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 ?

[EditorialGuy]

Google's advantages are in indexing the "dead" web. That's the part of the web that doesn't change much from one year to the next. Approximately 23% of the active web could be like this (brochureware).

Not just "brochureware," but old and new evergreen editorial content, too.

I saw "old and new" because there's nothing dead or static about the non-social, non-news Web. Just this evening, I was looking for professional reviews of newly-released [gadgets], and I had no trouble finding them in Google.

Also, people tend to equate "social" with the likes of Twitter and Facebook, but review sites and forums are highly social, too.(Google Analytics even includes sites like TripAdvisor and Yahoo! Answers in its "social" traffic category.) What's more, they're likely to be more influential than Twitter or Facebook when it comes to driving purchases, because they cater to people who are researching how to spend their money.

So, a prediction:

- Smart search marketers will need to become more adept at distinguishing between "social" that builds awareness (Facebook, Twitter) and "social" that helps serious prospects make purchase decisions (e.g., TripAdvisor and other consumer review sites).

[Whitey]

@jmcc +1

The SE that manages to successfully index and contextualise the live web, (the rapidly changing and often socially driven web) will be the winner. The real wildcard in this will be Microsoft unless it manages to seize defeat from the jaws of victory. Many of these SM driven events will be short-term swarms and will peak and dissipate before long cycle search engines can index them. It might require multiple indexes and a different way of thinking about Search -- or an old way.

And @EditorialGuy - noww we're talking some dangerously, adventurous thinking here. Are we on a roll here .. :)

[samwest]

OK, what about:

"age of earth"

Google says 4.54 billion years, but if you were a Creationist, you'd probably throw a snit fit because the Bible told you that the "objective, measurable fact" was somewhere around 6,000 years.

Google is not a belief engine...yet.
You can qualify the term simply by adding the word "religious"
So for the term : "religious age of earth" you get 6000 years.

(they probably saw your post and fixed it already)

Happy holidays.

[Whitey]

So, a prediction:

- Smart search marketers will need to become more adept at distinguishing between "social" that builds awareness (Facebook, Twitter) and "social" that helps serious prospects make purchase decisions (e.g., TripAdvisor and other consumer review sites).

@EditorialGuy +1 - actually I just wanted to give some supporting personal credence here to your thoughts as we get back OT. The last couple of posts here, have really helped sharpen the awareness, and allow us the opportunity to hone in on a much greater capacity for thinking and what's ahead of us. Thanks.

Business' like TripAdvisor currently have around 1.5m page FB likes which gives me the sense that they are resisting converting their audience platform over to Facebook. It's not a lot compared with their active engagement on their site network. I'm quite sure they get good leverage through Google search by holding back their content and users to their site.

I'm seeing one major player with enormous transaction numbers, now building robustly their own internal social platform, who have the capacity to go to 2-500M+ audience quite quickly, and resisting publishing it for Google to crawl [ it may happen ], showing content only to users.

Since the content is highly personalized, it probably holds little attraction outside of the users specific intent and close circles. It seems to me that they are in a good position to become a prime referral site for capturing users intentions, and converting that to sales.

So there are some good reasons to hold back some content from Google, if you can, and if it makes sense.

Facebook / Instagram on the other hand, has a lot of folks who want to buy things and can be targeted by advertising ( Instagram's content is limited on advertising currently as it builds rapidly it's young audience, and tries not to alienate users from their enthusiastic uptake at the expense of FB ). Since people can post content and interact effectively, in closed user groups or networks, and in a personalized capacity, with a "recommendation" or "referral" capacity, which may make aspects of the experience better targeted for advertisers.

So I see a bit of tension in the need<>need relationships.

One important thing, if you own the product, or process and get users to write content, you're a step ahead of referral traffic from Facebook or Google, provided you have the numbers.

For those trying to apply these trends into their own base, I think 2015 will be the year when content marketing into social networks, enabled to search engines will trend strongly. Good content can peak, but it can also sustain if it is done cleverly.

If you're small go niche and really look after your users and customers by creating great content, meeting their needs, whatever, and connecting them socially. That should allow a ramp up of activity in 2015.

[Nutterum]

Since Panda, Penguin, Pigeon and other animals were quite effective in 2014 my prediction for 2015 is:

- Due to increasing inability to produce churn&burn websites or spamming links to get local rankings, negative SEO will show its ugly face even more so.

Hope I am wrong on this one..though I doubt it.

[Whitey]

- Duane Forrester made redundant at Bing [ ditto , following Google ]

Duane Forrester is re hired at Bing [theonlinemarketingguy.com...] and [webmasterworld.com...] . Welcome back Duane and Happy New Year.

Sometimes it feels fantastic to be wrong - 'so glad my OP prediction is reversed and that Bing is not following Google :)

In the context of competing with Google search, what do you make of Duane's comment :

I’m also going to be spending time working with folks on the API side of the house, seeking ways to grow engagement with our data-level opportunities for businesses. It’s no secret that the data-layer will continue to be one of the most important aspects of search moving forward.The trick is helping businesses understand how to access it and leverage it for their own success.

What improvements should be introduced by Google in 2015 for WMT, based on needs / and future trends ?

[micklearn]

What improvements should be introduced by Google in 2015 for WMT, based on needs / and future trends ?

Tough to figure out if this is a serious question or a survey of some sort. The last "improvement" was introducing "not provided". Google isn't focused on improving things for webmasters.

[jebernier]

samwest

been thinking the same thing

[EditorialGuy]

Tough to figure out if this is a serious question or a survey of some sort. The last "improvement" was introducing "not provided". Google isn't focused on improving things for webmasters.

The tools are called "Webmaster Tools," not "SEO Tools." Just because Google no longer provides keyword data doesn't mean it can't add useful features that help Webmasters improve their sites.

[jrs79]

So, a prediction:

- Smart search marketers will need to become more adept at distinguishing between "social" that builds awareness (Facebook, Twitter) and "social" that helps serious prospects make purchase decisions (e.g., TripAdvisor and other consumer review sites).

This has been the case for at least 10 years. There are not any "smart" marketers that don't understand this.

[bhukkel]

I think 2015 will become the 'HTTPS year'. Its already started with just ordinary SSL certificates but the next step will be that google will force you to buy an organisation validated certificate. It is ideal to identify spam networks.

Next thing is ranking in the app stores will be more important. I already see more traffic coming from my apps then from link building.

[Whitey]

Google Faces A Terrifying Trend

Google is a search company, but the searches it makes money from are the searches people do before they are about to buy something online.

These commercial searches make up about 20% of total Google searches. Those searches are where the ads are.

Two and a half years ago we wrote, “What Googlers worry about in private is a growing trend among consumers to skip Google altogether, and to just go ahead and search for the product they would like to buy on Amazon.com, or, on mobile in an Amazon app.”

We noted that, according to ComScore, “the trend is real.” Searches on Amazon.com were up 73% year over year.


On mobile, using Google as a starting point when you want to buy something makes even less sense.

Think about it. Why go through these steps?
• Open your web browser on your phone.
• Google search “bike gloves.”
• Scan some text links.
• Click on a link to go to a product page at some e-commerce store.
• Click to add the item to your cart.
• Input your credit-card info.
• Type in your address.
• Select the shipping preferences you want to pay for.

When you can just …
• Open the Amazon app on your phone.
• Search “bike gloves.”
• Click one button to buy the product with your usual credit card, and have it shipped to your usual address free.

Disclosure: Jeff Bezos is an investor in Business Insider through his personal investment company Bezos Expeditions.

[businessinsider.com.au...]
Guilding the lily a little [thefreedictionary.com...] maybe with Jeff Bezos of Amazon's investment link, but certainly some truth behind it. Take this in the greater context of organic search and mobile responsive / apps.

Predictions ?

[jmccormac]

Well Google murdered all those Mom and Pop websites and now Amazon is going to gut Google. Amazon may well kick up a gear on its shopping platform and mobile search angle. The specialisation of search, something that started in 2002-2004, will accelerate and Google is going to be its unlamented victim. Want specific information on a product and and where to buy it - go to Amazon. Shopping for bargains and previously owned products - go to eBay. Want help with homework - go to Wikipedia. Want information on hotels - go to Tripadvisor etc. So just why would people want to go to Google? That's the real killer question. That PR fluffer's fake Star Trek story about the ship's computer answering all the questions is just that - clueless hype by someone who never watched the series. Ever wonder why Spock and Data were in the series? Anyone who really watched the series would know. This year, 2015, might be one of the worst for Google because it has lost its market position. Search is no longer generic or universal - it is reverting to specific search and the toxin for Google will be apps. Vortals, Vertical Search, Local Search and Social Media driven Search may become far more important in 2015 and Google will be excluded from the deep pages on these sites. Of course Google can always release press releases to the technology churnalists who will unquestioningly recycle them as "news" but Google Search is in real trouble because of the faffing about with all that AI bogosity. And if Amazon comes out with a replacement for Adsense, then things will get really tough for Google. The Domain Name business has some disturbing subprime-like trends and this could be the catalyst for the collapse of the efforts of Google's anti-spam team. Much of the short-lived (one year wonders) churn and burn sites were aided by discounts and coupons. Some TLD registries might increase their reliance on discounting to maintain registration volume in a tougher market. And that might make it easier to set up low cost or free churn and burn sites.

Regards...jmcc

[seoskunk]

Interesting jmcc. Google's promotion of brands ahead of specialist websites has been a disaster. The brands could not supply the choice and consumer has suffered. Google have destroyed there ecosystem and many companies have gone to the wall because of the policy BRAND IS BETTER. Amazon provided choice and reaped the rewards. Google needs to try and rebuild commercial choice again, Amazon need to continue to capatalise there market. 2015 may be the year Google regrets what its done to SME's.

[jmccormac]

Not sure if Google can recover from the damage it did to its ecosystem, Seoskunk,
The problem with Google is that destroys websites without bothering to think of the human cost. Like most ecosystems, the web has been developing but because Google has been fixated on a simplistic theoretical approach, it missed the development of the Social Web. The people who built these Social Media sites are often highly driven and highly motivated. They aren't bureaucrats. As with most startups, there is the money making idea and the entrepreneurs. The problem for Google is that bureaucrats aren't generally entrepreneurs. Bureaucrats appear later in the lifecycle of a startup. New projects need entrepreneurs who can convince the market rather than bureaucrats who can convince upper management. Google might be able to throw technology, CS and business people at a problem but it cannot throw entrepreneurs into the mix. That's why Facebook beat Google Plus and Twitter beat Buzz or whatever.

Google's biggest mistake was its attempt at "universal" search. It effectively goes against the evolution of the human mind and it is overloading the user with information that may or may not be of use. People want simplicity and limited choices - they want the right answers to what they are searching for rather than some irrelevant answers to a question that Google's algorithm "thinks" they searching. The original citation model is still quite robust but it requires updating to repair the damage done over the last few years. For the last few years, Google's approach to solving problems seems to be like that of a call centre answering calls but not doing anything innovative. It applies endless patches and tweaks to its algorithms to cope with a webscape that is evolving faster than it can cope. The killer for Google is that its promotion of brands cuts itself out of the decision chain. Amazon's position is the decision chain. Why go to Google if all you are going to get are a set of links that you have to wade through before you get to the checkout? With Amazon, you get to the product and can click to purchase. Amazon makes it simple whereas Google makes it complex. This simple dynamic is something that the people in Google Search don't seem to understand or appreciate. For SMEs, Google is fast approaching the stage of no longer being useful, especially if Amazon is beginning to snarf all the shopping traffic. And for SMEs, like the apocryphal restaurants, location matters. It is far easier to sell in Amazon's shopping mall than in a shack in the desert of Google's SERPs.

Regards...jmcc

[micklearn]

Perhaps, this will be the year that most site owners, big and small, realize that half of the traffic on the internet is performed by bots.

[EditorialGuy]

The killer for Google is that its promotion of brands cuts itself out of the decision chain. Amazon's position is the decision chain. Why go to Google if all you are going to get are a set of links that you have to wade through before you get to the checkout? With Amazon, you get to the product and can click to purchase. Amazon makes it simple whereas Google makes it complex.

I don't think Google is "promoting" brands so much as it's responding to users' preferences for brands. Google has plenty of data on user behavior, and if the figures show that online shoppers like to click on Amazon results, why wouldn't Google rank Amazon pages well for commercial queries? Especially since those Amazon pages typically include plenty of unique informational content in the form of detailed user reviews? (Let's not forget that Google's stated mission is "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." There's no disclaimer in that statement that reads "except when they're shopping for goods and services.")

[Rasputin]

I don't think Google is "promoting" brands

I can't agree with this - by allowing established/large brands to get away with things the rest of us can't they are effectively promoting them.

Examples include excessive ad number penalties, thin content penalties and group site interlinking which are all overlooked when big brand sites do them and get the rest of us penalised.

The result of discouraging sites to link out naturally except to 'big sites' for fear of looking as if they are selling links and the policy of brand sites to almost never link out naturally also indirectly promotes these brand sites.

[EditorialGuy]

I can't agree with this - by allowing established/large brands to get away with things the rest of us can't they are effectively promoting them.

If the established sites are "getting away" with things that smaller sites aren't, it's probably because of their link authority and user metrics.

But in any case, if many smaller site owners are being penalized for doing things they shouldn't, wouldn't it make sense not to do those things and gain an advantage over competitors who can't resist temptation?

[Rasputin]

Of course, in an ideal world everyone would follow the same rules and be judged by the same rules.
But the world is not ideal and realistically a 'normal' site cant compete fairly with sites that, for example, turn a 20 photo gallery into 20 pages that all get ranked, or that is allowed to show large amounts of ads, popups etc that make the money to pay for another handful of similar articles...ad infinitum

[Whitey]

I don't think Google is "promoting" brands so much as it's responding to users' preferences for brands.

@EditorialGuy Also Google's search technology is changing rapidly.

Google is making use of "implied links" or "express links" without actually linking by merely mentioning a brand or website. On top of that co-citation appears to be even more powerful than ever.

With widespread abuse of link building ( schemes and negative SEO), Google appears to be placing more emphasis on citations and brand mentions which are less able to be manipulated to achieve higher rankings. Tracking brand mentions and nofollowed links, will likely become as important as “dofollow” links for ranking purposes.

Webmasters will likely be spooked by Penguin which can potentially have you penalised, so more emphasis on sustainable methods of reputation building are very much on the cards. Some SEO's have coined the phrase " reputation management" for a while now.

One casualty of 2014 of course was the failed 3 year experiment on authorship , canned in mid 2014 by Google. With this I think Google+ will disappear into the ether. ( I could never see this working - too hard to be widely adopted)

Google may place more emphasis on social, like Twitter and Facebook - a "Catch 22" as I think Social is a real big risk also to Google as they've not been able to "own" that space.

So some more predictions for 2015 :

- Brand mentions and citations will become as potent as links
- Google+ will drop off the radar completely ( but not the intent of Google to replace authority source tracking better )
- Social is more important than ever ( mentioned before )
- and yes Amazon, ( self serving and cloaked in the above article ), less searches will occur for commercial keywords
- Google will need more ad real estate space on diminishing organic search pages and mobile space.
- Therefore, per above, I think the 6-8 pack local listings may fall casualty ( could never see the value of these in large cities, where 1,000's of alternatives were drilled down to 5 or 6 )

[Whitey]

But the world is not ideal and realistically a 'normal' site cant compete fairly with sites that, for example, turn a 20 photo gallery into 20 pages that all get ranked,

@Rasputin - I can see that angle of thought, and it's no doubt widely shared, but what about the opportunity through building content, good content, great content. One at a time if necessary.

Especially in the context of the above regarding citations and ways Google is now looking to surface content in the SERP's, and also rapidly changing user engagement through social and mobile.

Doesn't that make 2015 the best ever opportunity to think about how to create and market content, sustainably rather than be worried about the "normal" .... just a thought.

[EditorialGuy]

- Google will need more ad real estate space on diminishing organic search pages and mobile space.

I don't think it's a matter of Google's "needing" more ad space, it's more about a willingness to make ads more prominent on commercial SERPs. And why not? In the pre-Internet days, people happily used ads in the Yellow Pages, magazines, and newspapers to find goods and services. (I remember hearing a publisher of trade and enthusiast magazines say in a meeting that, according to his company's surveys, many people read those magazines "for the ads.")

As a consumer, I've used Google Shopping myself to find items that I wanted to buy. If I want, say, a pair of red woolen Widgetco drop-seat pajamas at a competitive price, it's quicker and easier to buy from a Google Shopping ad than it is to dig through a bunch of organic results. The better Google gets at providing ads that satisfy shoppers, the more willing Google will be to let ads become even more dominant in SERPs for queries that are clearly commercial in intent. Will this happen in 2015? Your guess is as good as mine.

[jmccormac]

@Whitey

Google is making use of "implied links" or "express links" without actually linking by merely mentioning a brand or website. On top of that co-citation appears to be even more powerful than ever.

One thing that I've noticed from link analysis work on all websites in a particular country is that the authority sites tend to have very few outbound links and will not actively link to sites in their content. Instead they use an inactive "citation" (basically the URL but not enabled as a link).

Regards...jmcc

[EditorialGuy]

One thing that I've noticed from link analysis work on all websites in a particular country is that the authority sites tend to have very few outbound links and will not actively link to sites in their content.

On the other hand, I know of two big authority sites that send us new links all the time. (One uses plain-vanilla links, the other nofollow links.) So the rule of "We're big shots, so we're going to hoard links" isn't universal, although it's probably common enough to justify the "implied links" or "linkless citations" approach that Whitey described.

[toidi]

I don't think Google is "promoting" brands 

In my niche (abodes) google created the brands. Prior to this change these 'brands' were just startups that would have gone away by now if left alone. Now, these 'brands' dominate almost every possible serp variation available even though they are rife with bad and outdated info. Knowledge has taken a back seat and incorectness rules.

[jmccormac]

On the other hand, I know of two big authority sites that send us new links all the time.

This isn't based on some single website looking for links. This is an analysis of a very large number of links and linking patterns on hundreds of thousands of websites. It is quite different to mere anecdotal evidence.

Regards...jmcc

[EditorialGuy]

It is quite different to mere anecdotal evidence.

My point was simply that there are exceptions to every rule or assumption.

Maybe the term "YMMV" should be hardcoded into every Webmaster World post.

[ergophobe]

Nobody has mentioned it, but I think 2015 will be the year when schema markup achieves widespread adoption and those who don't get it done and get it right will be left behind in local SEO

And of course, mobile, but I see that as a 2014 (or 2013) trend that continues... by 2016 only the worst laggards will not have some decent mobile experience, either responsive, "m dot" or app.

[EditorialGuy]

And of course, mobile, but I see that as a 2014 (or 2013) trend that continues... by 2016 only the worst laggards will not have some decent mobile experience, either responsive, "m dot" or app.

That leads to another prediction:

- In 2015, we'll begin to see even more segmentation in search. Mobile vs. desktop is a good example: "One size fits all" doesn't always work, and responsive layouts aren't always a panacea. For example, Google might decide to give more weight to in-depth content in desktop/laptop/tablet results and more weight to "Cliff's Notes" content in smartphone (mobile) results, or it might make different assumptions about user intent based on whether the query is coming from a conventional or cellular network.