Archive for April, 2008

published: April 28th, 2008

“SEO” Trademarked?

Category news | 2 comments »

Could SEO companies soon lose the right to call themselves SEO companies? If a man named Jason Gambert has his way, the answer is yes.

Mr. Gambert claims in his application (which was rejected several times before finally being accepted for publication) that SEO is defined as a “process”, and not a service. Thus, he is claiming that he has the right to trademark it as a service. SEO as a “process” would remain free for general use, not that it would matter.

The only problem he faces is that SEO has indeed been a service for over ten years, and thousands of companies can demonstrate prior use of the mark as a service (including my own). The chances of him actually getting the trademark are close to nil.

On his blog, Mr. Gambert claims that he is trademarking the term for the good of the industry, and that he will enforce certain standards that companies will have to meet in order to use the term “SEO”. To which the industry replied “Who the hell is Jason Gambert, and what are his qualifications?” The answer to this question has yet to be answered, but many doubt his claimed altruism and believe that ultimately, it’s about the money that can be made by licensing the term.

Even if his stated plans are true, good intentions have no bearing on whether or not a trademark is granted. It’s my understanding that many opposing documents have already been filed, and it will then be up to Mr. Gambert to answer to people that have a much more legitimate claim to the term than he does.

For a detailed history of this saga, please visit http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pulling-a-fast-one-a-clever-internet-marketer-is-trying-to-trademark-seo

Popularity: 11% [?]

published: April 21st, 2008

Optimizing for Personalized Search

Category Universal/Personal, news | 1 comment »

iGoogle get’s social

Seems that the fine folks at Google are stepping a little closer to the world of social media/networking after opening up a sandbox for iGoogle developers (as reported today on GoogleSystem and Search Engine Land). For those not yet familiar with iGoogle, it is a personalized Home page for Google that one gets when creating an account on many of their services. Looks like this (also multiple tabs);

iGoogle Home page

The iGoogle service was by far the fastest growing service last year and this should continue that growth pattern over 2008 and beyond. This addition of a social element ensures that.

Where’s the beef?

So, what does social goodiness have to do with SEO you ask? Simple, it will also mean a greater number of Google users, if they know it or not, will be logged into Google’s personalized search. That in turn means that those of us in the search engine optimization game should be certain we’re familiar with the differences in optimizing for it.

Personalized search, in essence, tries to get to know the end user based on their actions and interactions with the search results they are served. The search engine will look at a variety of signals such as;

  1. Previous search queries (probabilistic query refinement); As an example; if the searcher has been recently searching the term ‘diabetes’ and submits a query for ‘organic food’ the system attempts to learn and presents additional results relating to organic foods that are helpful in fighting diabetes.
  2. Previously presented results (may be omitted in subsequent queries); results that have been presented to the end user can be omitted in future results for a given period of time in exchange for other potentially viable results.
  3. User query selection (and flagging of similar content); Past selected or preferred documents can be analyzed and similar documents or linking documents can be used to refine subsequent results. Furthermore, certain documents types can be seen as preferred, in what would be a combination of Universal Search concepts. Common websites that accessed can also be tagged as ‘preferred locations’ for further weighting.
  4. Selection and Bounce rates (and user activity on document/site); an editorial scoring can be devised from the amount of time a user spends on a page, the amount of scrolling activity, what has been printed, or even what has been saved or bookmarked. All can be used to further refine the ‘intent’ and ‘satisfaction’ with a given result that has been accessed.
  5. Advertising Activity (performance metrics); the advertisements clicked on can also begin to add to a clearer understanding of the end users preferences and interests.

Time to get personal

These types of signals, known as user performance metrics, bring new concerns for the search optimizer and have the potential to change how we approach our efforts. If each person has slightly different result rankings, the goal will become more about over-all traffic generation and conversions more than merely trying to rank top 10. Google has even recently discussed using such engagement metrics in the regular, non-personalized results.

If you’re unfamiliar with the ramifications of personalized search be sure to check out our handy publication (PDF); the Ultimate Guide to Google’s personalized Search.

And get hooked up to the RSS feed for more on this topic in the future.

More on Personalized Search;

Bill Slawski; Personalized PageRank and Personalized Text ScoresGoogle Personalization MethodsSecond thoughts on a G-PhoneSearch Engine Land; Google Ramps Up Personalized SearchPersonalized Search, Google Bookmarks and Link Building

Beanstalk; Personalization and the Death of SEO
Aaron Wall
; How to turn off Personalized Search without logging out
SEO Roundtable
; Your Search Results are Personalized
Search Engine Watch
; Personalized Search Leaves Google Labs (2005)
Greg Linden
; Personalized Search Primer And Personalized Search for Movies

From GooglePersonally SpeakingPersonalized Search and PrivacyGoogle Puts users in charge -Talk on your personalized Home PageMore of the world in your pocket

Join the discussions on the forum

Popularity: 11% [?]

published: April 11th, 2008

Yahoo’s Desperation

Category General | Comments Off

The bomb dropped late wednesday night – Yahoo, in an attempt to show that there are other suitors besides Microsoft, announced that they were running a joint advertising experiment with Google.

In a nutshell, Google will be serving up 3% of the paid ads on the Yahoo search engine (in the United States only) for the next two weeks. Assuming the joint venture is successful, (which presumably means that the Google ads perform better than the Yahoo ads) Yahoo would join operations with the sliding AOL, which already uses Google technology for paid advertising (further complicating the picture, Google owns a 5% stake in AOL). Time Warner would take a 20% interest in the venture, paying in cash. Then, Yahoo would use that money to buy back its own shares in the $35 to $40 range to raise the stock price, a significant premium over the existing Microsoft offer which hovers just below $30 per share.

Sound convoluted? You bet. It’s almost as if Yahoo is trying to throw out as many big names as possible (Google, Time Warner, AOL) in order to send a message to shareholders (and Microsoft) that plenty of other studs want to take them to the prom.

There’s only one problem – it won’t happen. At least not in the way it is currently being presented.

If Google and Yahoo were to combine advertising platforms, which is the logical conclusion when Yahoo is measuring Google’s ad serving technology against their own, the advertising alliance would control over 80% of online advertising in the U.S. Analysts are already proclaiming that this would not pass regulatory scrutiny, which would leave Yahoo right back where it started. Microsoft has already pointed this out, but they are still seen as the evil interloper in all of this, so apparently they don’t count.

I can’t tell you what’s going to happen – but I can tell you that beneath all of Yahoo’s name-dropping and exciting potential alliances I detect the underlying stench of desperation.

Popularity: 9% [?]

published: April 11th, 2008

the Best in SEO

Category Tools/Resources | 3 comments »

I had always wanted to be ble to search just the best SEO blogs and websites from the web so I could cut through all the garbage that is out there. What’s a guy to do though? Well, thanks to Google I can create my own Custom Search Engine and pick and choose which sites I want in my search engine as well as assigning refinements and even weighting of the sites. How friggen cool is that huh?

It is loaded with the top SEO blogs/websites and is great for research and learning. If you are looking for SEO information and want to get right to the best stuff from the pros… check it out

the SEO Search Engine

 If this works out I am going to put up some others I have that search Social Media Marketing, Buzz Monitoring set up and more… let me know what you think

At the moment, it searches the following sites;

the LinkSpiel, Sebastians Pamphlets, Hamlet Batista, TopRank, Search Engine Journal, Sphinn, HuoMah (duh), SEO Book Blog, SEO by the Sea, SEO-Theory, the MadHat, Search Engine Land, VanGogh, Search Engine People, Cornwall SEO, Search Engine Watch, Marketing Pilgrim, Bruce Clay Blog, SEOmoz Blog, SEO Scoop, 10e20, Jennifer Slegg, John Andrews, Wolf Howl, Small Business SEM, Hobo SEO, Joost DeValk, SEO Scientist

the SEO Search Engine

Popularity: 12% [?]

published: April 8th, 2008

Google to Unload Performics

Category news | Comments Off

Google announced late last week that they would unload the search engine marketing component of Performics, although they will consolidate the affiliate marketing component of the business into their own offerings.

In a statement, Google said:

It’s clear to us that we do not want to be in the search engine marketing business. Maintaining objectivity in both search and advertising is paramount to Google’s mission and core to the trust we ask from our users. For this reason, we plan to sell the Performics search marketing business to a third party. We believe this will allow us to maintain objectivity and the search marketing business to continue to grow and innovate and serve its customers. While we have not yet identified a buyer, we’ve received preliminary interest from a number of our current partners. Search Marketing will continue to run as a separate entity until the division is sold.

Of course, this is welcome news to search marketers, even though many of us still feel that the whole issue was handled poorly.

I must admit that I do not understand all of the intricacies of closing a huge acquisition, and there may be several reasons that would have led Google to stay mum on the issue until the approval of the DoubleClick deal by the EU. Perhaps it is bad form to talk about what you will do with a company before you have made certain you will acquire it.

This still wouldn’t explain the FAQ on the acquisition that was put out by Google in April of last year:

What will Google do with Performics?

Performics is part of DoubleClick, and we are acquiring it as part of the transaction. We have no plans to dispose of it at this time.

This was shortly thereafter changed to read:

They have built a strong business that is valued by their clients, and we will be evaluating all strategic alternatives for this business. We are committed to continuing to meet the needs of Performics clients, and we expect no interruption in service during this transition. Google has many important agency, SEM, and other partner relationships, and we continue to value those relationships.

So maybe my idea that it is bad form to discuss the future of a company you have not yet acquired is wrong. Or maybe amending the original statement was necessary damage control after “important agency, SEM, and other partner relationships” raised hell about the prospect of competing with Google.

In either case, Google ultimately did the right thing, and I should probably get over it already.

Popularity: 10% [?]

published: April 7th, 2008

Some facts about Blended Search

Category General, Universal/Personal | Comments Off

I came across an interesting white paper I thought to pass along. The research was conducted over Dec.07-Jan.08 by iProspect and JupiterResearch. The main goal of the survey and analysis was to better understand search user behaviour patterns in context of blended search results.

They presented people various search results for given queries inclusive of varied levels of integrated blended results. What they found was certainly interesting;

For the purposes of the survey, vertical results are those that able the user to refine or limit the results to a specialized category. A blended search result is one inclusive of a generalized search results set. The main ones we all know are images, news and video.

Not quite there yet – vertically challenged

It’s not all roses mind you as adoption amongst users is not deeply prevalent as 60% of the respondents either do not use vertical search or don’t recall clicking vertical responses to search queries. What is important to consider is the relative infancy of blended search in the major engines; as time passes adoption should continue to rise.

At the end of the day, as one would imagine, there is every reason to try and maximize the potential for your website/product/service to show up in as many locations of a search results set as possible.

Optimizing for these opportunities is an area of consideration for all website owners, if not now, then for the future.

Of the verticals being clicked, images was the most popular garnering a mere 26% (most popular of the verticals). After that, ‘news search’ was the 2nd most popular of the clicked verticals. Remember that video isn’t an initial vertical option with Google and requires a second click to get to; a good reason for reduced numbers.

Getting the right Blend

Looking at the data from the blended results questions things came out a little different. The over-all non-user total dropped to 44% (from 60%) which means adoption is somewhat smoother. News items rose to be most popular with images now in 2nd place (36% and 31% respectively). Both are also up from the vertical search narrowing which means blended search is being adopted much better than the vertical search avenues.

As you can see, video is also well up when presented in blended results (from 10% to 17%) which means that it is more viable a vertical search support than ever before. The mere fact that they are presented as an intial option upon general discovery search means that optimizing for blended search is more important than it has been in the past and you should start thinking about your optimization schemes to include blended search oportunities.

If you have some time, be sure to go read more about the findings at iProspect (or grab the PDF)

More Reading;

Universal and Blended Search - Online Marketing Blog
Optimizing for Blended Search
– SEO Space
10 Tips for Blended Search
– Mike Grehan
Universal and Blended Search Session
– SE Roundtable
Google 2.0; Blended Search – Search Engine Land

Popularity: 8% [?]

published: April 4th, 2008

Five Tips for E-Commerce Search Engine Success

Category General | Comments Off

What follows are five important items that can be used by an e-commerce site to gain traction on the major search engines. Some take more effort than others, but pursuing all five can help your site move up in the rankings and bring in more traffic. Please note that this list is in no way comprehensive, as there are literally hundreds of things that must be considered when optimizing for E-commerce.

1. Don’t Neglect the General Keyphrases

First, make sure that you target general phrase as well as product-specific phrases. When optimizing an e-commerce site, a lot of people will ignore the fact that searchers are using general phrases to find a supplier of the category of products being sold – and those phrases are more popular than individual, specific product phrases. The other advantage of targeting general phrases is that they tend to bring in people who are lifetime shoppers rather than shoppers who are product-oriented or price-oriented. For example, if you had an e-commerce store that sold office furniture, somebody who typed “office furniture” would be more likely to be looking for a site that he could return to time and time again for his furniture needs. On the other hand, if someone typed in a specific manufacturer and model number, she might buy that item from you one time, but she might not come back for multiple purchases. Both of these people are valuable, but in the grand scheme of things, the person who is searching for the resource can be a more valuable customer over a lifetime than the person who is searching for the individual product and who might simply be price shopping – and checking out your competition while doing so.

2. Make Sure Your Server Is Working for You

Next, make sure that your server behavior has been modified so that your product pages are automatically optimized each time they are generated. Note that search engine spiders will read your code post-parse, and this means that they will treat your code like it is fixed even though it was created on the fly by your server. To take advantage of this, look carefully at how your database is set up. If it’s like most databases, such as MySQL or Oracle, there will be separate fields for, for example, product type, product number, color, brand, and so on. The trick is to make sure that your database is set up in such a way that the keyphrases that identify an individual product are separated and can be pulled from the database.
If the identifying information for search purposes for a particular item includes (for example) the color, the manufacturer, and the model number, you need to make sure that the server can access this information from the database and put it in the appropriate places on the page for optimization purposes. By setting up the database with fields for each piece, this can be done much more easily.

But it’s a mistake just to assume that while you are pulling this product information, you’re deciding on your own what’s relevant, what’s not relevant, and in what order the information should go. You must us research tools rather than relying on instinct. Do searchers normally type in the model number first, the brand name first, or the color first? You don’t want to guess, because the right order can give you a great boost in the rankings.

3. Make Sure Your Pages Are Spiderable

A critical part of e-commerce is making sure that search engine spiders can see and index all of your product pages. While Google and Yahoo! each have a site mapping tool that allows you to submit individual URLs, experience tells us that those results typically are fed directly in the index and then are used as supplemental results if the spiders can’t find anything else. So what you really want to do is make sure that the engine can find the pages by going through your website directly.

Also, there are an amazingly high number of sites out there that have their entire e-commerce section blocked from search engine spiders because some of the technology that they are using, or information that they are demanding, has made their product pages invisible.

4. Flatten Your URLs

While some search engines – most notably Google – are getting better and better at indexing URLs that have long parameters in them and URLs that definitively say this is a query by containing such characters as question marks and ampersands, it’s still worthwhile to flatten your URLs to make them as compact as possible. There are still some benefits to having keyphrases in a URL, so if you can construct your URLs on the fly using information from the database, much like was discussed earlier in this article, you can have the best of both worlds.

5. Build Links

Link building is an old standby that’s good for any site, not just e-commerce. Link popularity is one of the largest factors in determining how sites are regarded by search engines. Essentially, a link to a website is treated by a search engine as a vote for that website – and all votes are not created equal. Links that are from pages that are relevant to yours in business and that are important or highly regarded are the ones that are going to be the most valuable.

These are only five of the issues that you face when considering optimizing your E-commerce site. Hundreds of other items are much more technical and fall outside the intended scope of this article. However, the five steps above represent a good start. Good luck!

Popularity: 7% [?]

published: April 1st, 2008

What type of links are best?

Category Link Building | 6 comments »

Ok my fine readers… another on from the ‘Ask the Experts’ file;

Archana asks; “Which type of linking is the best?”

There is no single answer to this, which is a common occurrence with SEO. You see search engines are not merely made up of a single algorithm which we can set our sites on to figure out. Quite the contrary; think of it as layers of an onion.

There is a core mechanism to which other methods and approaches are added. Each time a search engineer adds another layer it becomes exponentially more difficult to sort out. Then consider that each layer in that onion has a set of parameters that can be adjusted to create a slightly different outcome (search results). Much to the chagrin of your local SEO, none of us know exactly how it works.

Now, that being said, we do understand some aspects relating to inbound links and how they are (potentially) treated. Each website or more specifically, each page; has what we like to refer to as a link profile. This simply means the totality of the back-links and the potential value each may hold. Simply having more back links than a competitor is not the end-game here. Quality is often more important than quantity.

The basic types of links are;

  1. Reciprocal Links – links pointing to your site and you link back to them.
  2. One way links – links pointing to your site without reciprocation.

Now, each search engine will have their own feelings as to what is valued and how. A basic page segmentation approach give us the following in order of value (mine not a given engine);

  1. Editorial; links that are in the actual content of the page.
  2. Side Panel; a link from the side panel of a given web page.
  3. Header; a link to your site from the header section of a web page
  4. Footer; a link that comes from the bottom navigation of a page
  5. Site-wide; links that are predominant throughout the site (a forum sig for example)

the Value of a Back Link

Now we can add on factors that affect a given link. Each link has a weighted value depending on the search engine and how they deal with link valuations. As a general rule some of the following come into play;

  1. Age of the link (how long it has been around)
  2. Topic and/or Title of the page the link is on
  3. Relevance of the content of the page
  4. Freshness of the page (has the page it is on been updated)
  5. Number of links on the page (some ranking systems pass a ratio of accrued value)
  6. Trust (is the link from a trusted page or a suspect domain)

Link Profiles – to expand the concepts a search engine also looks at the entire portfolio of incoming links to create what we call a ‘Link Profile’ – with this larger global view of your backlinks they can valuate it and even apply temporal metrics such as;

  1. when links appear or disappear,
  2. the rate at which links appear or disappear over time,
  3. how many links appear or disappear during a given time period,
  4. whether there is trend toward appearance of new links versus disappearance of existing links to the document, etc.

By doing this they can assess trends and potential attempts to game the search engine by artificially inflating one’s profile. Temporal factors are also important in assessing the current popularity of a site on a chronological scale.

And so which is best? I would say a topical/relevant, one-way link that is in the content (editorial) from an Authority site in you nice (market segment) – those are the best. In the end it is more about creating a logical and balanced link profile – more on that in the coming days.

For now some more reading;

Link Building Ideas for 2008 – Reliable SEO

  Visualizing a balanced Link Profile – News.com

  Link analysis done right – SEO Theory

  Link profile building tips – SEO Design Solutions

  Difference between a Natural and an Un-Natural Link Profile – Internet Marketing Journal

Popularity: 10% [?]