March 16, 2009 Archives

Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.

Continue reading "Daily Search Forum Recap: March 16, 2009"

Googlers know they have to be very careful what they say in public forums when I am watching. In a recent Google Webmasters Help thread, Googler, JohnMu replied to a thread, and I am going to beat him up for his response. Before I do so, let me say that John has provided so much value to the forums and to webmasters, that I admit, he does not deserve this, but I know Googlers have thick skin.

The Google Webmasters Help thread was complaining that Google was ranking his site well for a keyword phrase, but the page Google returned was not the page that best suits the searcher for that query. He asked why doesn't Google show the page that is the best result from his site for that query.

From the looks of it, there are some SEO issues with the site that might explain why this is happening. But John's response is what I felt was a bit non-Google like. Let me quote him:

As long as users are coming to your site because they're finding it in the search results, I wouldn't worry about the actual page they're landing on. If they come in and read your content (regardless of whether it's the page where just one post is or if it's your homepage), I think you've pretty much won the first part. They made it to your site. The actual URL shouldn't really matter too much.

Really John? So if they even land on the home page, but there is a better internal page about the query, shouldn't Google show that? Relevancy is key. Now, in this case, there may be SEO issues or relevancy is in the eye of the searcher, so who is anyone to say page A is more relevant than page B. But to say landing on the site is good enough, I am not too sure about that.

Striving for the actual URL is key. Usability consultants know this all too well. I assume landing on the best page possible would lead to higher conversions. I assume it would also make for a happier searcher.

I am not done beating up one of Google's most helpful Googlers.

Forum discussion at Google Webmasters Help.

A WebmasterWorld thread has tips from senior member wheel on how to get links from .edu pages, even when they might not be .edu pages.

Wheel said that many professors have web sites that might not be on an edu top level domain. Since edu links might not be better than any other TLD, then why not go after any link from any professor's site?

Wheel said:

Searching on things like widget instructors, widget courses, and anything you can think of related to education in your niche is likely to provide a rich list of potential link sources.

For example, if you sell video cameras, why not sure for videography instructor or videography professor and then continue by drilling down on those professor's web sites.

The same goes with college or university students. Find their web pages and send them some beer. Of course, as discussed in the thread, that might be considered a paid link. ;-)

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.

A month and a half ago, Google began testing Google AJAX search results, which caused a major uproar amongst webmasters who were unable to track referrer information in their analytics package. Google released a statement that they test things all the time and didn't say more. Soon after, AJAX search results went away and we forgot about it.

Then Brett Tabke asked Google's Matt Cutts at PubCon last week about this test. Lisa Barone has the live blog coverage of that question, where Matt answered:

That was really funny. The team there only thinks about speed. They want to get the results back to users as quick as humanly possible. JavaScript makes the search results a lot faster. Suppose you do a search for flowers, as you’re typing flowers, they can do a query from the back end and fold search results right into the page. You’re still in Google.com and they can pull in the results automatically. It doesn’t give you the referrer. He says the team didn’t think about the referrer aspect. So they stopped. They’ve paused it until they can find out how to keep the referrers.

Right, and that is what most of us assumed. So Brett followed up by asking Matt, "why didn't they just come out and say that?" Matt replied, "that's nice feedback and he would let them know".

Some actually think Google is starting the AJAX test again. SEO Smackdown reports again, seeing it. He said that to get around the referrer problem, Google is passing variables in the click through URL that Google Analytics understands, but other analytical programs do not. Of course this is not the solution and he says so. I also see the URL parameters in my searches, but I am not getting the AJAX search results.

Google is a big company. Google Analytics was upset that the Google search UI team did this. Google's search UI team had no idea of the implications of their change.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld and Sphinn.

Two recent articles sparked some discussion around the question if SEOs that specialize in an industry or two are more qualified then SEOs that do not specialize. One article was from Search Engine Land and the other from Top Rank Blog.

Lee Odden said:

Experience in a particular industry may be important on one level, but a company that specializes in a particular vertical warrants questions about conflict of interest. How can a company specialize in “real estate” for example, without working for competing firms? The biggest advantages that come industry specific experience is the ability to quickly ramp up on client key messaging and audience needs as well as connections made online for content promotion, online public relations and link building.

To me, there is nothing better then having an SEO that is 100% devoted to your site and has been an SEO in your industry for a couple years. These SEOs have the experience of seeing, day in and day out, what has been working on your site and your competitors. But if you can't afford to hire a full time SEO, then hiring a company is a good alternative. Should that company have direct experience in the industry that you are in? You can see the pros and cons to that. Direct experience means they have other clients that are your competitors but yet they know what it takes to rank you well.

So let me ask you, should SEOs specialize in a specific industry or not? This really applies to all work categories, from lawyers to web developers to doctors and caterers, but still, let's poll you guys:

Forum discussion at Sphinn.

I have been seeing a strong wave of posts and discussion threads on the topic of the Google Money System or Google Kit. In short, there are emails going out telling people Google will pay you by using Google's services. I did not get into the details on how they work, but I can tell you, Google is not paying you for these services.

I see tons of threads, tons of them, in the various forums, asking why hasn't Google paid me for this yet. Or asking more questions about these services. Google has not yet responded officially because Google isn't offering any of these programs. I am sure their lawyers are on it, trying to crack down on these people using Google's name in part of this scam.

One thread at Google Web Search has a confirmation from a third party member, who responded to this claim. The person said:

Just because the Google name is mentioned does not mean that Google has anything to do with it. There is wide-spread use of the Google name in relation to money-making schemes. You will have to use your common sense as you evaluate anything like this (even when the Google name is not mentioned.) Read the fine print on the sites. Search the internet for other discussions about the specific offer that you are checking into. A search on this site for [ money ] [ cash ] [ scam ] should provide you with a variety of opinions about these types of schemes.

I assume Googlers can't officially respond until their lawyers look into it. But Google should do something, because it seems like this issue is getting worse. I guess an official blog post on the issue would do good. If that blog post ranked #1 in both the organic and paid listings, it might save some people from signing up to this possible scam.

Forum discussion at Google Web Search.

Friday, we reported at Search Engine Land that Google is testing favicons (the icons you see in the URL bar) in Google AdWords ads. The test seems to be limited to the European market. Here is a screen shot taken from one of our members at Search Engine Roundtable Forums:

Notice the bottom two ads on the right have little icons on the left of the display URL. Those icons seem to be from the favicon.ico file on those respective sites. For example, eBay's is at ebay.com/favicon.ico.

There are several members reporting seeing this at WebmasterWorld and one at Search Engine Roundtable Forums. In fact, one received confirmation from his AdWords representative that this is something Google is testing on a very limited closed beta. Kerstin, who posted this, said:

Spoke to our AM at Google this morning, they've confirmed that they're testing. It's limited (for both advertisers and searchers) and closed.

What was interesting was just a few months ago, Google was testing favorite icons in the search results, the free listings.

It seems like if you are in the UK area, you may stumble across this test every now and then.

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld and Search Engine Roundtable Forums.