6 ms·

I guess the June search-algorithm updates really worked. (Kicking out everyone that earns without giving Google it's piece of the pie). Google keeps removing s

by fear91 13y ago

I guess the June search-algorithm updates really worked. (Kicking out everyone that earns without giving Google it's piece of the pie). Google keeps removing small business websites from its results, forcing them to use Ad-Words. This strategy cannot be sustained unless they want 100% commercial / 100% junk results. I wonder what will they do in the future.

hartator 13y ago
We notice some changes too since june, you think it's too push people to buy adwords? I feel too that small websites have trouble to rank against bigger ones.
- drzaiusapelord 13y ago
  This is no conspiracy. Ignoring that larger sites have better page rank, they can also spend more on SEO. Ma and Pop's widget shop is a wordpress clunker built by their teen son. He's not spending 20 hours a week watching metrics and messing with SEO. $big_shop_webmaster certainly is.
  - judk 13y ago
    That's a bug. Google claims that quality content wins over SEO. And WordPress is professionally written software.
    - Jtsummers 13y ago
      > And WordPress is professionally written software. So are many web servers, why would this affect ranking? Content, not platform should be the determiner (though some hosted content might get penalized because of others using the same host).
NathanKP 13y ago
I'm no Google fanboy but what you are saying is a pretty strong accusation. Where is the data to back what you are claiming Google is doing?
- sharkweek 13y ago
  I'm not going to defend the overall conspiracy here but I totally buy into the theory that Google would prefer a big brand ranking over several small businesses... The logic in my mind is -- Google wants the rankings to be unequivocally trustworthy, e.g., if I'm searching for an espresso machine, would I trust a small ecommerce shop where the experience could be terrible or do we just throw an Amazon or Bed Bath and Beyond result at the top because those are vetted companies. Sure, the little guy has to grind to get a better ranking and free traffic, but it should in the long term encourage better behavior by companies as they attempt to earn that trust.
- anon1385 13y ago
  http://i.imgur.com/eBtzYic.png http://i.imgur.com/eBtzYic.png see any organic search results there?
  - notatoad 13y ago
    this bullshit example gets trotted out every time somebody tries to prove this point, but it never gets any more relevant. yes, google shows a lot of ads for a vague, contextless search query. but nobody ever searches for anything so vague unless they're trying to prove how google search results are going down the toilet. if you search for the name of a category of information, it's impossible to know what aspect is relevant to you and you're either going to get ads or irrelevant results, and google has chosen to serve ads instead of irrelevant results.. try searching for bitcoin mining, bitcoin exchange, etc, and you'll see relevant results.
    - mehster 13y ago
      Try this one: flights from los angeles to las vegas Not sure if the organic results are relevant, because I can't see any.
  - sharkweek 13y ago
    Yes -- http://i.imgur.com/vFwD9xr.png http://i.imgur.com/vFwD9xr.png
krelian 13y ago
You have some examples? I'll be happy to see because as someone who searches I'm pretty happy with the results I'm seeing.
hugofirth 13y ago
Anti-competitive lobbies, hugely funded by Google's competitors, have tried to make that stick in the US and EU. They have largely failed to do so both times. Prove it :)
- fear91 13y ago
  I guess since Google got a court verdict stating that their search results are their "opinion" and thus "free speech", they cannot be really attacked from this point. Add to that the fact that their algorithm is top-secret and probably heavily compartmentalized and it becomes even harder. I am not arguing whether Google breaks a law or not, I simply say that they hurt the smaller players. Getting rankings is getting harder and harder with each update. Soon, paying for AdWords will be the only affordable option.
  - agilord 13y ago
    You do realize, that because of the increase of content publishers, getting ranking becomes harder anyway (independent to Google).
    - iamhungry 13y ago
      This is true but when Google's ad clicks increase by 20+% a quarter what you said is irrelevant, Google is keeping almost all the clicks for Adwords. So you're competing with Google's Youtube, Google Local, Google Images, and the whole shebang. Guess who's winning?
      - hugofirth 13y ago
        As far as I see it there is something of a chicken and egg problem here. Google has often maintained, publicly, that its search algorithm is only interested in providing the most utility to end-users. To an extent (and in some cases, I except that there are exceptions) this holds true: If I google for a video streaming website I want Youtube to be at the top of the list. Semantically that is the correct answer to the "question" implied by the search. So: Are google services popular because they are highly represented in google's search results? -OR- Are google services highly represented in google's search results because they are popular. I absolutely do not believe that google should feel pressured to artificially demote its own offerings over fears of anti-competition litigation/legislation. On the other hand I can see an argument for clearly marking a result that points to a google service as 'belonging' to google.
hvass 13y ago
And this is based on what? If people are 'forced' to use AdWords it would be because of the move towards 100% not provided keywords in natural search, thus nudging you to go into AdWords to see the full search report.
- tonfa 13y ago
  I really don't understand that. What is the relation between AdWords and not having keywords provided? Won't the search query report in adwords have actually less data than what you get for free with webmaster tools? (With adwords you will only see the traffic from the keywords you decided to bid on, while webmaster tools will show all the organic traffic, including segments you didn't know about).
90002 13y ago
Can you provide any data support this claim? I haven't recognized massive removal of small business websites, but I may be wrong.
moultano 13y ago
Google does not make ranking changes based on revenue. We don't even collect statistics about that for ranking changes. Worrying about the fate of small sites in Google's rankings is a reasonable concern, and one that we share. But whatever you think we are doing incorrectly in ranking, it has nothing to do with making more money.
- iamhungry 13y ago
  We don't even collect statistics about that for ranking changes. Who's "we"? Are you Larry Page to speak with such confidence? Nope, just a lowly engineer being observed by hundreds of Stanford and ivy League MBAs as your changes impact Ad Clicks, the golden eggs.
  - moultano 13y ago
    I know you're basically just trolling, but I'll reply seriously anyways. I'm one of the people who makes changes to Google's rankings. As a result, for any change I want to make, I have to collect the statistics to justify it. This is done with the help of an analyst who has a different reporting chain from the ranking engineers in order to ensure that they remain unbiased. These statistics include things like what results people click on, how often people hit "next page," how humans rate the results before and after the change, etc. (None of these statistics involve ads or revenue in any way.) Once we've collected those statistics, the analyst writes up a report about the change summarizing their findings and pointing out any areas of concern. This report is then presented at a weekly launch meeting, where the ranking leads review each change both for its metrics and for its complexity, ongoing infrastructure cost, etc. and make a decision about whether to launch it. You can view an example launch meeting here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtRJXnXgE-A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtRJXnXgE-A
  - nostrademons 13y ago
    FWIW, for most engineers the entire Search org chart, all the way up to Larry, is engineers. Larry was an engineer, Alan Eustace was a hardware engineer, Amit Singhal is an engineer. In my management chain there are two people with an M.S. in computer science (Larry is one of them), zero with MBAs, and everybody else has a Ph.D in CS. If your mental model of Google is a bunch of MBAs who tell engineers what to do, you're quite incorrect. That's Microsoft.
cylinder 13y ago
I started with adWords and then quickly got into the first page for organic. It doesn't matter, I still get negligible organic traffic, it's almost all paid. Seems like consumers have been trained to go to adwords results when they're looking for a service or good they want to pay for, and organic when searching pure information (free).

by fear91 13y ago

hartator 13y ago

We notice some changes too since june, you think it's too push people to buy adwords? I feel too that small websites have trouble to rank against bigger ones.

drzaiusapelord 13y ago
This is no conspiracy. Ignoring that larger sites have better page rank, they can also spend more on SEO. Ma and Pop's widget shop is a wordpress clunker built by their teen son. He's not spending 20 hours a week watching metrics and messing with SEO. $big_shop_webmaster certainly is.
- judk 13y ago
  That's a bug. Google claims that quality content wins over SEO. And WordPress is professionally written software.
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    > And WordPress is professionally written software. So are many web servers, why would this affect ranking? Content, not platform should be the determiner (though some hosted content might get penalized because of others using the same host).

NathanKP 13y ago

I'm no Google fanboy but what you are saying is a pretty strong accusation. Where is the data to back what you are claiming Google is doing?

sharkweek 13y ago
I'm not going to defend the overall conspiracy here but I totally buy into the theory that Google would prefer a big brand ranking over several small businesses... The logic in my mind is -- Google wants the rankings to be unequivocally trustworthy, e.g., if I'm searching for an espresso machine, would I trust a small ecommerce shop where the experience could be terrible or do we just throw an Amazon or Bed Bath and Beyond result at the top because those are vetted companies. Sure, the little guy has to grind to get a better ranking and free traffic, but it should in the long term encourage better behavior by companies as they attempt to earn that trust.
anon1385 13y ago
http://i.imgur.com/eBtzYic.png http://i.imgur.com/eBtzYic.png see any organic search results there?
- notatoad 13y ago
  this bullshit example gets trotted out every time somebody tries to prove this point, but it never gets any more relevant. yes, google shows a lot of ads for a vague, contextless search query. but nobody ever searches for anything so vague unless they're trying to prove how google search results are going down the toilet. if you search for the name of a category of information, it's impossible to know what aspect is relevant to you and you're either going to get ads or irrelevant results, and google has chosen to serve ads instead of irrelevant results.. try searching for bitcoin mining, bitcoin exchange, etc, and you'll see relevant results.
  - mehster 13y ago
    Try this one: flights from los angeles to las vegas Not sure if the organic results are relevant, because I can't see any.
- sharkweek 13y ago
  Yes -- http://i.imgur.com/vFwD9xr.png http://i.imgur.com/vFwD9xr.png

krelian 13y ago

You have some examples? I'll be happy to see because as someone who searches I'm pretty happy with the results I'm seeing.

hugofirth 13y ago

Anti-competitive lobbies, hugely funded by Google's competitors, have tried to make that stick in the US and EU. They have largely failed to do so both times. Prove it :)

fear91 13y ago
I guess since Google got a court verdict stating that their search results are their "opinion" and thus "free speech", they cannot be really attacked from this point. Add to that the fact that their algorithm is top-secret and probably heavily compartmentalized and it becomes even harder. I am not arguing whether Google breaks a law or not, I simply say that they hurt the smaller players. Getting rankings is getting harder and harder with each update. Soon, paying for AdWords will be the only affordable option.
- agilord 13y ago
  You do realize, that because of the increase of content publishers, getting ranking becomes harder anyway (independent to Google).
  - iamhungry 13y ago
    This is true but when Google's ad clicks increase by 20+% a quarter what you said is irrelevant, Google is keeping almost all the clicks for Adwords. So you're competing with Google's Youtube, Google Local, Google Images, and the whole shebang. Guess who's winning?
    - hugofirth 13y ago
      As far as I see it there is something of a chicken and egg problem here. Google has often maintained, publicly, that its search algorithm is only interested in providing the most utility to end-users. To an extent (and in some cases, I except that there are exceptions) this holds true: If I google for a video streaming website I want Youtube to be at the top of the list. Semantically that is the correct answer to the "question" implied by the search. So: Are google services popular because they are highly represented in google's search results? -OR- Are google services highly represented in google's search results because they are popular. I absolutely do not believe that google should feel pressured to artificially demote its own offerings over fears of anti-competition litigation/legislation. On the other hand I can see an argument for clearly marking a result that points to a google service as 'belonging' to google.

hvass 13y ago

And this is based on what? If people are 'forced' to use AdWords it would be because of the move towards 100% not provided keywords in natural search, thus nudging you to go into AdWords to see the full search report.

tonfa 13y ago
I really don't understand that. What is the relation between AdWords and not having keywords provided? Won't the search query report in adwords have actually less data than what you get for free with webmaster tools? (With adwords you will only see the traffic from the keywords you decided to bid on, while webmaster tools will show all the organic traffic, including segments you didn't know about).

90002 13y ago

Can you provide any data support this claim? I haven't recognized massive removal of small business websites, but I may be wrong.

moultano 13y ago

Google does not make ranking changes based on revenue. We don't even collect statistics about that for ranking changes. Worrying about the fate of small sites in Google's rankings is a reasonable concern, and one that we share. But whatever you think we are doing incorrectly in ranking, it has nothing to do with making more money.

iamhungry 13y ago
We don't even collect statistics about that for ranking changes. Who's "we"? Are you Larry Page to speak with such confidence? Nope, just a lowly engineer being observed by hundreds of Stanford and ivy League MBAs as your changes impact Ad Clicks, the golden eggs.
- moultano 13y ago
  I know you're basically just trolling, but I'll reply seriously anyways. I'm one of the people who makes changes to Google's rankings. As a result, for any change I want to make, I have to collect the statistics to justify it. This is done with the help of an analyst who has a different reporting chain from the ranking engineers in order to ensure that they remain unbiased. These statistics include things like what results people click on, how often people hit "next page," how humans rate the results before and after the change, etc. (None of these statistics involve ads or revenue in any way.) Once we've collected those statistics, the analyst writes up a report about the change summarizing their findings and pointing out any areas of concern. This report is then presented at a weekly launch meeting, where the ranking leads review each change both for its metrics and for its complexity, ongoing infrastructure cost, etc. and make a decision about whether to launch it. You can view an example launch meeting here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtRJXnXgE-A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtRJXnXgE-A
- nostrademons 13y ago
  FWIW, for most engineers the entire Search org chart, all the way up to Larry, is engineers. Larry was an engineer, Alan Eustace was a hardware engineer, Amit Singhal is an engineer. In my management chain there are two people with an M.S. in computer science (Larry is one of them), zero with MBAs, and everybody else has a Ph.D in CS. If your mental model of Google is a bunch of MBAs who tell engineers what to do, you're quite incorrect. That's Microsoft.

cylinder 13y ago

I started with adWords and then quickly got into the first page for organic. It doesn't matter, I still get negligible organic traffic, it's almost all paid. Seems like consumers have been trained to go to adwords results when they're looking for a service or good they want to pay for, and organic when searching pure information (free).