Re: Google dance

From: Robert Day <rpday_at_btinternet.com>
Date: Mon 08 Dec 2003 08:21:41 -0600

"Josh Carlson" <jcarlson_at_insurancejournal.com> wrote:

>I disagree, this is based on your experience. Sometimes adwords
>are more relevant than the search results. Google demands
>relevancy (adwords have to maintain a minimum CTR) and is smart to
>do so with a PPC model. Searchers get what they want/advertisers
>get what they want/Google gets what they want.

Let's start from the stated aim of Google in an email to me that
they are committed to "fair representation of the Internet".
This is now out of the window. The present commitment is to
"fair representation of whoever will pay us the most money".
And as to the present state of relevancy, try using http://www.scroogle.org/
with a search for "fruit basket". Can you honestly say that the
top sites now being shown are relevant? If you wanted to buy
someone a fruit basket on the net, would you be happy at the
range of sites being offered to you by Google?

>Google plays a huge role in the *real* world. IMHO they're too
>smart to think they can play games like this and get away with it.

Google has just departed the *real* world and has entered a parallel
world where they are using their power to make money for themselves.
It is your money they are after. That is, if you're willing to
give it to them.
IMO Google is demonstrating a callous disregard for thousands of
Internet businesses and their employees. And they did it right before
Christmas. Probably thousands of these businesses stocked up ready
to meet demand, which never came following the changes.
I don't play games. I had clients' sites that were perfect results
for search terms that people would use. Some of my clients are
independent insurance brokers. Customers need the benefit of
independent advice. Now, they will not get it because the results
at the top of the list are the likes of BUPA i.e. single insurance
companies who will only offer their own insurance to an enquirer
whether there is a better plan elsewhere. An independent broker would
give a client the right policy. In this example Google's actions are
anti the interests of the consumer.

>Search engines (and hopefully every company) are constantly
>tweaking their strategies to improve. If all is out in the open,
>then the system is open for abuse and essentially becomes
>worthless. Long story short - When people don't get for free today
>what they got free yesterday or their overpriced SEO campaign just
>got hammered, they cry. I recommend reading today's newsletter
>from www.highrankings.com - Jill Whalen said something like -
>compared to the 1 million matching sites, does your site
>*honestly* belong in the top 10? ... and some other good
>recommendations which she has always stuck by.

See above - our sites honestly do belong at the top of the rankings.
They are nothing to do with spam, con tricks, or invalid use of
SEO technology. If you sell pink widgets, then you'd expect a site
about pink widgets to be top of the rankings, not some obscure
university web site. Our relevant sites are no longer at the top.
Spammers can go to hell. All I ask is that Google honours its
commitment to "fair representation of the Internet". By lumping
us in with the spammers, they have used their sledgehammer and
now thousands of businesses will struggle. You will have to pay
more on Adwords to get your site listed. You will have to pass
your expenses on to your customers. This is not "tweaking".
It seems to me to be a cold decision to make as much money as
possible without any warning of what they were going to do. And as
far as I know, they are still hiding behind a facade that the
adjustments are "normal fluctuations".

>Good. Then there's better pricing for the rest of us. :)
>Again, ask yourself the question above.

If you think that this is going to drive down the cost of Adwords
then you're living in cloud cuckoo land. The price of Adwords is
set to explode. And who will benefit - Google will.
Is everyone ready to throw more money at them, or is it time to stop
recommending to your clients, friends and colleagues that Google
is the best search engine? IMO it no longer is - it is no longer
producing fair representation of the Internet. You'd have to be a
fruit basket to think otherwise.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Day rpday_at_btinternet.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Received on Mon Dec 08 2003 - 08:21:41 CST