http://searchengineland.com/survey-60-of-consumers-more-likely-to-consider-or-contact-businesses-with-images-in-local-search-results-73092
Interesting article on how businesses that display images in local search results are more likely to be considered as being relevant to a user and be interacted with(60% more likely). It also goes to show and rank local listing sites in order of how many clicks they generate. It is of no surprise that the information presented almost perfectly correlates to the volume of site traffic the website i moderate receives from each source (Google/Google Places being at the top and Bing at the bottom).
It is interesting to see how many users stated how much they use search engines/local to locate businesses(54% at least every month) and the importance of owning this online information to place additional content like pictures and videos for users to interact with. Google/Bing/Yahoo along with many other sites offer the ability to list your business and add content like this for free. All you need to spend is the time to get it done. Not only will this make the information more accurate but it will make your listing look more relevant and valuable when compared to others.
It's plain and simple, if you are a small business you need to own your online information.
Best Regards,
-The Marketing Ninja
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
Google Is Serious About Social
http://searchengineland.com/report-google-ceo-page-ties-bonuses-to-social-success-reorganizes-google-mgmt-team-72197
When Larry Page said he wanted to have a social layer applied to Google he wasn't kidding. Apparently he didn't like the direction the company was taking. Schmidt started focusing on developing software for enterprises to nip closer to the heels of Microsoft. This has only caused Microsoft to fire back with better more competitively priced alternatives that further entrench it as the exemplar for business software solutions. (sorry for the msft tangent).
This "social layer" is currently taking bits and pieces from current social network stars Facebook and Twitter (as in twitter and facebook have the opportunity to make your page rank higher in search. This is based on a combination of how many friends/followers an individual has and how many people retweet etc etc) but ultimately, Larry still wants Google to have a proprietary social network.
One of Larrys major change to the business regards employee compensation. Google is now basing internal bonuses on how "social" the work of its employees are. An employees bonus could either by 25% more or less depending on the metrics being used to gauge success.
In my previous blog post i go over the new Google +1 feature and how i feel it will ultimately fail as a social networking tool, but succeed because businesses want their online content/advertisements to rank higher by getting people with "Google Profiles" to "+1" their content. http://the-marketing-ninja.blogspot.com/2011/04/google-social-30-like-remixed.html.
Google Profiles allow you to tag your email address to a face. It gives you the opportunity to say a little bit about you, the work you have done, share pictures from Picasa and a few other limiting features. This oddly seems like how Myspace/Facebook started out? Honestly, do we need another profile page. I know most people who have made one just set it up...then forgot about it. What is the real value in something that you do not use?
I learned from a great professor that people who just say "we will just have to wait and see" will always be left in the dust. I already know that this will fail in a social sense, sure it is cool to get recommendations from my friends that have gmail accounts but that is making a broad assessment from Google. Most other people i know that have gmail accounts are not my friends but classmates i have had to collaborate with or other random people. Most of my friends that i would want to get recommendations from are not on gmail, but are on Facebook. I know that this is a pretty biased perspective but honestly not everyone has a gmail account and not everyone is going to go out, get a gmail account and create a Google profile just for this feature. I think it required too much effort from individuals when they can get a better experience from pre-existing social networks.
Side Note: I do not hate Google in anyway, i just like to give(take) objective constructive criticism. Without the multiple SEO guides, webmaster tools, analytics software, advertising and webmaster blogs that they provide for free i would not have as robust a knowledge of SEO/Search as i do now.
Best Regards,
Antonio Esposito
When Larry Page said he wanted to have a social layer applied to Google he wasn't kidding. Apparently he didn't like the direction the company was taking. Schmidt started focusing on developing software for enterprises to nip closer to the heels of Microsoft. This has only caused Microsoft to fire back with better more competitively priced alternatives that further entrench it as the exemplar for business software solutions. (sorry for the msft tangent).
This "social layer" is currently taking bits and pieces from current social network stars Facebook and Twitter (as in twitter and facebook have the opportunity to make your page rank higher in search. This is based on a combination of how many friends/followers an individual has and how many people retweet etc etc) but ultimately, Larry still wants Google to have a proprietary social network.
One of Larrys major change to the business regards employee compensation. Google is now basing internal bonuses on how "social" the work of its employees are. An employees bonus could either by 25% more or less depending on the metrics being used to gauge success.
In my previous blog post i go over the new Google +1 feature and how i feel it will ultimately fail as a social networking tool, but succeed because businesses want their online content/advertisements to rank higher by getting people with "Google Profiles" to "+1" their content. http://the-marketing-ninja.blogspot.com/2011/04/google-social-30-like-remixed.html.
Google Profiles allow you to tag your email address to a face. It gives you the opportunity to say a little bit about you, the work you have done, share pictures from Picasa and a few other limiting features. This oddly seems like how Myspace/Facebook started out? Honestly, do we need another profile page. I know most people who have made one just set it up...then forgot about it. What is the real value in something that you do not use?
I learned from a great professor that people who just say "we will just have to wait and see" will always be left in the dust. I already know that this will fail in a social sense, sure it is cool to get recommendations from my friends that have gmail accounts but that is making a broad assessment from Google. Most other people i know that have gmail accounts are not my friends but classmates i have had to collaborate with or other random people. Most of my friends that i would want to get recommendations from are not on gmail, but are on Facebook. I know that this is a pretty biased perspective but honestly not everyone has a gmail account and not everyone is going to go out, get a gmail account and create a Google profile just for this feature. I think it required too much effort from individuals when they can get a better experience from pre-existing social networks.
Side Note: I do not hate Google in anyway, i just like to give(take) objective constructive criticism. Without the multiple SEO guides, webmaster tools, analytics software, advertising and webmaster blogs that they provide for free i would not have as robust a knowledge of SEO/Search as i do now.
Best Regards,
Antonio Esposito
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Google Social 3.0: "Like" Remixed
(apologies outright for any spelling/grammatical errors. Blogger has been giving me issues lately)
Lets take a look at Google's attempts to enter into the US Social Networking industry. Google likes to first attempt and acquire companies in new business areas that it wants to break into. If that fails then they attempt to create a competing product. With regards to US Social Networking, this strategy is a bust.
2003: After the failed takeover bid for one of the original Social Networking companies Friendster, Google sets it eyes to create its own service to compete in the market. Okrut was born, but so far has only performed will in India and Brazil and did not see much success within the US.
2010: Google Buzz was supposed to change the way that people lived and collaborated with each other. The initial announcement of this product made many social networks nervous as it was going to be run out of Gmail accounts and would launch with millions of users worldwide.The beta had some promising features but the overall usability was extremely cumbersome and not intuitive. This is coming from someone who beta tested the product and knew right away that it wasn't going to take off.
One of the main issues with Buzz was that when it was released it was done so to all Gmail account members, without their knowledge and immediately began sharing information. The public outrage at such an outright violation of privacy has put a ten year long SEC privacy audit on Google that could hinder the future performance and creativity of the company.
2011: It is one year later and Google has released individual profile pages for users. Take a look at mine https://profiles.google.com/AEsposito88/about. Could this be the precursor to Googles new, simplified approach at building their own social network?
Googles Facebook Like
Googles +1 and its affect on PPC
This article on the new Google +1 feature almost solidifies my assumption. The +1 feature is going to be the google version of a like/retweet and it will require users to have a Google Profile in order to +1 an advertisement/webpage. Google has stated that the amount of +1 and how many of your Gmail "contacts" that +1 a Google search result will affect its search ranking.
Do i think this will be successful? Yes and no.
Yes, I strongly believe that it will be successful for Big Brands and SEO companies as they would not only get the most value out of this feature, but they would have a large fan base and/or employees to gain +1's from. Some companies could even make it an initiative that all employees create a profile and +1 the webpage/advertisements. (unless this would be against +1 guidelines) The main advantage of this would hopefully be higher search standings and higher CTR for advertisements.
No, i believe it will fail for the individual user and as a type of social network. I have doubts that most people will go out of their way to create a Google profile just to +1 an advertisement or webpage. I hate to say this but we will just have to wait and see what happens. You can bet yourself that i will be keeping an eye on the implementation and success/failure of the Google +1.
Best Regards,
-The Marketing Ninja
Lets take a look at Google's attempts to enter into the US Social Networking industry. Google likes to first attempt and acquire companies in new business areas that it wants to break into. If that fails then they attempt to create a competing product. With regards to US Social Networking, this strategy is a bust.
2003: After the failed takeover bid for one of the original Social Networking companies Friendster, Google sets it eyes to create its own service to compete in the market. Okrut was born, but so far has only performed will in India and Brazil and did not see much success within the US.
2010: Google Buzz was supposed to change the way that people lived and collaborated with each other. The initial announcement of this product made many social networks nervous as it was going to be run out of Gmail accounts and would launch with millions of users worldwide.The beta had some promising features but the overall usability was extremely cumbersome and not intuitive. This is coming from someone who beta tested the product and knew right away that it wasn't going to take off.
One of the main issues with Buzz was that when it was released it was done so to all Gmail account members, without their knowledge and immediately began sharing information. The public outrage at such an outright violation of privacy has put a ten year long SEC privacy audit on Google that could hinder the future performance and creativity of the company.
2011: It is one year later and Google has released individual profile pages for users. Take a look at mine https://profiles.google.com/AEsposito88/about. Could this be the precursor to Googles new, simplified approach at building their own social network?
Googles Facebook Like
Googles +1 and its affect on PPC
This article on the new Google +1 feature almost solidifies my assumption. The +1 feature is going to be the google version of a like/retweet and it will require users to have a Google Profile in order to +1 an advertisement/webpage. Google has stated that the amount of +1 and how many of your Gmail "contacts" that +1 a Google search result will affect its search ranking.
Do i think this will be successful? Yes and no.
Yes, I strongly believe that it will be successful for Big Brands and SEO companies as they would not only get the most value out of this feature, but they would have a large fan base and/or employees to gain +1's from. Some companies could even make it an initiative that all employees create a profile and +1 the webpage/advertisements. (unless this would be against +1 guidelines) The main advantage of this would hopefully be higher search standings and higher CTR for advertisements.
No, i believe it will fail for the individual user and as a type of social network. I have doubts that most people will go out of their way to create a Google profile just to +1 an advertisement or webpage. I hate to say this but we will just have to wait and see what happens. You can bet yourself that i will be keeping an eye on the implementation and success/failure of the Google +1.
Best Regards,
-The Marketing Ninja
Friday, April 1, 2011
Google's Instant Search is Ancient History
https://searchengineland.com/yahoo-had-instant-search-in-2005-and-dropped-it-50169
The original search giant Yahoo! had already beta tested using instant search capabilities 5 years before Google implemented it in 2010. What happened and what does this mean about search?
Back in the day Yahoo! was not able to bring their live search beta to market because of issues with infrastructure/server capacity to consistently bring up instant results for the previous #1 search engine.
What does this mean for search and Google? It seems that they are running out of ideas for search. There is only so much you can do without having to re-invent the way people look for and use search engine like tools. The idea for Google's Instant Search was already out there years ago, just the capability to implement it was not there. It's my guess that alot of energy is being put into other projects such as mobile search platforms instead of attempting to re-invent the desktop search experience.
In my previous post i showed how Yahoo has taken instant search to the next level with Search Direct. Check it out if you have not already.
http://search.yahoo.com/
They are taking things deeper into the web-browser and focusing on the search box itself. Baidu, the chinese search giant has talked about doing this with their own suite of future operating software and search engine technology. It's an interesting approach that allows for a fresh look at search results and interactivity.
All i can say is i love this industry. Lets keep innovating!
Best Regards,
-The Marketing Ninja
The original search giant Yahoo! had already beta tested using instant search capabilities 5 years before Google implemented it in 2010. What happened and what does this mean about search?
Back in the day Yahoo! was not able to bring their live search beta to market because of issues with infrastructure/server capacity to consistently bring up instant results for the previous #1 search engine.
What does this mean for search and Google? It seems that they are running out of ideas for search. There is only so much you can do without having to re-invent the way people look for and use search engine like tools. The idea for Google's Instant Search was already out there years ago, just the capability to implement it was not there. It's my guess that alot of energy is being put into other projects such as mobile search platforms instead of attempting to re-invent the desktop search experience.
In my previous post i showed how Yahoo has taken instant search to the next level with Search Direct. Check it out if you have not already.
http://search.yahoo.com/
They are taking things deeper into the web-browser and focusing on the search box itself. Baidu, the chinese search giant has talked about doing this with their own suite of future operating software and search engine technology. It's an interesting approach that allows for a fresh look at search results and interactivity.
All i can say is i love this industry. Lets keep innovating!
Best Regards,
-The Marketing Ninja
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)