Post-IPO SEO: Optimizing For A Public Google

Garrett · #1 (**permalink**) 05-03-2004, 10:49 AM

Google finally announced their IPO after months of rumor and suspense leaving the world hungry for any sort of news about Google they can get. But what will Google's status as a public company mean to the practice of optimizing your website for Google?

I started my investigations by reading John Battelle's take on the letter Larry Page wrote to potential shareholders, the "Owner's Manual." Battelle thinks the letter "borders on hubris," with its insistence that Google is best run by its founders rather than by the investors.

If Wall Street reacts to this hubris by not investing (not likely) we may (even less likely) see some decline in relevance and maintenance of the serps as Page and Brin spend their days in gin-soaked despair. This dark Google phase would not likely last long, but it would give Yahoo a brief but crucial period to drop Site Match and become the new leader in purely organic search results.

My biggest concern before reading Page's letter was that Google would lose their innovative culture. Page addressed these concerns in the Owner's Manual, saying, "we will not shy away from high-risk, high-reward projects because of short term earnings pressure."

And as far as future innovation is concerned, "do not be surprised if we place smaller bets in areas that seem very speculative or even strange."

It also appears unlikely that Google will ever accept pay for placement within their search results. Though Page didn't specifically state that they wouldn't, he did make some statements about the current state of their serps: "our search results are the best we know how to produce. They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them or for inclusion or more frequent updating."

Their dual class voting structure, "is common in the media business," which is interesting, especially in regards to Greg Jarboe's concept of search as media. Google views itself as a media company, at least in regards to retaining control of the decision making the way that The New York Times and the Washington Post do. This will also contribute to their insistence on purely algorithmic search results.

Fathom, an SEO moderator from WebProWorld, believes the IPO may have a positive effect on the SEO industry as a whole.

"Google is the Internet darling of most Internet professionals, but is generally a virtual unknown to the greater business population and by proxy so is SEO/SEM. On a daily basis I meet with people that would never use Google or care less about "search relevancy" as (for one example) MSN is immediately available the moment they open their browser. Hard to compete against 'being oblivious to technology trends and alternative marketing media.'"

Andy Beal agreed. "I can only see positive benefits for SEO companies, coming from the Google IPO. With a $2.7b war chest, Google will be able to significantly step-up their own marketing efforts and increase the awareness and importance of search among businesses. As these businesses enter the search marketing arena for the first time, they will need the assistance of reputable SEO/SEM companies to assist them in getting the most out of their campaign."

However, Fathom pointed out that "more visibility to SEO through Google IPO leads to more newly developed SEOs looking to cash in."

Newcomers seeking fast cash in the SEO industry may diminish trust, and may lead to some sort of professional SEO certification.

So what will Google's status as a public company mean to the optimizer?

We can assume an increased penalization of high-risk seo techniques. Google mentioned index spammers as one of the potential hazards of investing in their company. In an effort to protect their algorithmically pristine results Google may become increasingly sensitive to high-risk techniques.

Microsoft and Yahoo are two other potential investing hazards. Google cited them as their main competitors. I've said this before, and so has GoogleGuy, a Google employee - check out the competition and get listed there. I've heard anecdotal reports of Google accounting for 80 percent of a site's traffic (while comScore gives Google a more modest 35 percent). This may not continue as Yahoo and, eventually, Microsoft increase their share of the search market.

AOL too is liable to launch its own search engine, further dividing the search world. The increased attention on search that Google's IPO will create will drive more money into new search engines. Watch for more Wall Street driven search IPOs in the coming months.

What this means is that you need to watch the search market closely - there's no telling who's going to come up from the wings and become the next Google.

Battelle (who apparently read the entire S1) also mentioned that Google only has the exclusive license to PageRank until 2011. After that Stanford can license it out to anyone they please, which could eventually affect SEO.

Danny Sullivan charted Google's financial data, offering some interesting insights as well as a detailed, easy to read account of what Google revealed.

fathom · #2 (**permalink**) 05-04-2004, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garrett

I've heard anecdotal reports of Google accounting for 80 percent of a site's traffic (while comScore gives Google a more modest 35 percent). This may not continue as Yahoo and, eventually, Microsoft increase their share of the search market.

A slight mis-statement. Google while adjoined with Yahoo did account for (approximately) 80% of search queries as Yahoo, AOL, and Netscape all archived Google's search results... I believe it actually broke down like:

Google.com 40%
Yahoo.com 24%
AOL.com 11%
Netscape 4%

With the Yahoo separation from Google results immediately dropped that to around 55%.

So - the difference between previous 40% to 35% could be just propagation trends.

atimmins · #3 (**permalink**) 05-05-2004, 02:21 PM

I believe that what’s good for search is good for SEO. The Google IPO is good for search simply because they will have the above referenced “war chest” of cash to further invest in their search, as well as, other technologies.

As far as an influx of sub-standard optimizers flooding the market looking to cash in, I for one am not concerned. There are indeed these types of individuals doing the same thing today. Every industry is plagued by the sham artist looking for the fast cash, why would we be any different. My advice is do not focus on the competition, focus on your own efforts and work everyday to hone your skills. This philosophy can be applied to any individual in any industry, and just makes sense.

As for a SEO certification being required, or at the very least a highly sought commodity, I am again all for it. In my opinion it is long overdue and will only add credibility to the industry as a whole. The question is who the authority would be for a recognized standard of certification. Off the top of my head I would suggest CompTIA as they are an unbiased organization with nothing to gain other than the proceeds of the testing. As their A+ and Network+ certifications have faded in importance because just about anyone with a little computer knowledge can pass them, this could be a boost they need.

I personally became an MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer) several years ago. While this is a valuable certification because Microsoft builds the OS, they would certainly not be a disinterested and unbiased party when it comes to search for obvious reasons. SEMPO could be another contender, but as an organization they are still young and unproven, not to mention the HIGH cost of just becoming a member, which leave a sour taste in my mouth. But that’s a topic for another discussion, and to be honest I have not visited their site for some time.

Why do I tend to write posts that are almost as long as the original article? I guess I just like to read my own thoughts! But, seriously I would to hear the opinions of others in the industry.

Mel · #4 (**permalink**) 05-05-2004, 11:18 PM

My take is that Google will continue to be run in the same manner by the same managment team, an outcome that Google have taken pains to ensure.

It should be noted that Google have taken the very unusual step of selling shares via internet auction, which will IMO result in very few large blocks of shares ending up in the hands of mutual funds and other large investors and more in the hands of the man on the street. This, together with the fact that there will be two share classes and not profit predictions, should insure that Google will continue to be run in the same old way, with few if any effects as a result of the IPO.

rev606 · #5 (**permalink**) 05-06-2004, 06:42 PM

Send me a $100 and I'll give you a SEO certification.

Quote:

Originally Posted by atimmins

I believe that what’s good for search is good for SEO. The Google IPO is good for search simply because they will have the above referenced “war chest” of cash to further invest in their search, as well as, other technologies.

As far as an influx of sub-standard optimizers flooding the market looking to cash in, I for one am not concerned. There are indeed these types of individuals doing the same thing today. Every industry is plagued by the sham artist looking for the fast cash, why would we be any different. My advice is do not focus on the competition, focus on your own efforts and work everyday to hone your skills. This philosophy can be applied to any individual in any industry, and just makes sense.

As for a SEO certification being required, or at the very least a highly sought commodity, I am again all for it. In my opinion it is long overdue and will only add credibility to the industry as a whole. The question is who the authority would be for a recognized standard of certification. Off the top of my head I would suggest CompTIA as they are an unbiased organization with nothing to gain other than the proceeds of the testing. As their A+ and Network+ certifications have faded in importance because just about anyone with a little computer knowledge can pass them, this could be a boost they need.

I personally became an MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer) several years ago. While this is a valuable certification because Microsoft builds the OS, they would certainly not be a disinterested and unbiased party when it comes to search for obvious reasons. SEMPO could be another contender, but as an organization they are still young and unproven, not to mention the HIGH cost of just becoming a member, which leave a sour taste in my mouth. But that’s a topic for another discussion, and to be honest I have not visited their site for some time.

Why do I tend to write posts that are almost as long as the original article? I guess I just like to read my own thoughts! But, seriously I would to hear the opinions of others in the industry.

TrafficProducer · #6 (**permalink**) 05-06-2004, 07:19 PM

Google... may fail

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=18487

TrafficProducer · #7 (**permalink**) 05-06-2004, 07:24 PM

More Google IPO info..

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...059/d1012g.htm

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...059/dex991.htm

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/sto...MPLATE=DEFAULT

Of course a Google search
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourc...8&q=IPO+google
_________________

Dave Hawley · #8 (**permalink**) 05-07-2004, 12:37 AM

About the only certainty when a BIG .com like Google floats is facts and rumours will blend.

Quote:

It also appears unlikely that Google will ever accept pay for placement within their search results.

This has been THE mistake made by all other SE, greed! Google have an excellent track record of not doing what all other similar companies do for no other reason than "hey, if they are doing it we should". They are also one of the very few that can claim this. Sure, many big businesses claim they are "leaders", but most of these cannot help following the Lemmings for fear of being wrong.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode