Forum Moderators: open
1. To see spammers and evil (and I mean evil) SEOs kicked out of the index. Forever.
2. Froogle non-beta launched within the first few months of 2003 with full support for foreign currencies.
What are your wishes/hopes?
C'mon Google, WE ALL KNOW you can do better!
I would like to see google maintain their own index, I think spammers would be less likely to try to cheat google directly.
How many people actually use the directory? Is there even a need for one? As far as I can see, the main benefit of having a directory is that the ODP feed lets Google use site descriptions that make more sense than Google's own snippets when sites are listed in the ODP.
Another alternative would be to use the yahoo directory, where the editors are paid.
Trouble is, many worthy sites aren't listed in Yahoo because the Webmasters can't justify paying $299 to submit their URLs. And there's been some speculation here that the quality of Yahoo's directory has declined since paid submissions were introduced, since Yahoo now has a financial incentive to list sites that might have been rejected in the past. (If word got around that Yahoo was rejecting many or most sites, Webmasters might be reluctant to risk paid submissions).
I'd also like Nottingham Forest to win the Champions League, to have a million in the bank and for people to quit whining about DMOZ. I'm aiming for 2 out of 3.
Only comment I have to make is:
Google Rocks! Keep it up.
(and I speak 1st as a Paid advertiser, then as a webmaster who gets FREE traffic, Thank You Google).
Shak
I'd like to see the following.
1. Google to create a "quick review" process to determine if a site was banned for legitimate reasons, and to get it back into the index if it was not.
2. Single page affiliate sites booted from the index
3. Google to realize the economic impact of putting out a product such as Froogle. Hundreds, if not thousands, of small buinesses will be put out of business. Only the large players benefit.
4. My site to have a PR7
5. The google index to grow and have more people participate in the online american dream.
I would like to see Google add a paid review system to their directory. The OPD data would still be used, but webmasters would have the option of paying Google to have their sites/descriptions reviewed by a Google editor.
Those that can't afford the fee will still have the option of getting in the Google directory through the ODP.
The bottom line is that if Google sticks to its decision to rely heavily on a human developed directory, then I think they need to take on some of the responsibility involved with running it. DMOZ editors are overwhelmed with too many submissions and many webmasters of quality sites are unable to get listed.
A paid option would help address both issues.
I would also like to see a paid webmaster support system. If you are fortunate enough to have a business relationship with Google, you will find that their customer support for both paid and non-paid technical issues is absolutely incredible.
However, there are many businesses who are willing and waiting to become Google premium sponsors, but can't because all the avaialble inventory has already been purchased. For those types of sites, a simple technical glitch that they are unaware of can cause them to be out of the index for months because it is impossible to get an answer to an email sent through the system that currently exists.
What we need is a simple "express email" form setup on a secure server that will except a reasonable credit card payment in exchange for a response in a 24-48 hour time frame.
That way site owners that find themselves suddenly missing from the database can have a quick an reliable method of determining what the problem might be.
If they wanted to go ahead and implement a 'google directory' where webmasters could pay google $x ($x being a price that the market will bear) then I would appreciate it as well.
The DMOZ directory is the best of it's kind - there is absolutely nothing like it. Problems? Yes. Tough to get listed? Surely.
However, fwiw, DMOZ is here to stay as long as Google is using it, I would agree with WebGuerrilla, that Google should take some responsibility over it as well.
Not suggesting it be free, I'd say they should definitely derive revenue from that - but the service would be incredible.
Other than that, continued algorithmic excellence - wouldn't mind having a guide from Google on how to rank #1 for every keyword / phrase out there :) but then, that's a wish, not an expectation.
What I'd like to see next year:
1 GZIP compression added to Googlebot (save me $$$)
2 Adwords gone forever
3 Kill Froogle, stay Google
4 Google going back to ONLY B2B - stop selling stuff to consumers. (See wish number 2 again please.)
5 Kill Froogle, stay Google
6 Advance dance schedule
7 Kill Froogle, stay Google
8 In 2003 I'd like to see Google pick a good fight with MSN (muuuahhahahahaah).
9 Kill Froogle
10 Keep webmasters happy
11 Jump to Wish # 9, Loop
12 Peace.
13 Repeat #12
Merry Christmas to all of you.
you did one last year GG and people listed their wishes, but many of them just didn't come true .....
[webmasterworld.com...]
maybe they'll come true in 2003? maybe 2004? probably not a good idea to hold my breath ....
I certainly agree with that. Can't stretch my agreement to Forest winning the Champions Leagure though!
I agree 100%. I'd like to see Google resist the pressures to diversify quickly and take on too many social responsibility roles. The potential for new services, markets and monetisation is huge, and the level of public scrutiny is huge; but if they concentrate on running a very good search engine like they have so far then the future will be bright.
In other words, Please don't stop being Google.
Seems like a pretty good time to look back. It's hard to believe that our enterprise search and AdWords Select programs both launched within the last few months. I think the way that both teams have scaled up to be market leaders in just 7-8 months is pretty phenomenal. Things like News and Froogle are even newer, but have the potential to give users better ways to access info. We found time to play with Google Labs, Google Answers, and Google Compute to help cure diseases. We added another billion documents that people can search, and starting making our search results minty fresh. I'm glad that other search engines are working hard too--competition makes everybody better, and makes it more fun when we work late nights to improve our search.
And I can't freakin' wait for next year. Do folks remember at the beginning of 2002? I was so psyched that it was going to be a great year and we couldn't wait to get started? It turns out I'm just as excited about 2003. I want more relevance, better communication, and new ways to search that you didn't know you needed until we add them. I want Google to make the world a better place by this time next year.
So keep the suggestions rolling in. These "what should Google do next? How can we do better?" are my favorite threads, bar none. They're one of the reasons I love to hang out here, ten minutes from Christmas starting (!).
I'm sure you can expect big improvements in search from us, but keep your eyes peeled for the little things too. Didja notice how many languages the toolbar supports now? Anybody notice that we've started to translate our webmaster pages to other languages, so that everyone can have better guidelines about how to structure their site? We'll keep working on the little things too. Users may not notice it, and we won't put out press releases about it, but our search is going to keep improving in dozens of subtle ways. So keep the feature requests, big ideas, and little suggestions coming. There's still a lot of great things left to do. :)
[GoogleGuy gets up and does the Google Dance all around the room. He acts like a dinosaur a little bit ("Yar!"). Sometimes he does that when he gets really psyched about cool things like the new year. GoogleGuy realizes that he may be a little hyper from too many holiday cookies, and sits back down.]
Ahem. I hope everybody has happy holidays,
GoogleGuy
P.S. More logos too. Definitely more logos.
1) Google offer email services that are 100% SPAM FREE! If anyone could it would be Google, and people would drop their yahoo and hotmail accounts like a bad habit. Perhaps they can investigate email spammers and give their spamming sites PR0 just like search spammers!
Or if they don't want to become a portal, perhaps Google could release some sort of toolbar that latches onto outlook and outlook express (just like their toolbar does now for explorer), that is programmed to filter out known spammers. Make advertisers that do mass emails conform to certain standards approved by Google to ensure REAL opt-in/opt-out email. If they don't, and Google picks up on the fact that multiple emails are being sent out to their toolbar users, it automatically zaps them dead.
2) Make an advanced Google page, with lots of cool statistical features. For example, it can show the last 10 searched terms related to what you searched for maybe you never thought to look for that... not popular search terms like stemming, more "just searched" stuff. It would be neat to see what their server load is at any given time (not raw figures competitors could use, just a cool little bar or radial gauge like a tachometer or something), stuff like that. They could show a popularity bar with clickthroughs for sites contained in the SERP's.... Things nerds like me would enjoy seeing ;)
3) Peer to Peer file trading? I don't know if Google wants to get involved with this, but Google's superior search would make it an ideal cantidate for this market... maybe if/when it becomes more accepted and "legal."
4) Make a "reviews" service, where you could search the web for reviews on products, movies, albums, manufacturers, websites, anything. I would find this very useful, provided there was sufficient data which might be hard. They could start with something easy, like movies, and work their way out.
I can't think of anything else, sorry :)
[GoogleGuy gets up and does the Google Dance all around the room. He acts like a dinosaur a little bit ("Yar!"). Sometimes he does that when he gets really psyched about cool things like the new year. GoogleGuy realizes that he may be a little hyper from too many holiday cookies, and sits back down.]
...It must therefore be official. He connects the Google Dance to December 25th (in the U.S.) Expect the monthly update momentarily. :)
some earlier threads on Google improvement suggestions/wishes:
christmas 2001 [webmasterworld.com]
may 2002 [webmasterworld.com]
july 2002 [webmasterworld.com]
merrry Christmas to all..;)
3. Google to realize the economic impact of putting out a product such as Froogle. Hundreds, if not thousands, of small buinesses will be put out of business. Only the large players benefit.
Could you please elaborate, c1bernaught?
I definitely don't think so. I think Froogle is going to be of great help to small, medium-sized and big merchants as well, especially those selling "niche" or hard-to-find products.
PS: Merry Xmas to everyone.
(yar)
For example, if people are searching for "canon digital cameras", all ads specifically targeting that search term should come ahead of ads targeting "digital cameras", even if the ad $$$ = CPCxCT (cost-per-click x clickthrough) figure is lower for "canon digital cameras" than "digital cameras".... The more specific search terms are not as agressively bid on, which is why the CPCxCT formula is lower (since CPC is much lower), even though the CT portion of it is most likely higher.
I think this is common sense in terms of relevancy. People would rather have ads specifically targeting "canon digital cameras", which is why they searched for it in the first place.
I know this will make Google less money, but in the long run it will benefit them financially showing better matches. This is the only thing that drags down Google's adwords and makes Overture superior, in my opinion.
PLEASE DON'T. If anything the minimum should be raised. AdWords Select is a great Google tool because it rewards CONTENT, not deep pockets throwing money around. Google's model for Ad Words Select is simply brilliant in its user-friendliness -- if users don't like the ads, they don't get shown, no matter how much money a bigshot wants to throw at it.
Please Google, continue to value good content in both the main index and Ad Words Select.
Continue strong dependence on DMOZ as the single best resource on the Internet... and show that by throwing some money their way, perhaps specifically to create an RDF dump so Google's own directory is updated weekly.
Continue trend of improved interaction with webmasters.
Add spam report link here: [google.com...]
Don't sell out for serious bucks, continue building company privately and being the envy of the corporate suits and end up making mega bucks yourselves.
By the end of 2003, have updates be weekly.
(Disagree with Marcia that updates are like foreplay -- not a masochist -- updates remind me of that "are we there yet?" commercial.)
Remember its the content of the ads, not the site, that determines how often and how highly ranked Adword ads are placed. That takes some thought, but not a lot. Heh youve only 3 very short lines (around a dozen to 15 words) and a URL to play with.
Plus the more you pay, according to Google;'s guidelines also is a component in high well and high your ads are ranked. The higher your daily maximums and bids the better chance you have of being seen as well, according to their FAQ.
Google's high min clicks for our major keywords, despite our qualifying/limiting of our clicks by extra keywords in the same line, is the only thing that keeps us with Overture for the majority of our campaigns.
I would like to know more on why high min clicks deter "big pockets" more than high content.
[edited by: chiyo at 4:51 am (utc) on Dec. 26, 2002]
My second wish (I hope I have 2 :)) is more obscure and concerns Froogle. When the biggest search engine in the world launches a shopping directory and only allows non-affiliate sites inside, this is bound to create a major earthquake on the web (regardless of what other people might say). Trying to separate the commercial from the informational web is like separating Siamese twins that share the same head. As the creators of informational sites can't chew on their keyboards for a living, most of them have an affiliate store somewhere in a back room that helps pay their bills. However, if Google directs all paying customers in a different direction, the effect on the informational part of the web might be disastrous (I'm talking about the corpses of abandoned sites lying around all over the web, yuck!). Just a thought, dominating the search engine world also means a lot of responsibility...
Happy new year everyone!
Well, that's what I said. These are ADS, not sites. Good ads get rewarded. Ad Words Select is not about sites at all. It's about what sites offer. It's pure content, AD content.
"I would like to know more on why high min clicks deter 'big pockets'."
I don't know if this is a trick question or what, but it's obvious: you can't buy a listing. You have to earn it. It's the central point of Ad Words Select -- your ad *content* has to be seen as valuable by users (objectively demonstrable via click rate). The higher the minimum click rate, the less the deep pockets matter.
I pay under .70 on Ad Words Select. Deep pockets pay *over thirty times* that on Overture, and they also try to on Ad Words Select, but they can never get the minimum clicks, so they fall off! This is partly due to them not being able to offer a good content ad (people don't want what they offer), and partly due to them not using the Ad Word Select program in the targeted, sensible way it is set up for. Basically they try to spamishly appear in every instance of where a word appears, even ones clearly off topic. [edit I don't mean literal spam, merely a shotgun versus laser-beam idea.]
Ad Words Select makes people earn ranking via user satisfaction. It's a similar model to Google overall...... which is why this sub-thread of the main thread does belong here, and not the Ad Words forum. This is all about how Google-the-corporate does everything, including Froogle, Ad Words Select, the main engine, and the rest, including stuff we don't know about. please Google, keep the model on content, not deep pockets.
As the creators of informational sites can't chew on their keyboards for a living, most of them have an affiliate store somewhere in a back room that helps pay their bills. However, if Google directs all paying customers in a different direction, the effect on the informational part of the web might be disastrous...
Froogle will be used only by people who are actively shopping for products. So yes, an information site might lose the person who wants to buy a widget right now. But it will still get the person who's researching widgets or who's reading about a related topic and is prompted to inquire about widgets via an affiliate link.
It only makes sense that if all your site is is a shopping mall with no value added, Froggle is a much better place for your content and you will find it harder to rank well in google proper.
To help you understand, goto Google AdWords' keyword entry page and enter some top keywords like "DVD" or "web hosting". Set the maximum keyword CPC to $0.05 and hit submit. You will see that the above keywords are not accepted by Google AdWords because they have MINIMUM CPC (of around $0.80 or even $1.00).
Chiyo/myself/others want this to be removed.
If this is removed, it will actually HELP small advertisers who cannot afford $1.00 per click.
Get it?
But note Adwords and OV in their secondary basis for ranking, do give a weighting to both how much you pay and relevance (OV relevance "reviews" - poor as they may be - and Adwords boost for adwords with higher max bids)
However I still dont see, as vibgour says, how these inflated min clicks that at least I see in our terms, help those without deep pockets. surely they help those WITH deep pockets.
Your terms seem different from mine - ours have higher min costs in Adwords vs max bids in OV. But it maybe that we are targeting 3 to 4 word phrases while you may be targeting 1 or 2.
There is a reason for this i think, which is a weakness in the otherwise smart Adword ranking algo.
The main problem, as stated before, is that OV costs come DOWN as you add qualifying and limiting keywords, while Adwords stay the same and sometimes even go up. That hardly helps with relevance and targeting as it DISCOURAGES advertisers from making their terms more specific (more words in the one line)
For example one of our main keywords is (something like) "advertising research". Both "advertising" and "research" have quite high min costs on Adwords meaning for a cost each of around 60 to 80c. Just because you have limited or qualfied the query universe by maybe 99% by adding the qualifiying term "research", the cost per click has not come down. Now if I add another term to that line like say "software" or "tracking" or "china", it still stays around 60 to 80c, does not go down, and in some cases goes up! (it does not help limiting the campaign to say chinese users, as all our target clients are based outside China) In OV when you add these extra terms the max bids go down very fast as you are targeting and they are less "popular".
This is the case in Adwords even if you make these terms in square brackets, curly brackets or no brackets.
Until Adwords sorts out this anomaly, I cannot agree with them and you that it provides better ROI than Overture for mom and pops and specialist services and products.
So the reduction of the costs of some terms and lower costs as you target more specifically is what I would like as a new year present from Google. Letting the market decide how valuable a term is, rather than using info from an old impressions-based program seems emminently sensible. To me it would help Google adwords relevance as it encourages advertisers to target better, achiveing what you and I both want steveB, without adding costs which are sometimes unsustainable for vibgyor79 and me. Already im seeing increasingly broad and off topic ads in Adwords. This will fix it.
[edited by: chiyo at 8:56 am (utc) on Dec. 26, 2002]
