Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Fortune Magazine Article
Posted 26 November 2003 - 01:49 AM
It's a very good look into Google and the upcoming issues. Highly recommended.
Posted 26 November 2003 - 07:57 AM
Certainly this is not the ideal time for an unpopular revamp of their main product, unless it can be shown to raise more cash in a sustainable fashion.
Posted 26 November 2003 - 08:04 AM
All are aiming for what they see as Google's weak spot: lack of customer lock-in. Though its search engine is a wonderful tool for using the Net, what happens when a better search engine comes along? Or just a good-enough search engine in the hands of a powerful rival? Is there anything to keep users wedded to Google? "Google has a lot of momentum, but its current position is probably not defensible," says an investor.
As you say Mel, it looks as though Page and Brin are taking a very big gamble with the latest furor.
Page says he doesn't spend much time worrying about competitors: "That's not what we're about. We think of what we do as adding more value to the world." Yet investors—stockholders and the limited partners in Google-invested venture capital funds—are growing nervous.
Posted 27 November 2003 - 10:01 AM
Nor is the NY Times article from yesterday.
Downright encouraging, in fact. The sooner the general-audience media, the investor rags, and the tech trade journalists stop hyping G, the faster others will emerge. At least one of these will do a better job for website owner and searcher alike.
But a new search platform today cannot get any substantial funding, thanks to the last two years of Google-gushing. If Fortune and the NY Times raise doubts, while at the same time any newbie can see that paid search is here to stay, then the people who put up the money for technology advances will begin to look for alternatives.
[Several hands scattered around the HighRankings Forum rooms suddenly are raised high.]
Don't think me insensitive to the plight of the current sites being hammered by the G update: having a dozen sites of our own to worry about, we can well empathize with SEOs and their clients.
But if we - I mean the *whole* online community: users, publishers, consultants, and "sellers", too - emerge from this period with a search discipline where site listings:
- are submitted in a clear, bias-free, no-hidden-agenda process
- are basically controlled by the web site owner (or her designated consultant)
- with the assistance, not obstruction, of qualified human editors
- where the search users can clearly identify the "commerciality" of a listing (if they so choose - we all know many don't care)
- search users can SELECT what kind of SERPs they wish to see
- search users can PARTICIPATE in the quality-control, SPAM-prevention process (if they choose to)
we can all be grateful for these years of excessive optimization, if indeed that is what has been the practice.
If, in addition, someone can find a way for the merchandizers to get their messages listed without totally overwhelming the SERPs with trashy notices or other ads, then so much the better.
And - what the hell, it's Thanksgiving Day for a large proportion of HighRankers, so why not posit a search industry we can someday be thankful for? - *if* the commercial listings can be handled in a way that does not require the ruinous keyword "auction model" - so terrible for so many smaller and content-oriented websites - well...
Don't say that the above kind of search methodology and (IMO) saner business model is a fiction, because it is already up and running. The only question is when it will be seen by site owners and the search users as an alternative to crawled engines and "keyword-bidded" junk-search.
Happy Thanksgiving Day to you who are about to die from over-eating, from someone who has been more than once called a Turkey...
And cheers to you, MakeMeTop, of a more liquid nature...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users