maybe even most of the time), a search engine is the best starting point in a quest for information.

[EvilSaint]

Let's not forget Negative SEO...I think that this will become even more and more prevalent in 2015 and there may even be agencies who specialise in demotion tactics against competitors...

[jmccormac]

The Google shills will continue to push the line that Google is go(o)d.

Google search quality will continue to dissolve into a puddle of gunk as the clueless pursuit of Google to provide answers to what Google thinks the searcher wants rather than what the searcher is looking for drives people to other options.

A subprime type effect may hit the domain name business as legacy gTLD registration/deletions rates become increasingly dependent on coupons and discounts.

Some new gTLDs will be surprisingly successful.

Google might consider retiring some of the people responsible for its decline and loss of traffic to Amazon, Wikipedia etc.

Fragmentation of search (Leosghost touched on this point above).

Increasing melding of apps, location based search and shopping.

Google shareholders masquerading as unbiased commentators become increasingly shrill as Google's stock price takes a hit over regulatory action.

Most attempts at paywalls by newspapers fail due to reading habits having changed.

Regards...jmcc

[micklearn]

PPC ain't going anywhere, because (for many) it works.

@netmeg, sorry, poorly worded post on my part. I meant that I think a lot of businesses will become more educated and wind up digging further into stats/settings and eliminate a lot of PPC spending that doesn't convert into sales. I've seen some horribly managed PPC accounts, that needed some major corrections, as you probably have come across with clients, too. I just think this upcoming year will be a wake-up call for search engines on some level.

[Clay_More]

For one thing, if you want to know the capital of North Dakota, the quickest way to find it is to type "capital of north dakota" into Google or Bing and click. Even if they're looking for an article for something in Wikipedia, the quickest way to reach that information is in Google or Bing.

Probably good advice for those who seek "quick" rather than accurate. I honestly do not remember the last time I was at a social function and someone asked about the capital of North, or South Dakota. That's a pretty simplistic query where I'd be surprised if an engine could not produce a result. If a person searched for "best state capital", there is no simple answer.

Do you really know people who look for articles on Wikipedia?

[lucy24]

Do you really know people who look for articles on Wikipedia?

Put it this way: If you are looking for what wikipedia has to say on a given topic,* you are more likely to find the relevant article through a search engine than through wikipedia's internal search. But that's not because search engines are good; it's because wiki searches stink.


* i.e. general background information on a non-controversial subject

[netmeg]

Do you really know people who look for articles on Wikipedia?

Absolutely. Remember, we here are not "normal" users.

[RedBar]

Do you really know people who look for articles on Wikipedia?

That would be me then! Hardly a night in the pub goes by without us having to refer to Wikipeadia since it's one of the best, probably the best, source for checking out music/band information of all genres. I can tell you, it stops a lot of arguments very quickly.

[superclown2]

For information sites, subject expertise and substance will continue to grow in importance (and at the expense of "quick answer" sites and UGC

I think that's been growing for years. Authority sites (or 'brands' as many call them) have been sweeping away the mom n'pops for ages. Charles Darwin had a good explanation for it.

I remember 15 years ago when I had thousands of competitors. Now I have a dozen or two. The fittest will continue to grow, the rest will not stay around.

[EditorialGuy]

I think that's been growing for years. Authority sites (or 'brands' as many call them) have been sweeping away the mom n'pops for ages. Charles Darwin had a good explanation for it.

By "subject expertise and substance," I didn't mean "link authority" or "brands." I literally meant "subject expertise and substance."

A few years ago, Google was giving a big boost to broad and shallow megasites (often built around user-generated content), but in my sector, I've seen those sites slide in the rankings for many queries, to be replaced by pages from specialist sites. (Our own Google rankings have taken a nice jump with the last few versions of Panda, and for a while now, our Google organic traffic has been running about 250 ahead of where it was a year ago.)

It's worth noting that Matt Cutts mentioned several times in 2013 that Google was working on giving a boost to sites or authors (he wasn't clear which) with authority for their topics.

For the search queries that I watch, that's definitely been a trend in recent months, and it makes sense as Google provides direct answers for queries that don't require depth of information.

For queries that do require depth of information, or for searchers who aren't satisfied with quick answers, it makes more sense for Google to rank substantive sites (including mom-and-pop niche sites) than to send searchers to sites that essentially duplicate what its answer boxes provide.

[FranticFish]

I've seen some horribly managed PPC accounts

Yep - like every one I've ever seen. If Google put more effort into outreach to show people how to do BASIC stuff in AdWords like utilise negative keywords and fragment their campaigns into groups then people would stay on. The most common comment I get from people about AdWords is 'tried it, wasted my money'.

P.S great thread!

[jmccormac]

One interesting tangent could be if Amazon facilitates webmasters publishing their websites as Kindle e-books or similar. Google has murdered so many small websites that any kind of non-Google monetisation might be considered good. Google must only just be realising how dangerous Amazon can be to its business. Through the Animal Farm muppetry, Google's SE has effectively become a PFI SE and Amazon does offer a online market place.

The other aspect is Google's foray into new gTLDs. I don't think that it is so much aimed at new gTLDs as the legacy TLDs (com/net/org). Google's IP ranges have approximately 1.4 million websites. Google's dog and pony show about new domains earlier this year seemed to be relatively clueless about the business. Perhaps Google might promote its cloud services more in 2015. And the search engine connection? Well captive content on its own servers might provide easily accessible content that doesn't have to be detected by blind crawling. The "don't link" strategy promoted by Google's FUD buddies in the media may really be having an effect on Google's detection of new websites.

Regards...jmcc

[superclown2]

By "subject expertise and substance," I didn't mean "link authority" or "brands." I literally meant "subject expertise and substance."

I said 'authority' not 'link authority'. There is a difference.

You trying to say that the big brands and authority sites lack 'subject expertise and substance'? They can afford to buy it and most of them do. That's one of the reasons they became big brands in the first place.

This will continue, I'm certain. Small sites will have to up their game or continue to go under. Anyone who cannot see that, and doesn't have a plan to adjust to it, has problems to face.