Google Conspiracy Theories

[LH]

I agree with those that say Google wants you to use their Adwords.

In fact I'm surprised that all discussion of Google's fluctuations is narrowed down to engineering tweaks. The company of the size of Google has a pretty sizable marketing department and when business starts making as much money as Google, that Marketing Dept. often has a lot more weight in decision making then any IT team.

Here's my "conspiracy theory", if you wish, see if you agree with it:

Google intentionally drops high ranking sites! Why, because you've tasted the results of good traffic and will be willing to do anything, including paying for your listing to appear back on the front page. Is it a coincidence that they limit Adwords listing to 8 per page to make them all appear as "near top" listings. And look how conveniently they place the answer to all your problems, right in front of your eyes, on every page "See your message here...".

Google is no longer into search relevance tweaking -- they are into cash-flow optimization.

[minstrel]

Frankly, in my opinion that's nonsense. Google's long-term survival depends on delivering relevant results - without that, they fall to the same level as other pay-per-listing services and their overall ability to generate revenues falls at the same time;

See this thread.

and in particular read this article (this is in Adobe Acrobat/PDF format).

[markewhit]

Gents:

I agree with the both of you. Google (hereafter known as 'The Black Hand' - if you've seen Godfather 2 you know what I mean.) has temporarily dumped high-ranking sites in order to better estimate which ones of us will panic and start throwing money at them. My gut feeling is that in 4-6 weeks everything will go back to normal because NOBODY is going to use a search engine that produces only sponsored results. 10 pages of casinos and Viagara and 'Hot, horny teens want to consolidate your debt' is going to be the ultimate result of such a system. They know this. Virtually every search I've made on 'The Black Hand' since Sunday yields almost no relevant results. I've decided to not change a thing about my site and I'm thanking all of you (especially minstrel) for making up my mind. I'm still ranked very high on AltaVista, Ask.com, MSN and most of the others.

Look, some of you who are selling $10,000 diamonds online can afford toss a little green Google's way, but I'm selling $500 Web sites and $99 sticker deals to bands - I'll NEVER use a pay-per-click ad service becasue it's simply not cost-effective. I'd have better luck screaming out my window. They're simply trying to determine which keywords are going to be the 'money words' and which aren't. They'll learn very quickly what the rest of us already know: Consumers will NOT use 'The Black Hand' if it doesn't give them what they want: QUALITY, RELEVANT RESULTS.

[impers]

Hasn't anyone thought that Google might want you to PAY for placement? It is very clear to me. I have a website: bridalheadpieces.com. My keywords and content are very consistent and I was #1 for a long time (searching for Bridal Headpieces/Wedding Veils). (Also a very large site) Now when someone searches for Bridal Headpieces, they get fabric stores or some tiny site with not much selection or content. I can't even find my site when searching for Wedding Veils. So don't tell mre about content! This has happened to my competitors as well. Yahoo has also done this with Overture and good placement is tantamount with your pocketbook. I'm sorry but this is so obvious.

[cbp]

Its not obvious. Only those who believe in conspiracy theories accept that the recent Google changes are aimed at getting more revenue via Adwords. There are still plenty of commercial sites doing well in the search results.

It may well be that there is increased revenue for Google from Adwords, but this was not deliberate. It appears that more commercial sites were affected in the two recent updates because some of them lack links from the right types of sites (ie expert; themed etc). This is just the way that ranking works now --> nothing deliberate to increase Adwords spedning.

Of my 10 sites, none were affected in Florida update (they all went up) and 1 got dumped in Austin. I spoke to an SEO with 100 or so sites in his portfolio - he mentioned only 5 of these sites were affected in both updates --> most sites have not been affected

CBP

[Mel]

The only reason that Google can make money with Adwords is that it is linked to searches on the worlds most trafficed search engine.

Why is it the worlds most trafficed search engine? Because 80% of the worlds searchers believe that they will get the most relevant results there.
If the perceived relevancy of Google goes down, the traffic goes down and the Adwords revenue goes down.

Now rethink your conspiracy theory in the light of day.

[oldmaid]

Hello,

I have the best solution...;o). Do not use google.
I know that I am the odd ball out, but I still use yahoo.

Have a good day/night
Old Maid

[MrLeN]

You should keep in mind that Google temporarily inflates the rankings of new listings to determine whether anyone will be interested in the listing or not.

If the listing never gets any clicks, Google can safely assume that it's not overly relevant, and will [then] rank it accordingly.

Imagine if you were selling hotdogs and burgers from a stand..

You yell out for an hour "Hotdogs! Hotdogs!" and sell 35 of them.

Then you try yelling out "Burgers! Burgers!" for an hour and sell 4.

Would you keep yelling out "Burgers! Burgers!" or switch back to "Hotdogs! Hotdogs!"?

It's the same principle.

I have noticed time and time again, that my NEW pages hit top #10 consistently, and then many of them fall back a page or two - especially if the competition is tough/saturated.

I currently have top #10 listings on Google for "Website Backgrounds" and "Search Term Suggestion" and "Search Term Suggestion Tool"and I am getting lots of cool traffic, but chances are I wont have them next week.

I recently had "Find IP" and "Online Community" in the top 10 as well, but after a few weeks they fell off again - DOH!

*Goes to work on link popularity and more content*

..my sites are too new :(

MrLeN

[Krapulator]

>>I have the best solution...;o). Do not use google.
I know that I am the odd ball out, but I still use yahoo.

So you are using Google anyway!!!

There's no consipiracy - I believe that Google really are trying to provide better search results and so are playing with the recipe. Its far from a tasty delight just yet - but I think the changes are far from finished.

[Ozdachs]

I have a number of client sites that were in the top 5 of results last week and they aren’t showing up in the top 30+ now. They are good sites, and we play by the rules. I can find the sites by searching by the business’ names, so I know we're not banned. But searching by name not helpful in attracting visitors.

Most of these sites DO advertise in Adwords, and have for many months. The sites ahead of us in the organic listings are not ahead of us or even in the Adwords list.

Google’s changes are passing strange. But, I don’t see the conspiracy. My conclusion doesn’t help my clients, but it helps keep me focused on finding a solution.

[jonathan-uk]

maybe its a bit of both!

Google could be shaking up positions to attempt to improve results for people who use google, at the same time some sites that depend on high ranking free positions drop off! (maybe only for a week or month!)

This may cause people to consider taking out some'security' by placing a few ad-words to back-up there Se work.

Of course google can't afford to provide people with poor results in an attempt to force people to use add-words, but they can afford to shuffle a few results around with these new updates, as long as they are providing good quality results.

[/quote]

[DrTandem1]

I know for a fact that not all top listed sites have fallen, so that kind of shoots down that part of the conspiracy theory.

As far as tasting the results of top listings go, well, the dirty little secret is that high listings rarely equate to more business. I have sites that have done well that were never found high in the listings. I have had sites that have been number one for very popular keywords that did no better than before they were ranked well.

I have used AdWords and Overture pay-per-clicks and the only thing it got my client was their competitors clicking away at their bank account. I think far too much concern is put on search engine results. Clients would do far better to use more traditional forms of advertising for their internet business. Traditional advertising is under your control, not the latest algorithm nor some PPC scheme.

[red]

"As far as tasting the results of top listings go, well, the dirty little secret is that high listings rarely equate to more business."

This may be true of your clients business but it's survival of the fittest (pages, that is) that has kept food on MY table for the past 18 months as well as my clients.
Higher rankings = More Business= More $$$
...at least from my vantage point.

Now, I do not put all of my eggs in the Google basket or I'd be living in a cardboard box somewhere.
I have always maintained a balance of good rankings along with some well placed ppc ads and some strategic inbound links. I continue to use AdWords even after 'The Black Hand' smackdown 2 weeks ago.

I know not what the GoogleHeads were thinking this last time around aka 'Austin Update' but I hope that things go back to normal soon.

[geoffreygag]

Tasting Google. The residual effects and learnings will be the following.

The lost positions were perhaps compensated with an ad budget that wasn't needed due to top position beforehand. GOOGLE = REVENUE

The new sites with top position will realize what google top placement can do for them in terms of increased levels of visitors and sales. Whenever the rearrangement takes place, all current top sites will then start placing ads GOOGLE = REVENUE

[Mel]

Its a beautiful theory Goeffry, but the problem with it is the assumption that anyone who loses a top ranking is going to compensate for it by purchasing Adwords, is not a proven scenario, and in my case I am making up for any ranking losses by optimizing more for high Inktomi rankings.

Question. Did you have top rankings before and are you now spending a large budget on Adwords each month?

[DrTandem1]

I'd be willing to wager that I could take two similar sites, with the only difference being marketing, and prove that search engines are largely irrelevant. One site would be only marketed with search engine rankings and the other would be with traditional marketing. I am confident that the traditional marketed site would do far better than the search engine marketed site.

I'd be so confident, that I would put "noindex, nofollow" in the meta tags of every page of the traditionally marketed site. I do agree that all other things being equal, a site that is listed in the top 10 would do better than a site that is in the 20's or worse. My point is, once you decide you need to pay for advertising, your dollars are better spent on things other than search engines.

[Mel]

I would be very interested in the results of such an experiment - provided that each site was given an indentical budget to spend.

I agree that if you take up prime time TV advertising spots you will get traffic, I just question if it is going to be cost effective.

Will you exclude all online forms of advertising or will your "advertising" budget include PPC, which is still search engine marketing?

[Krapulator]

I would wager that I could set up a third similar site and effectively utilise both types of advertising and beat both of the others.

I don't think you can argue that search engine rankings are entirely irrelevant for a business. You need to balance a good traditional advertising presence as well as effective online marketing (including maximisation the potential of the free search engine listings).

[DrTandem1]

I think PPC is a farce. The way the experiment would run is that you can spend whatever you want to become number one in any or all search engines and no other marketing would be allowed. The other site would spend a similar amount of money in any other medium other than the internet. I guarantee that the e-commerce site marketed other than the search engines would out perform the search engine ONLY site in revenue.

Also, the time involved must be the same. In other words, a specific date must be chosen to check the results. For example, starting March 1 to June 1. Both sites must have the same content, same prices, same design. The domain names can be up to each site's administrator.

By the way, there already is such a sit ethat has proven this. Maybe you have heard of it. Amazon.com.

[Mel]

Please educate me. How does Amazons existance as one of the largest and best optimized sites on the web PROVE that other advertising methods are best???

To me it proves just the opposite, especially thier affiliates program.

[Mel]

How does a budget like this sound to you?

I spend no money at all on SEO, but do spend ten hours optimizing the site and your spend no money at all on other forms of advertising but do spend ten hours on the phone or passing out handbills or whatever?

[southplatte]

Hello all,

I agree with some of the posts on here.

Hardly any businesses in my locale promote online, some only promote offline and they wonder why they don't have any payoff...though others promote only online, and not offline and have the same results.

If a business puts all assets (time, money etc) to focus only on search engines they will be broke very quickly and be short lived.

Same is true for the opposite using traditional marketing.

Target market identification and demographics of this target market are absolute key. There is always a push on SEO these days (for some years now actually) and I recently even asked for eval of that in my site. However, it is key to keep your dollars spread to a variety of mediums, and if Google doesn't work for you any more, replace it with something that does as it is not the only engine out there, and definitely not the only medium out there.

Take a look at the big players in the online world -- they do search engines, television, radio, print and much more. Their traffic, customer base and profits show this as well. If you are only worried about getting online sales, you can still promote extremely effective offline, sometimes cheaper than time/money spent on SEO for just one search engine.

[Mel]

I recently spoke to an online florist who has a very nice website and who is a household word. He spends no money on SEO but spends $9 million per year on billboards, bus advertising, radio and TV ads etc. He advertises his website address as that is his most economical method of taking orders and receiving payments, and he does a very good business, but at the end of the year he makes very little money, due to his high advertising expenses.

For 1% of his advertising budget I can guarantee him more traffic than he gets with his traditional campaign, but I cannot guarantee him the household name reputation.

IMO you need a bit of both to succeed, but you should look at the bottom line in determining which to use when.