Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 107.23.176.162

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Google business reasons for algo updates

     
5:20 pm on Aug 5, 2018 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 4, 2005
posts:317
votes: 93



System: The following 3 messages were cut out of thread at: https://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4913754.htm [webmasterworld.com] by robert_charlton - 1:57 pm on Aug 5, 2018 (PDT -8)


When all is said and done, aim of algo updates at this time and age is to increase Google revenue.
Be in denial, if this makes you feel better.
.
9:37 pm on Aug 16, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 1, 2016
posts:2359
votes: 626


I'm going to make one point and then I'm done with this discussion.

The argument being made by some in this thread is that Google is defective by design. This is an oxy-moron because if something works as per its intended design and function then it is by definition not defective. Rlilly suggested that it was defective to protect it against reverse engineering. Yes it is designed such that it cannot be reverse engineered and gamed. This is not a defect it is a fully intended feature.

Now MrSavage claims that it is defective in that it returns results that he would does not like (ie: his website is not in position one for all keywords). This argument is fair, although not everyone agree with it. But MrSavage also argues that the poor results are intentional, so they exist by design, again a fair argument. But these arguments are mutually exclusive, either it is by design or it is error it can't be both.

Practically speaking this discussion is completely pointless as the results are what they are and we as webmasters need to adapt. Google makes updates every few month and thing change and again we need to adapt. Why they do what they do is of very little consequence.
12:34 am on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 4, 2005
posts:317
votes: 93


Why they do what they do is of very little consequence.

Except it has turned the web upside down.
.
2:16 am on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Aug 5, 2009
posts:1676
votes: 332


People still don't get the simplistic. THE ADS ARE NOT VOID OF SEARCH TERMS. When you search apples, you aren't getting oranges ads are you? What is an advertiser going to say when their ads show up for non relevant search terms? That's how this all comes full circle and how it may (or may not to the apologists out there) affect the business. A goofy algo sure makes those ads hum along when they are far more fine tuned to the terms a person typed into the box. Again, far too simplistic a concept for the geniuses here to grasp. A goofy algo + fine tuned ads = greater ad revenue from more clicks. Everyone knows that the more relevant the ad, the greater the click volume. Not factual? Stock prices soar for some odd reason. Is it because of the Pixel phone sales? An algo that can spew irrelevant garbage absolutely can help increase ad click through. Geniuses.

I have no self-interest in this right now. This has nothing to do with where my website ranks. I certainly don't invest time and effort into chasing free traffic that is eroding on a daily basis. A shift in the search landscape and I might start caring again.

Does every discussion need to solve the world's problems or fix something that's broken? Does every discussion need an answer so it can be considered "solved"? I can't compute that mentality. Imagine not being able to discuss topics because they can't be "solved".
9:59 am on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 5, 2012
posts:911
votes: 171


What is an advertiser going to say when their ads show up for non relevant search terms?

As an advertiser I can tell you that ads showing up for non-relevant terms in a constant and ongoing battle. I wouldn't hinge your argument on the relevancy of the ads to the search, if they are relevant that is more because of advertiser's action and less to do with google.
4:09 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Aug 5, 2009
posts:1676
votes: 332


Fair enough. But to flesh this out, as an advertiser, if you say I want ads when searcher types in "oranges" that is what you would expect. Obligated aren't they? If Google showed your ad on non orange searches, what would you call that? But in reality, the searcher can type "oranges" into the box and get results about apples instead. Google AI rationalizes by saying they are both fruits and so many people are searching apples, it must have been what you really wanted. The point being, the ad makes no mistake in terms of relevancy. I would argue that as an advertiser you would just LOVE the results to show sites about apples because your "orange" ad is far more likely to see clicks. Isn't that business smarts if the algo is acting like a dumb S? Seems pretty simplistic to me. It's a win-win for Google and the advertiser. That's the discussion point correct?
4:20 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 5, 2012
posts:911
votes: 171


If Google showed your ad on non orange searches, what would you call that?

Broad Match.
4:30 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 5, 2012
posts:911
votes: 171


The point being, the ad makes no mistake in terms of relevancy.

That is an incorrect statement. google is constantly showing advertisers ads for irrelevant searches. It is a constant game of whack-a-mole for advertisers: changing match types, adding negative keywords, monitoring "search terms" vs "search keywords".

It may even seem that the ads are more relevant than they actually are because advertisers can auto populate the "search term" in their ad, in real time.

At the end of the day, google shows the searcher what google thinks the searcher wants to see in a manner that generates to most revenue for google.
5:25 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from FR 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 15, 2004
posts:7139
votes: 410


At the end of the day, google shows the searcher what google thinks* the searcher to see in a manner that generates to most revenue for google.

For "thinks" read "wants"..and then remove the second instance of "wants"..

* my bold
5:30 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from FR 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 15, 2004
posts:7139
votes: 410


That way ( with a little "tweaking", rather like one can "tweak" an "algo" ) you get ..

At the end of the day, google shows the searcher what google wants the searcher to see in a manner that generates the most revenue for google.

Once that is admitted to..one can work around it..once you know someone's conscious motivation(s) or / and their conscious or unconscious motivation(s), you can use that knowledge to manipulate them..same applies to corporations and search engines..
11:14 pm on Aug 17, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 5, 2012
posts:911
votes: 171


* my bold

* your everything.

Seems the concept of quoting text is lost on some.
1:52 am on Aug 18, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from FR 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member leosghost is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Feb 15, 2004
posts:7139
votes: 410


Seems the concept of quoting text is lost on some.

Getting the "quotes" right ( yes I mangled your text there whilst trying to tweak it..mea culpa ..mes excuses..sorry ) is harder when one is blocking the script calls to google here..takes away the ability to edit..and means writing all the tags in by hand.I was also in somewhat of a hurry , just "looking"in", between things in "real life"..

But you got the gist of what I meant I think ? :) ..someone apparently did.
re the idea of the ads being more relevant than the organics..I tend to agree with you there..the ads are often as far away from matching the query as the organics, when the ads are on target , it is indeed because the advertisers have spent a lot of time going through the adwords settings ( which if left to Google's default settings are in "take as much of the clients money as possible show ads for searches, and to searchers that the client would not want them to show for, make it as complex as we can for the client to have their ads shown only to those who they want to see them" ), anyone here who reads the adwords forums would know this, and that Google constantly switch things around in settings, or "broaden "things" to supposedly help advertisers , but whose real aim is to spend even more of your ad budget until you discover that they are now "helping you by showing ads for your widgets to most of India.

Some the ads are only more accurate than the organics when related to the queries because some advertisers know that Google is as tricksy as hell..also "we" know they are ads..the "relevant to search term" ads stand out from the "organics" to us webmasters.

However what Google and the advertisers are counting on, is the fact ( this really is a fact, unlike a lot of things which get called "facts" in these threads ) most searchers ( waaaay more than half of them, and probably near to 99% of them ) can't tell the ads from the organics, They just think that Google place "the best answers", at the top of the results. Adsense publishers , and Google also count on the fact ( again a real "fact" ) that most website visitors can't tell the ads from the content..even when the difference screams out at us webmasters..almost all clicks on ads ( either adwords or adsense are made by people who do not know that they are clicking on an ad..and we know that..we ( if we place or run ads ) are complicit with Google in that "bait and switch" ), ask a non webmaster searcher to click the ads on SERPs, and they'll not be sure where to click..we webmasters would though..

Usually in these kind of " there has been an algo update and now the SERPs are crappier " , one eventually hears someone say in "Google's defence" something like "if they tweak the SERPs to make them more money, they'd lose credibility and people would switch to another search engine" or a similar phrase..This line of reasoning completely fails to take into account the following things..

Google now have ( via android ) over 90% of the cellphone pre installed search engine search market..and search via "cell phone" is now way bigger than search via computers..those of us who use computers ( desktop or portable ) is a percentage compared to those whose web activity is entirely via cellphone..Those cell phone users do not know how to switch from Google ( built in on android ) to another search engine..Most cellphone users either "go on facebook" , "go on google" , "go on instagram"..yes..we all know this..( and many of us make our living from this )..the fact is ( and while it is just us webmasters here in a webmaster forum we can be honest about it ) that even the intelligent people that we know, if they do not work on websites, have no idea how any of "this" works, to them it is all like magic..show them a page of simple source code ( let alone program code ) and they'll understand as much of it as cows do about a passing train..we once understood as little about how websites and the internet works, and how search engines work , and what are ads and what is content, as those people..

Google know that too..they know that people are not going to switch from one search engine to another like they switched from myspace to facebook and are now leaving facebook..and "tech journalists" and "tv journalist" are not likely to get "the public" to switch away from Google either , because when you have worked with some of those "tech journalists", you know that most of them have problems changing the batteries in their own mice, and cannot understand how cookies work any more than your cat can..let alone how search engines affect the economies and what we see, and what information we can access..

The only thing that Google has to worry about is legislation being passed that would affect their ability to "track" users, because it is that ability to track users, that attracts the big spending advertisers..

Why do they make these "updates"..

If they didn't.. we would all be gaming them effortlessly as one once could with altavista..because after every announced update ( and in between them when the little tweaks to the algo are happening ) webmasters are observing the SERPs, analysing the movements, and deciphering some parts of the "black box"..so Google have to keep changing the parts ( or at least the weighting of the various parts in relation to each other ) of the "black box"..if Google didn't keep doing that, people would not stop using Google to search, but..fewer ads would be bought if advertisers could easily game Google..They have to keep the ad revenue coming in and increasing every quarter, because if they falter, Wall street will show them no mercy..the best way to keep that ad revenue coming in, and growing, is to not allow the SERPs ( especially in the "money term areas" ) to be too stable for more than a quarter..

Businesses , especially large ones, like stability ( with growth if they can have it too ), they need it, they need to be able to plan ahead..they need to be able to influence their sales figures..so ..they can "roll the dice" ( rely on organics ) or they can "buy some stability""..via adwords..

Relying on organics means understanding something of how organics works, and how search works, and how people who are searching "tick" etc..Businesses can "buy the services of someone who claims to have that knowledge"..an SEO..But SEO can cost lot of money, and has no guarantees..( ever seen an SEO "expert" who only wants to be paid after achieving results, not before , or during ) but how can they know that the SEO "knows what they are talking about ? We know that many don't have a clue, but they can write a good resumé. How does a business know the good SEO from the scammers..Unless they know someone ( or preferably multiple "someones" )who has had their figures improved by the SEO..and who personally recommends them..So, the business buys ads, from Google, or from an agency who places their ads at Google. maybe someone in the business decides to watch and observe SERPs, read a few webmaster forums, think a bit, and mix a little SEO experimentation with the ad buying.

Google really have no choice but to stir up SERPs from time to time, that is their motivation, their imperative,( I wish they'd be more honest about "the why", but I don't think they ever will be ) how one responds to that stirring up ? as iamlost said, diversify, that doesn't necessarily mean diversify ones's business ( although that can help not to have all one's eggs in the same niche basket ) but definitely means diversify ones tactics..One has to change either what one does, or how one does it, or both, because Google will have to continue to change how they rank you and your business , accepting / admitting why they have to keep doing so can help you avoid being a casualty when they do so..to start with..move to being less reliant upon being found in Google, reduce your reliance upon traffic from Google.
2:27 pm on Aug 18, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 2, 2014
posts:654
votes: 313


That is an incorrect statement. google is constantly showing advertisers ads for irrelevant searches. It is a constant game of whack-a-mole for advertisers: changing match types, adding negative keywords, monitoring "search terms" vs "search keywords".

+1 for your comment about broad match. Many advertisers fail to fine tune their campaigns and Google will gladly take their money while sending them irrelevant traffic. Unfortunately those with shopping campaigns have little control over who sees their ads. In a sense, all shopping campaigns are broad match and must remain that way outside of minor tweaks to negative keywords, IP exclusions, etc.

Regardless of how many thousands of dollars we dump into Adwords, and the effort to optimize campaigns, we find shoppers are going straight to Amazon. Traffic to our products originating from all of Google (paid and organic) appears to be limited to those doing research and others just in the first phase of the purchase cycle - resulting in few conversions. Considering Google's traffic converts so poorly, we don't want to invest any money in Adwords or organic SEO as the ROI would be in the red.
6:23 pm on Aug 18, 2018 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 4, 2005
posts:317
votes: 93


Considering Google's traffic converts so poorly, we don't want to invest any money in Adwords or organic SEO as the ROI would be in the red

To start with..move to being less reliant upon being found in Google, reduce your reliance upon traffic from Google.

True : for e-commerce purposes, they are becoming increasingly irrelevant. They have continuously degraded their own product, i.e. search. They look increasingly like Bing. If they continue down this path it will be no surprise to see ad revenue plateau and eventually reverse.
.
8:09 am on Aug 21, 2018 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

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

joined:Nov 15, 2001
posts: 1732
votes: 36


Sorry Leosghost TLDR

Google could now be described as an advertising engine - rather than a search engine.
5:41 pm on Aug 28, 2018 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 4, 2005
posts:317
votes: 93


D. Trump talk about RIGGED Google algorithm : we knew this ages ago. But nobody ever cared.
.
This 75 message thread spans 3 pages: 75
 

Join The Conversation

Moderators and Top Contributors

Hot Threads This Week

Featured Threads

Free SEO Tools

Hire Expert Members