Google helping Bill Gates?

[janeth]

Is Google going to help Bill Gates take over? As a matter of fact I think Googles biggest problem right now is Google.
They hire Eric Schmidt who has a record of 0 out of 2 against Microsoft. I guess there thinking is sooner or later he should win.
Google was sitting in the best seat for the fight. I think it was like 80% of all searches online where done on Google. A lot of people loved Google and was not about to leave. I was one of those people. But now a search on Goolge a lot of times returns information that has nothing to do with what your looking for.
I'm not the only one I have read post after post all over the internet about people having the same problem. I also herd that the NY Times was looking into it now so maybe Google can get a front page story about how crazy there searches are right now.
Yahoo is no better because there just a copy of Google.
I think Google may loose this fight before it ever starts if they stay on the path there on.

[cbp]

I read that NY Times story - its all about the spam when searching for gift baskets. It was a good bit of PR on behalf of the section of industry who are not happy with the way Google rank a particular very large network of gift basket sites.

New York Times story here (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/20/technology/circuits/20goog.html?ex=1069995600&en=f8b2225a230de953&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

Given what I know about some things going on in that industry - this was an organised PR effort by the disgruntled webmasters - they did well.

Here is some insight into an explanation for the current alleged problems with Google search results:
(from: http://searchenginejournal.blogspot.com/ )


Google recently introduced a new keyword phrase filter during its most recent update. Some phrases were unchanged, but many highly optimized and highly competitive phrases were drastically altered. Some webmasters saw their sites drop from top listings to not being in the top 1,000 sites. Unlike other filters, this spam peanalty does not affect a page or sites overall perceived value. The end effect is lowered rankings for various specific searches for that page.

If you have a couple commonly paired words on your website such as "search" and "marketing", the new filter will check to see how the words are placed on your page (and possibly in incoming links). The new algorithm is looking for more naturally existing context to prevent search engine optimized websites from dominating search results. Essentially the goal of this filter is to get webmasters to adjust their content to be written for the users and not search engines. The problem with this logic is that good SEO typically falls in line with good site and page structure.

The filter is selective in that it is only enabled for some terms on certain searches. The filter can be overridden by placing a - character for the terms. If you search for search marketing you will find Commision Junction where my site was once listed. If you search for search-marketing you will see my site. If you search for search marketing info, you will see that the filter in not enabled for that search.

Off the start the filter was set rather corse, but it appears to be shifting more in line with reality. Some of the decent optimized sites are appearing back in the place where spam was just filling the results. Just this morning I saw a clients website pop up for two seperate phrases he was tripped for.

This filter marks the first time in search engine history where webmasters have not been able to reengineer exactly what the search engine did. Currently I do not recommend making any chages while Google is still fine tuning the filter.


Food for thought...

CBP

[AimeeC]

If this really is the case, and Google's going down, this is just sad. As a surfer, I favor Google over the others. As a website owner, it seems to be the quickest way to get indexed (if that's the right word). I hope they'll realize what they're doing and come to their senses, eh?

[rlrouse]

Google is constantly tweaking the algorithm in an attempt to keep the spammers at bay. The problem is they sometimes "turn the knob" a little too far and take out tons of innocent sites along with the black hats.

The good news is they usually recognize the problem and fix it with the next update. The bad news is they seem to be making these mistakes more often than in the past.

Let's face it, as long as Google ranks pages using a mathematical algorithm, the SERPS will never be perfect and we can't expect them to be. Users will accept good quality SERPS just as readily as they'll accept perfect SERPS.

But when they recognize a noticeable drop in quality they'll be unhappy. For a few years now Google has set the standard of quality by which all search engines are judged. To fail to meet their own high standards, especially at this particular point in time, is a mistake IMO.

With an IPO looming, it sees to me their interests would be better served if they refrained from rocking the boat so much after getting so close to the shore (the IPO).

[janeth]

Hi cbp,
I know where to find the NY Times story Guess you found that with out the help of Google. lol
I'm going to read it now.



I love rlrouse

"better served if they refrained from rocking the boat so much after getting so close to the shore"

That was great.

[alpine]

Re: New York Times story (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/20/technology/circuits/20goog.html?ex=1069995600&en=f8b2225a230de953&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

I read the above article and it is unfortunate that the businesses who enjoyed great profits with the old algorithm, have fallen prey to the spammers.

However they are in the interim "Ms. Wiesel of Cesta Gift Baskets" is working with pay per click.

If they were smart enough to get to the top the first time, it will only be a matter of time that they will figure out how to get to the top again with the new algorithm.

Hopefully it will be soon enough for the retail boom this holiday season.

If she has the budget she may try a reseller program like CJ or LinkShare

[AlanMCSD]

Hey, I'm not partial, I hate them all. Nuff said.

[outkast]

Google was the place to go for so long, we forgot about all of the other guys. Alpine, I think that is the problem. They wont leave things alone long enough for us to figure it out again. So we just use high quality content and a clean interface and hope for the best. At least for now...

[Sualdam]

But now a search on Google a lot of times returns information that has nothing to do with what your looking for

But is that Microsoft's fault?

You look at some site review requests on these forums and find people with a couple of thousand (well, I saw that many once) keywords covering everything in World History from Adam & Eve onwards, even thought they are just trying to sell cute rocks or real estate.

Is it any wonder that search engines generally are in a mess?

As for it just being Google, it's the age old problem: abuse the most popular vendor. So that's what the scammers do.

Personally, I can realise rubbish when I see it (if I search for, say, a video camera and ANYTHING with Kelcoo in it appears it is ignored).

Google still works for me if I want anything.

[joseph909]

Good article...but I have a few comments from my experience, specifically with the gift basket industry.

Cesta has held top positions for "gift basket" and "gift baskets" for as long as I can remember. I know because they are my competition.

They play the same SEO game as everyone else and if they have not sold a fruit basket in two months it is because of their website, products or something else, not lack of rankings. They trade links, optimize their site and all the rest-they have a right to do that to keep their business on top.

I have not heard of "Gift Services" out of Seattle so I am not sure if they are Drop shipper or spammer who is creating hundreds of subdomains or mirror sites meant to deceive.

Personally, I don't think it is unethical for a person to start a business by selecting a drop shipper and creating an online store that features that wholesalers products. It doesn't matter if 1 person or 100 people decide to use the same drop shipper/wholesaler. Its just the way capitalism works. How many brick and mortar retailers sell the same products? Wal-mart, Target, Kmart...they all have essentially the same products at varying prices with occasional private label brands.

Do I have a problem with Spammers creating 100's of subdomains with the intent of tricking the engines and deceiving people - YES.

Doug of Ihelpyouservices forum frequently says if you are doing something to decive or trick the search engines, then don't do it. I totally agree with that and think its all about intention.

I didn't like the way Cesta was portrayed in this article, like the victim who has no rankings at all...quite the contrary. They play the same game as everyone else and just because you don't make every single gift basket does not mean your not a legitimate business.

If you are having a problem with sales, revamp you website and products.

Thank you for the discussion of this topic...I had to get that off my chest.

[janeth]

I understand the problem with the Gift Basket industry. But it goes a lot further then that. We lost some key words for our home page and gained some key words that have nothing to do with what we do.

I also tried the - in the key word search and it did not work. We where ranked for key worsd like "custom web site design" and kno are no where to be found.

So it goes a lot further than just gift baskets.

Also Google is still making changes so something must have gone wrong for them to have not stoped.

[maniactive]

joseph909, I have to agree with you. . .

How can a business owner can say to a newspaper reporter, "We haven't sold one product in two months. . .and it's all Google's fault!!!"

... and keep a straight face?
... or not have the reporter start to giggle?
... or stay in business at all, for that matter?

This business owner must have Google-y eyes, because she sure isn't seeing things straight!

Personally, I know nothing of the gift basket market, other than I tend to buy them for holidays and presents, and this must be the time of year where you guys put extra effort into promotions and marketing.

Google might be one way to find a gift basket vendor, but cheez. . .this is the time of year when you guys

a. send me catalogs
b. send me postcards
c. send me coupons
d. advertise in local papers

Well, you get my point. The list goes on and on.

Bottom line: if you want to pout that your business is in ruins because of something Google did. . .I think you need to look in the mirror and say,

"Google is not to blame. I need to better diversify my marketing and promotional activities so that if one advertising venue yields less of a return, I have other areas covered."

[janeth]

Hi maniactive,

I do not blame Google for changing things around it is there engine and there right. But I think it was a stupid thing to do when they where doing such a good job. I have been trying different search engines because I'm having a hard time finding things on Google.

If you find a site you like come back an hour later that site is gone and no where to be found.

Yes I should have book marked it and next time I will but when I do not get good results I look some where else.

I was really hoping google could win against Bill Gates but instead it looks like they decided to roll over and play dead and hope he goes away.

[joseph909]

janeth-

You're right. Their are a lot of changes going on with google right now. All we can do is be patient. Google_Guy said in another forum that they still have to add some data into their database(duh). Their are some crazy results coming in though - figures right before christmas - the same thing happened last year. It drives us all nuts.


maniactive-

You said, ""Google might be one way to find a gift basket vendor, but cheez. . .this is the time of year when you guys

a. send me catalogs
b. send me postcards
c. send me coupons
d. advertise in local papers"

You bring up some good ways to be creative to incease business. These are the types of marketing all businesses need to do to increase sales, in addition to SEO.


joseph

[janeth]

Hi Joseph,

I know I saw something from Google guy I think on Monday saying there was another day left but that was Monday did you see something from him today?

[maniactive]

But I think it was a stupid thing to do when they where doing such a good job. I have been trying different search engines because I'm having a hard time finding things on Google.

Ahhh, the only thing constant is change. Google HAS to change to remain relevant with changing markets, levels of user sophistication, increasing numbers of sites, etc. If they didn't, they might not be -- as Janeth put it -- "doing such a good job".

Like Janeth said, there is lots of competition, including a whopper like Microsoft. If Google didn't try new logrhythms, new techniques, etc., they'd lose their popularity and relevancy more quickly than if they sat back, content to rest on their past successes.

And a couple of weeks (maybe even months!) of hiccups and a few sneezing fits until Google gets down with its new 'rhythm does not mean that Google has a terminal, long-term disease!

If I was a business owner who had a bad case of the Google-drop (I didn't, so maybe I have no talking room): instead of endlessly tinkering with my site's code and getting more inbound links with the objective of trying to get Google to recognize me again within the next few days -- I'd stop obsessing!

I'd put my focus where it needs to be: getting & retaining customers. So, I'd re-deploy my marketing and promo plan to get a better return.

And I'd continue to put up attractive, well-written content that attracts people, as well as the engines!

Google isn't the only game in town; but it's the biggest. And because they are so huge, their hiccups may sound like the sky is falling.

It isn't.

Life goes on, even if Google crumbles, or another company finds a better method of searching.

It's called "progress". Sometimes, it's painful.

[pmrussell893]

when one avenue fails you need to go somewhere else.

I was placed #9 under personalized magnets in google but have dropped to well (i dont even know).

But i have all my avenues covered so I have put more effort in my next biggest traffic avenues.
I have placed extra ads. Gone to the newspapers and placed more prominent ads in my rental booths.

You must have more than one way of getting customers and making sales to be succesful in any business. On or offline.

[rlrouse]

If Google didn't try new logrhythms, new techniques, etc., they'd lose their popularity and relevancy more quickly than if they sat back, content to rest on their past successes.

Agreed. The question lies in the wisdom of the timing. While a major change may not hurt them long-term in the search engine wars, limping into this spring's IPO can only hurt them on Wall Street, bolstering the chances of a Microsoft takeover or some other big change.

Google had little to gain by making such a major algorithm change resulting in bad press at this time, but much to lose IMO.

[Ralyn]

maniactive-

You said, ""Google might be one way to find a gift basket vendor, but cheez. . .this is the time of year when you guys

a. send me catalogs
b. send me postcards
c. send me coupons
d. advertise in local papers"

You bring up some good ways to be creative to incease business. These are the types of marketing all businesses need to do to increase sales, in addition to SEO.


The internet is great and granted I'm still pretty new at it, but statistics show that the old methods of marketing bring in more results for most businesses. I'm going to school for marketing and one of the first things taught is that you don't quit doing something that works for something newer, but use a combination. Local sales are what started me and even though I'm working on going pretty much fully internet I won't dicontinue the old methods cuz they've more than proven to work.

[maniactive]

rlrouse:
Bad press? Any press is good press! (Grins...)

pmrussell893:

I think we should all invest in refrigerator magnets as a form of brilliant advertising that gets repeat customers! I have a few on my refrigerator. . .called two last week.

Who needs google when we can use refrigerator magnets!

[rlrouse]

Bad press? Any press is good press! (Grins...)

I doubt if the shareholders of Martha Stewart Omnimedia would agree.

[Ralyn]

Business card magnets are a great way to advertise and have been very successful for me.

[maniactive]

AOL has around 25 million US subscribers. Microsoft plans to include search capabilities in its newest version of Windows, used by more than 90 percent of consumer PCs.

These are the big competitive challenges that Google faces. And that's why it must make changes NOW.

"If not NOW, when? If not Google...."

The alternative non-headline would be: "Google has done nothing to improve its product for over a year, waiting in fear of changing anything in anticipation of an IPO." That's not exactly forward-thinking.

As for bad press: Go to google.com/news and search for "Martha Stewart". You'll get a plethora of negative articles! (Poor widdle Martha!)

Now search for "Google". The preponderance of articles are informational or positive. A few negative are to be expected, given Google's enormity. (Think Google.com/news might be biased, given the source? Fine. Try Altavista's news search, or eLibrary. Same story.)

People have been following "the Google dance" story for months now. That's the biggest quasi-negative spin. But stories on "how my business was ruined by Google" only make me furrow my brow in wonderment at businesses who put all their eggs in the Google-basket. A story like the gift basket one doesn't make me enraged at Google for daring to try to make their product better. It makes me question the sanity of the business people who take the Google-or-nothing approach.

Competition is good. It makes for better products, better services, lower costs. It makes everyone less complacent. And it might make Google and other engines more relevant in the long run.

As for me, all this makes me want to invest in refrigerator magnets! Or at least, run to the refrigerator and GET a beer!

Happy Friday, y'all....

[janeth]

I have always said that you should have a well rounded marketing in place.

My point is the same as rlrouse read around at how many people are leaving Google because they feel this will hurt Google bad enough that they would rather put there money else where.

I'm sure some of them will come back but not those that find something else that works just as good.

[rlrouse]

Google has indeed enjoyed good press, and rightly so, which is why it's so puzzling why they chose this particular time to reverse the momentum.

The "threats" that you refer to won't materialize until well after the IPO is over and done with.
Staying at the top of the hill is always a challenge. Unnecessarily placing yourself in a position to be knocked off is unwise IMO.

[janeth]

I do not think they did it on purpose but I do think they would have been better off trying there new filter on a couple key words at a time instead of all the major key words first.

[godzilla]

Microsoft plans to include search capabilities in its newest version of Windows, used by more than 90 percent of consumer PCs.

First of all let us clear the Windows case: Longhorn is at least 2 years a way and will include totaly new and redesigned technology which may as well be the biggest failliure of Microsoft of all times. Therefore, this part of Microsoft-Google war has not started yet.

As far as Algorithms are conserned, personally I have been doing lately alot of optimisation programming(C++, Java etc.).From my experience and given the size of the Google and amount of hits it receives, there is no way that any, even the best, programmer& matematician can calculate a global impact on the search engine. Also remeber that the size of the databse is constantly increasing and more efficiency is required to manage this amount of records (at 27 october Google counted 3 307 998 701 pages). Just think of the probability, one key word is enough to make all of us unhappy and to make few other thousands happy. This simply means that Googles changes affect everyone and it is unfortunate that the testing done by Google is obviously no sufficient for their needs.

I agree that Google's timing is never right. But just think on how many companies are out there that do not know what good timing means???

I think that google hasn't lost it yet(even if my page has totaly dissapeared from google, hopefully temporarily) and they will be able to repare all the mistakes they've made.

B.T.W. I have noticed that Google have reduced the crawling frequency, before I hade one crawler pass every week, now for three weeks nothing. Any one has any news on this ???

[joseph909]

Godzilla-
I am still seeing the googlebot daily but I have heard from some of my friends that they have seen a big drop-off as well. I am not sure why the decrease in frequency and why its only happening to some sites and not others.

You are totally right on about google not being able to manage the plethora of sites they have in thei database. Its no wonder it takes forever for them to catch the spammers. I don't think they have as much control over their database as people give them credit for...but who knows, maybe they do.

janeth-

Its TERRIBLE timing on google's part. Right before Xmas? Just imagine, you start a site in early 2003, do all the optimization, trade some relevant links, doing everything right and you get into the top 10 and you start moving up and thinking you are goingto have a good xmas - the BAM! Algo change. I do feel bad for those people but as maniactive and you have mentioned, old-school marketing needs to be commingled in with your SEO.

Are people going to leave google for MSN for because of this algo change? Maybe. Most users dont know a thing about what is going on with google's algo change and probably notice very little change, if any, with the new results. I think the only people who are getting so upse are webmasters who lost their positions - to be quite honest - google doesn;t care about webmasters. Look at what some of them have done to decieve and trick their algo.

With this said, I am seeing some pretty hairy results...I saw a number 13, 14 and 15 position for a competitive gift basket phrase going to the same bizrate.com gift and flower page. And thats just the start of it. Pretty bad...but I don't think its over...we'll see things settling down in another two weeks or so. That's my guess.

[speakak]

Hi Janeth lost your last message but I think I know what you was asking about, will answer later.

I was going to stay off the board but wanted to see what they were saying BIG B.G.

I didn't realize google was having a problem, so as I was lstening to all the posts I clicked over and tried my keywords and I LOVE IT.
At a quick glance it looks like to me they filtered out all the old obsolete stuff. But I'm probably.

[chiff]

Hi all,

Yes... Google is still wacky - normally they take three maybe four days and then settle back in - this time they started showing up in our stats on the 18th and today - the 21st made their 4th visit - the normal is 3.

We also lost pages that normally appear on the fist page - they're just not showing up at all - even in a site specific search - so - yes, something is going on - something is wacky and it IS right before the holidays when we depend on high traffic...

but with Google providing the bulk of referrals between their own search and feeding Yahoo... all we can do is sigh and hope they get their act together... soon.

One day the scammers will stop thinking of stupid tricks that make them a quick buck and then don't work anymore. It forces the search engines to revise everything to eliminate the bums --- the good sites get caught in the same net and kicked out too.

But I might as well wish for spam to stop and popups to disappear!

It is what it is...

chiff

[rlrouse]

I have noticed that Google have reduced the crawling frequency, before I hade one crawler pass every week, now for three weeks nothing. Any one has any news on this ???

What is the PageRank of your homepage?

[janeth]

What is the deal with incoming links? Mine are changing by the hour and have been doing so for about the last two or three days. I go from 125 to 45 and it seems to change about every hour.

I have seen Google on my site every day.

[acornwebworks]

Well I guess this explains my slowdown in sales :-) I had simply attributed it to the time of year, which is always really slow for me. But when I check the top 20 searches (from Google) in my log files, I find that I now only show up for two of them (albeit in the top position). Maybe I should start bitching about Google?

On the other hand, I have benefited so many times from the Google Dance that I reckon it's time for me to pay the piper. Do I like it? Of course not. And I definitely agree that the results that are now showing up are often pretty bizarre and not good search results. Heck, when a website where you can sell your soul - honest to gosh, that's what it says - consistently appears high in results for searches focusing on selling your home FSBO, and my Sell Your Home FSBO site doesn't (nor do any of the other top FSBO sites), you know there's something screwy.

But do I think Google was wrong to try a new algorithm? Not at all.

And why should Google trying to improve be set aside until after a [supposed] IPO in the spring? This is November, right? It's still fall, right? We still have winter to go through, right? If Google's goal is to develop a better way of keyword search results, then better to get the bugs out now and, I'm sure they are assuming, have a real winner than waiting till - when? Certainly not closer to IPO. But when thereafter? What's going on now would likely result in a big selloff. Is that good? Didn't think so. So how long should Google wait until making a change? ( I really like Maniactive's "The alternative non-headline would be: 'Google has done nothing to improve its product for over a year, waiting in fear of changing anything in anticipation of an IPO.'")

Google is rightfully always trying new things improve their service, so some sites will always suffer and some people will always complain. Nothing is perfect. Google, at least, tries to respond to *significant* problems that result from unexpected consequences of their changes. But they certainly aren't going to change things *simply* because some site that was #1 can't be found anymore. Heck, that #1 site might have been crap...and we have ALL found examples of that.

Someone in this thread asked why Google couldn't try the "new filter on a couple of key words at a time instead of all the major key words first.?" Wanna bet that most folks thinking that way are really meaning "why couldn't they have tried it on the 'major keywords' THAT AREN'T MINE"????

Again to quote Maniactive (my new hero :-) "It's called "progress". Sometimes, it's painful."

[janeth]

My thought was more like you said selling houses would have been a good one to play with in the winter time and gifts in January.

That was what I was saying. Yes I wish they had messed with everyone else and left me alone.

Did it hurt my business, not really as long as I'm not looking for infomation about something on Google right now.

I lost some key words but as soon as they figure out what there doing and stop long enough I will figure it out and we will get our ranking back.

I'm not stupid I know you have to make changes to stay in business but I'm smart enough to make sure it is going to work before I try it on a major part of my business and if I'm not sure trying it on a small enough part so as not to get in the news.

I'm sure Google hs made Bill's Christmas this year.

[acornwebworks]

Ah, but like someone said...

“It was a good bit of PR on behalf of the section of industry who are not happy with the way Google rank a particular very large network of gift basket sites. ...Given what I know about some things going on in that industry - this was an organised PR effort by the disgruntled webmasters - they did well.”

So it’s not what Google did that *might* be making Bill happy...it’s the press given to some unhappy folks. One wonders where the NY Times got the complaints from :-)

But I still stand by my thoughts about timing. With very few exceptions, we’re all small potatoes. No, we are infinitesimal potatoes. And I doubt all but a very few of us are going to be offering IPOs any time in the near (or even distant) future.

Not only that, but we are going to be making decisions based on things like our wants, needs and expectations from Google as it relates to our businesses. Google, of course, is going to be making business decisions based on its own needs. Because of this, we are often going to make different decisions than Google. And then want Google to make the same decision as ours. And be bugged because they don’t.

The strategy of developing an IPO is quite fascinating. For all we know, this could be part of their strategy. And just because we “infinitesimal potatoes” don’t understand it or aren’t aware of it doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.

P.S. There’s always this - maybe our chosen fields are such that *WE* would have been the keyword guinea pigs anyway :-)

[janeth]

now we come up #2 for "custom web designs"

The word designs is not used and where on my site and I'm not sure but do not think it is in any links coming to the site that I know of.

I was #2 to for "custom web design" I'm no where to be found for that word now.

I think if I could understand what there doing it would help me a lot.

[godzilla]

I have noticed that Google have reduced the crawling frequency, before I hade one crawler pass every week, now for three weeks nothing. Any one has any news on this ???

What is the PageRank of your homepage?
Well, the thing is that my web page has moved. And I've noticed one pass since I have moved and that's it. Also, at the moment I'm totaly redesigning my web page but from crawler point of view it should be all the same. Depending on keyword entered; you can get my old web page as second/third rank for "Godzilla Concordia". The weird thing is that this site is now almost down(I'm removing gradually all the links and files) and I'm still on the top.
I do not know if google has comparing capability, but it seems to me that when I moved the new site was somehow ignored: it has appeared on google as first rank for a day and then dissapeared at all. Honestly, I'm not searching the top rank and the initial design of the site was to provide a particular service(free), but I find it just very interesting: to check the ranking and to optimize the web page accordingly.

[rlrouse]

Did you 301 redirect the old pages to the new ones?

[eggman]

What's interesting about this topic is that Google plans on going public Q1-Q2 2004...at around 15 Billion. Albeit interesting Microsoft likes the taste of Google, it may be too large of a bite for them to chew without putting something substantial on the trading block.

On the other hand, Google has changed the SE game. Whether Google does itself in or Microsoft consumes it I am looking forward to the next "better mouse trap". It's getting better and will continue to do so as long as there an adequate level of competition online, we can make a choice and a company willing to make it so.

[janeth]

Hi Ego Man,
That is what I'm scared of is that we end up with no competition.

I would feel a lot better if there where three or four companies the size of Google and not just one.

[eggman]

I am right there with you! As it is right now I think Google has far too much reach, but until somebody (you? me?) builds something better than this. Google is getting it right, but there are absolutely no barriers to entry.

From a business standpoint it's a very smart move on the part of Microsoft, but if everybody keeps using Google, MSN, MSG, Ms. Google (insert slight giggle) then it's our own fault. It's pure competition while we pick what we want. Problem being is that will only happen is Microsoft goofs up Google. It's somewhat our own demise for doing what we do (as well as not do) if we continue to use it.

It's a big internet, and who knows, maybe there is another 14 year old kid with the next bright idea for finding info online - or better yet - heaps of 'em! I am looking forward to whatever happens. Google wasn't made blindly, isn't continued to evolve without learning from the mistakes of others and the next monolithic behemoth(s) won't come that way either.

It may be complete fantasy, but I still see the net as very young. In the fashion of "crawl (no pun intended), walk, run" we are still in infancy and there is much more to come. It's both scary and exciting at the same time, but there will never be any one company/site/entity that dictates what we do. That being said I refer back to my initial mention of a better mouse trap since that's the one (or many) we will use...because we already do.

[janeth]

Hi Ego Man,
What I would hate to see is Google mess around and get taken over by Microsoft because of stupid things like there doing now.

Then trying to compete would become a lot harder.

Although I'm sure things like this make Yahoo think about how much longer they want to keep using Google.

But how big is Yahoo did they hurt themselves by tieing in with Google like they did instead of trying to go it alone?

[eggman]

What I would hate to see is Google mess around and get taken over by Microsoft because of stupid things like there doing now.

I totally agree.



Although I'm sure things like this make Yahoo think about how much longer they want to keep using Google.

Personally I hope they don't. I sometimes think engines using each other's results (at least in part) diminishes what we get as users. I also think for a company the size of Microsoft (specifically MSN) to do that is almost that of an armature. Thankfully they have their own results now (or should).



But how big is Yahoo did they hurt themselves by tying in with Google like they did instead of trying to go it alone?
Exactly. To add to this they have made some very unpopular choices (read as porn) to couple with using Google.

Overall, what's the most scary thought to me isn't so much that Microsoft buys Google - something better will emerge if there is the need. What troubles me more that we don't get different info when everybody uses the same results. Microsoft is notorious (in my opinion) for using consumption to grow. If they gobble Google it would be very typical, but I still look forward and see great things to come.

[janeth]

I think that is what bothers me the most is that there is no reason for me to even look at Yahoo if I'm #1 on Google I'm either #1, or 2 on Yahoo.

I have not used them in so long because it is easer to just go to Google.

When Google went crazy I knew it was crazy on Yahoo also.

[eggman]

Now that's no joke. The positive side to that, though, is for the web master while the user is left in the cold.

Either way, using the same results can seriously break an SEP campaign...if you gain you really gain; you drop you really drop. This new thing Google has done has been a great example of how that works out.

[janeth]

Hi Ego Man
Yes what Google just did really opened my eyes to how bad it has gotten now.

[cbp]

Yes what Google just did really opened my eyes to how bad it has gotten now.


I do not think they are bad (at least not deliberatly) - all they are trying to do is to keep the results relevant and keep spammers at bay .... unfortunatly there is "collateral damage" which is causing a lot of pain.

If there is a demise of Google and another engine comes up (eg Micorsoft is one option; I use Teoma more often now) - the spammers will then target the algorithm used by whichever search engine is number one (remember how they worked out Altavista before Google came along). Any new market leader will have exactly the same problem that Google has now.

I have been a supporter of the approach that Google has taken with spam (ie automated detection and penalties via the algorithm) - BUT, am starting to wonder now ... maybe they should consider employing a large team to manually deal with the spam (but then that goes against there principle of not manually manipulating the results.

CBP

[janeth]

I'm sorry cbp,

When I said bad I meant how much control they have gotten.

I think we need at lest four search engines there size that get there on results and each one doing it different.

[acornwebworks]

It just crossed my mind that maybe we are such an unrepresentative group that what we think about all this Google stuff doesn't matter.

Consider these points:

1) Most, if not all, of us posting are far more knowledgable, experienced search engine users than the average user. What is unsatisfactory to us is normal to folks who don't know any better.

Heck, I can give a URL to someone and easily more than half of them will put it in the Search box, rather than on the Address line. And many, many people don't even know there is more than one search engine. I teach classes in searching and it's never made any difference whether I was teaching at the University level or at a non-profit for low-income people...folks are pretty ignorant when it comes to searching. They often only know what pops up first on their computer or what someone else has taught them, regardless of quality.

2) We are prejudiced. More than simply good results, we want OUR sites to show up at the top of those search results. Wasn't that really the point of that Times article? So we are going to filter our thinking through that 'me first' desire. I'm not saying it's a bad desire, just that it is a filter.

3) We are straying from our fields of expertise. As I have written before, most of us don't know the first thing about developing IPOs, and yet we are making pronouncements about Google's decision-making based, at least in part, on their upcoming IPO and how bad this latest 'enhancement' is for it. But it seems to me that what we are really saying is "we're unhappy with what you are doing because it's negatively affecting what we are doing" and at least subconsciously trying to use the IPO argument to make Google pay more attention to us. Heck, if putting out only high quality products and working all the kinks out before going public were a factor in making tons of money, Microsoft would have gone out of business years ago!

I'm not saying the discussion isn't healthy, just that maybe it's skewed by who we are as a group.

[janeth]

Hi awall19,
Both of those where great

[awall19]

I am shocked! A moderator who likes what I have to say...the articles are free to copy if people would like.

thanks for the compliment :)

[acornwebworks]

Hi awall19,
Both of those where great

I'll bite. What did awall19 say in this thread? I'd like to read it :-)

MOD note: awall19 posted the same message here and here (http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=8780), indicating that the latter thread was a better fit for the post. I therefore deleted this one but before realizing there had been a reply.

[withouraloha]

While of course a company should diversify, and of course you will not (should not) go out of business by loosing ranking in google, this google mix-up hurts the consumer.

First of all, a consumer can not find what they are looking for. Especially in all the ecommerce areas.

Secondly, price. Because of our being dropped altogether from all listings where we used to maintain a #1 listing for the past 2 years, we have needed to increase our advertising budget by 600% to maintain our sales volume. This is not sales growth, like one would expect during the holiday season, this is only to MAINTAIN our current sales volume. Without the google listings, we will shell out many many thousands of extra dollars this Christmas season, and of course it will have to be reflected in our prices. This hurts the consumer. Period.

[janeth]

I just hope Google sees they messed up and changes everything back.

[DrTandem1]

What if Google really started tweaking their formulas beyond all reason and we entered a Bizzaro World of search engine? My point being, we have no direct control over Google. Sure, it would be nice to understand what they are doing, however it is proprietary and ever changing. Many of you have touched on how I feel and that is to build a clean site focussed on the visitor.

That being said, if Google starts returning irrelevant results or simply directories on a steady basis, Google itself will become irrelevant. Which brings me to another point, Google, or any search engine for that matter, is not the center of the marketing universe. Personally, my website is search engine friendly, but I rarely look to see how it's doing in the rankings. Why? Because the vast majority of my business does not come from the internet. It comes from referrals by previous clients.

I think many spend too much time on being ranked highly and not enough time on their site's content or visitor performance. Of course, there are others who do absolutely nothing to increase their rankings and almost seem to hide their sites with their practices. You want the site to be found, but I think building a site that serves the visitor is the key.

You would think that Google's goal is to find such sites. The "Google Dance" is probably due in a large part to the reaction of webmasters trying to adjust sites to stay on top. While we sit here ranting about Google, I'm sure Google's engineers are ranting about us.

[janeth]

To make a web site work it has to have good content easy to navigate and be able to let the customer know what it is about in a matter of seconds. But that does no good unless you have customers. The search engines are the best way by far to get visitors to the web site because it is free and can bring in a lot of visitors per day and every visitor is finding you by searching on the key words that have to do with your product or service.
It is not the only way and should not be the only way you go about getting customers. There are many many ways to get visitors to your web site.
Most of the people that spend the time to work on there website and try to get a top ranking with the search engines have also spent the time to make sure they have a nice looking site.
I agree it should go hand in hand but I would also say that if you can get thousands of visitors a day for free then you should go for it but make sure your site is ready to handle them when they get there.

[minstrel]

The "Google Dance" is probably due in a large part to the reaction of webmasters trying to adjust sites to stay on top. While we sit here ranting about Google, I'm sure Google's engineers are ranting about us.
exactly... it's really just about Google reacting to the attempts of webmasters to manipulate them into pushing their sites to the top of the heap

[janeth]

I agree but I think Google went to far this time.

It looks like the only way to get ranked for your key words now is do not use them.

[janeth]

I think once Google figures out what there doing most of the sites you saw in the top the first time will be back.

If Google does not put them back they will work the system and get there on there own.