Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

The 100% Google Cure | Seo


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 05:36 PM

Our good friend, Glyn, put together a stellar post that deals with the current tumultuous effects of Panda, Penguin, "Not Provided" keyword data, and some "excellent" thoughts on how to "manage for profit" in a very tough time.
 
I couldn't agree more with every single point, Glyn nailed it. He offers The 100% Google Cure and his advice is timely, actionable, and comes from years of experience in the SEO/Online E-Commerce space.  This is a must read! 
 
 
You'll find it here -->
 

The 100% method to recover from any Google penalty (penguin, panda, and all to come)

 
 
Glyn ends the piece with this -->
 

A footnote for our heavenly father:

For those webmasters that get hit with a penalty it would be nice if
your team could find a way to actually report the URL of the site
causing the problem because in that way legal actions can be brought
against those parties that, for example scrape the hell out of Google
results and then drop-in a massive Adsense units at the top of the page
in a way to bake together some Adsense revenues (which by the way is
paid for by those businesses trying to sell something rather than
provide Ads which people click on as a way to leave the crap site Google
search just served!) – I still don’t get why your team can’t remove
these sites, but is so good at removing an actual business trying to
make it online.  This step might have the added benefit of turning WMT
into something that business owners could actually use beyond just
sharing their data with the Google beast. But I and others won’t hold
our breathe on that one.

 

<<< ------------------------------------------------ End pf Quote ---------------------------------------------------------->>>

 

AMEN!

(This is serious - there is no doubt in my mind that scrapers can corrupt a

link profile in no time, especially in the travel space, and you'll end up a

Penguin Victim as a result.  I've seen it happen.  I'll post on this later.)

 
 
Comments welcome.  Join in -- this is your chance to get "even" with g#####!
 
Let put our heads together and see if we can add to Glyn's work to develop the "Ultimate g##### Kryptonite!"
 
 
                                                SEO-Kryptonite.jpg

 

Back to the Anti-g##### Labs -- studying, reviewing, researching .......


Edited by chuckfinley, 13 October 2013 - 05:49 PM.


#2 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 1641 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 06:35 PM

Nice article.  Toward the end Glyn references having multiple channels and referencing the low cost of that strategy versus straight ppc.   That is no different than what IamLost has been referencing for a long time.  Its also a very basic and critical business strategy in any environment.  It is horribly risky and problematic to be dependent on one source of business.

 

Decades ago my father's business was halved in a matter of a few days in that they were 50% or more dependent on one source.  Today we have a couple of types of smb's with presence on the web.  On one type we've been reasonably successful on finding alternative sources of revenues outside of search and google.  We work on those alternative sources every day.  The smb's are in small niche realms with adequate, in fact reasonably strong local visibility in google.  But lets face it those niches are thin and not  too difficult to achieve that kind of visibility.  

 

Meanwhile we strongly bolster revenues by working alternative channels every day.   BTW:  in this business we added a great alternative channel in a stroke of luck and a connection that was staring at us for years.   It just had never dawned on us.  It's simply not that easy to figure out all the time.

 

We have other smb types that are inexorably tied to search.   It doesn't matter what we do.  Its a problem.  We purchased a brick and mortar smb of this type fairly recently.  What we or I should have known or realized right away is that it came with a google "local" penalty. I probably should have "seen it" or realized it within a week or two.  Cripes that killed search.  It also took me about 2 months of ridiculous effort to ultimately remove that penalty...calling on every resource and connection....and then in the last minute relying on long earned reliable validity to overcome a "stupid" sort of narrow judgement that could have maintained that penalty for a long time.

 

We were lucky.  

 

This particular niche is overwhelmingly tied to search.  Its a problem.  Something goes wrong or google screws us and we are screwed.  its that simple.  Google is the monopoly.  

 

Frankly in somewhat agreement with Glyn's perspective I think as time goes on and google has effectively disabled all keyword info and knowledge for websites...it can do whatever it wishes with algos and rankings and nobody will have a leg to stand on to confront them.  It will push up sites that become google's "paying partners".  Afterall as Glyn suggests it will help maximize return for the shareholders.

 

(I want to add to this perspective.   Again this comes from the local perspective.  If one has a restaurant or hotel in the US their traffic from google search was impacted significantly by the change from former methods of showing these businesses via the carousel.  

 

It was impacted in a very subtle manner not picked up in web reporting.   

 

An original search for a restaurant in your city or a hotel in Denver in the past would have generated a vertical list of businesses in the PAC.  On top would be ads and either above or below the PAC were organic results.   A click on a result would give you the search term.

 

With the carousel if one clicks on one of the pictures...google redirects the result to a new search phrase that has the business name and the city.   Before they removed all organic results if you tracked the visit to one's site...it would show a new search term:   restaurant/ or hotel by name/...name of city.   The original search might have been hotels, Denver or seafood restaurants Denver.

 

Essentially google took all that information about intent and keyword research and changed it for the smb.  All of it.  You no longer knew if phrases such as restaurant/city, seafood restaurant/city, hotel/city, boutique hotel/city, cheap hotel/city, 4 star hotel/city or any other descriptive element was driving traffic to your site.  Google completely changed the knowledge of what was driving traffic to your site.

 

Meanwhile:   google knows all that data.    

 

That was an astounding change.   It dramatically stripped knowledge from the recipient sites while providing google with incredible insights it could use to boost advertising.  Really extraordinary.  

 

Of course within a relatively short time google stripped all keyword knowledge anyway.  You now don't have the slightest idea if your high rankings or any rankings are driving traffic to your site, unless of course if each page is tightly wrapped around one or two keyword alternatives.   

 

the simple fact is that google controls the search game and has manipulated results to magnify its control.)

 

Alternative channels are an appropriate choice by many in many entities and businesses.  Its just not always easy to find them.  If you are a business that makes tanks for the US military...its pretty difficult to start selling candy to children, dresses to women, or mortgages to home buyers.  

 

Alternative channels --> easier said than done but a worthwhile endeavor.  


Edited by earlpearl, 13 October 2013 - 07:04 PM.


#3 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 4633 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 10:01 AM

In one way search - Google - made smb psychologically addicted and emotionally reliant and that is in the sheer firehouse quantity of traffic when all the stars align.
Note: this is a general observation and not directed at earlpearl's comments; he knows the specifics of his sites and markets with the knowledge and experience to know whereof he speaks.

Most smb have never had a web site. Most of those who have have long complained that it is a cost drain or that it's value is up and down depending on the whims of G and the incantations of their SEOs. And most smb decision makers are way behind the curve when it comes to the web. In their minds G is the web and all the stories of traffic, reservations, sales runneath over are real and current and happening to their competitors (who lie through their teeth about how well 'things' are going).

And so we have the fora angst of those who can't understand why their site doesn't rank well so that search will deliver the expected cornucopia and the fora queries of those who want to know why their site just got kicked in the teeth or the running commentary of those who continue the struggle in the muck that is Local.

There are three very hard points:
1. G is increasingly GIGO, simply because it can not directly determine either the context of the query or the quality of the potential results. And so, in self defence it combats the spam with brand (shorthand for recognized named entities). In a small market, as has been mentioned, it may be fairly simple to be a query return; in a medium or large market it pits the smb directly against enterprise level and unless extraordinary the smb is lost.

2. If starting new now one is competing for and against every back link already in the bag for existing competitors. Unless those competitors shoot themselves in the posterior ala the B&W zoo or manual penalties most query indices have become increasingly solidified. This is not a matter of simply out quality-ing the competition (SE tam's post above) because G is largely blind to such things: one is either above or below whatever a threshold might be, there are few gradients given various Googlers comments over the years. Despite all the FUD the foundation remains one of back links - fortunately one family of inputs where there are gradients of value.

3. Because of the above G is desperate to use social signals but most such are eminently game-able. And G really doesn't 'get' social although it continues to try so as to bring the social noise in-house and controlled.

4. Google is no longer a search company but an ad network company. I suspect that they figure if there is any one business segment that is susceptible to paid advertising it is smb with their historic yellow page fixation/reliance. Too much of the Google Local search muddle happens too often for no discernible reason to be 'natural'. I suspect that G wants all smb to build their sites to be AdWords landing pages. And many/most smb would actually feel right at YP home...

5. And then there is mobile. That is the biggest question mark in G's future. It is proving a very hard nut for G. They continue to struggle with supplying current appropriate Local search results, they continue to struggle with mobile ad ctr and conversion, for the first time since their beginning they are up against other behemoths, the rise of apps means that there is a direct alternative for repeat customers, the various snooping revelations raise an awareness they would rather slumber, etc.

Can smb succeed online as well as off? Can new sites rise up and flourish on the web generally and in search/Google specifically? Yes. But it will probably require imagination and investment not necessarily available for whatever reason. I would like to be proven wrong. Smb is the backbone of every successful economy. And it is really in difficulties in the current online economy which bodes poorly for the long term.

#4 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5477 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 10:46 AM

There are three very hard points:

 

lol....  You said three but then got carried away.   No, honestly, this is some of the most insightful information that I have seen in a long time. Anybody anywhere who is thinking about launching a new web biz and will not be using local search needs to read your points.

 

1. G is increasingly GIGO, simply because it can not directly determine either the context of the query or the quality of the potential results.  And so, in self defence it combats the spam with brand (shorthand for recognized named entities). In a small market, as has been mentioned, it may be fairly simple to be a query return; in a medium or large market it pits the smb directly against enterprise level and unless extraordinary the smb is lost.

 

Yep. Combat spam with brand.  Even the extraordinary small website is swamped by the brands.  The brand only needs one crappy product on his site and he will overwhelm a small site with the biggest selection on the web, the most informative and deepest content on the web (in both quantity and quality), a staff that will answer any question by phone or email.

 

Google needs a new algo to discover and promote retail niche quality.

 

3. Because of the above G is desperate to use social signals but most such are eminently game-able.

 

Websites don't link out any more.  It is really rare to find genuine webmasters in tiny retail niches who are writing and linking to superior content.  That activity is now in social.  Google needs to figure out a way to get that data and use it to promote websites.  They need a way to discover social signals that indicate content quality and ignore the BS.  Probably the best solution to this is to sell themselves to Mark Zuckerberg - if he is willing to buy them out.  lol



#5 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2577 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 06:53 AM

Thanks Chuck for the citation, and some really great comments in this thread off the back of it. As the lost one says, mobile is not so easy for Mr G, and eventually people will be comfortable transacting in Facebook and the other suspects so that's that.

 

My piece was about encouraging people to make a paradigm shift in the approach and relationship they have with Google. What I hope to have done is brought a few people across to the dark side of the force (which in reality is white like Gandalf it's just a G spin that makes it seem shadowy) so they can look within their websites rather than hanging in fear off the latest updates to police the spam - [read older school SEO].

 

That Google can update its terms and conditions of business making new guidelines have retroactive application is the kind of thing of governments are good at, which I suppose technically in the online space they are, but It doesn't make it right.

 

 Websites don't link out any more

 

They do, for a fee. But in that case it's a paid link, so your fu**** :)

 

G.



#6 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 15 October 2013 - 09:49 PM

Can smb succeed online as well as off? Can new sites rise up and flourish on the web generally and in search/Google specifically? Yes. But it will probably require imagination and investment not necessarily available for whatever reason. I would like to be proven wrong. Smb is the backbone of every successful economy. And it is really in difficulties in the current online economy which bodes poorly for the long term.

 

That was a succinct, accurate and well laid out analysis of the current state of the g##### nation.

 

Most SEO's and internet marketers are despondent, dejected, depressed and desperate to find a new path forward that gives them an ability to compete on equal footing with companies whose net worth exceeds theirs by a factor of 100 to 2,500.  It used to be that g##### was the "great field leveler" of the 21st century.  Finally those "evil brands" were going to have competition.  And a crew of gleeful SMB's headed off to finally make their way in the brave new online marketing world created by g#####.  It was hard to believe that a search engine with a conscience emerged to save the day with a motto of "Do No Evil" -- take that "evil brands!"

 

So we evangelized.  We created content that brought people to the search engine.  We struggled to learn how to sell things on the internet that people wanted.  It was hard work but we loved it because we finally had someone on our side against the giants that wouldn't let us into the "old boy's (girls') network.  Sergey Brin and Larry Page saved us and they weren't interested in making money, they were interested in "high ethics" and creating an internet that satisfied all the users and online venues that wanted to work to make it successful.  Afterall, why would they say, "First, do no evil" if they didn't mean it?

 

And, then they sold out .......

 

No, it's worse than that, they made it clear that it's "them" against "us."  They will, by force, take all that we helped them create and they will take all that we have today.   Why?  Because as it turns out, per Eric Schmidit, "Evil is what Sergey says is evil."

 

No wonder people are despondent, dejected, and depressed.

 

And to make matters worse, there are no real solutions, yet.

 

Glyn correctly points out that all of the current guidance from the self appointed SEO intelligentsia makes no sense.  What happens when everyone has a natural link profile?  After everyone copies the top 10 sites in that niche and they look exactly like the top 10, how can they expect to rise to the top of that pack?  There's only really 3 - 5 spots on the first page anymore anyway.

 

Pure SEO Lemming Lunacy.  As Glyn points out, after you put that one in the "Lie Big" Condenser, there's nothing left.

 

And then there's disavow -- Translated: A Highly Automated Outing Algorithm Disguised As A "We Are Really Here To Help You" Tool

 

And then there's the Panda & Penguin Get Well Crowd whose ideas really amount to -- out other businesses with the disavow tool and wait.  No one stops to think that g##### will soon use all that data from disavow against the people that are using it.

 

I think Jim Boykin said it best.  After all the links are removed and even if you get the penalty removed, you won't rank anymore because you don't have any links.  Sort of a self imposed penalty.  Do you Really want to do that?

 

Disavow and natural link profiles that make you look the same as everybody else.  Really?

 

Glyn nailed it.  Condensed all the bull sh!t right out of it and exposed it for what it really is.

 

Thank you for that Glyn.  Now we can get down to finding real solutions.

 

Maybe it's Facebook, maybe it's all the Ad Networks, maybe its Mobile, maybe its Local Search, maybe it's back to Off-Line Marketing, or maybe it's all of the above and a new approach to SEO. 

 

I just read an article from a source I highly respect.  They had some extremely valuable insights about how to make Hummingbird work for you, SEO-wise.  (I'll post on this soon.)  Maybe that's it or part of it.

 

But what I do know, it's not the same tired old approach.

 

What's Next?


Edited by chuckfinley, 15 October 2013 - 11:24 PM.


#7 test-ok

test-ok

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 368 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 12:53 AM

They do, for a fee. But in that case it's a paid link, so your fu****  :)

only if your caught  :emo_gavel:

 

BTW, I liked your article, nice job.


Edited by test-ok, 16 October 2013 - 12:54 AM.


#8 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 05:15 AM

This was interesting -->

 

This_is_a_must_read!.png


Edited by chuckfinley, 16 October 2013 - 05:17 AM.


#9 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2577 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 07:29 AM

I can now retire as I have reached SEO nirvana.


Edited by glyn, 16 October 2013 - 07:29 AM.


#10 DonnaFontenot

DonnaFontenot

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 3828 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 07:54 AM

Are you pranking us, Chuck? Don't see that in his feed.



#11 Ken Fisher

Ken Fisher

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 418 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 09:23 AM

Yea, real nice thoughts Chuck!



#12 test-ok

test-ok

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 368 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 05:23 PM

We have a co-media-n in the group. 



#13 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:09 PM

Are you pranking us, Chuck? Don't see that in his feed.

 

Consider yourself punked. :D But I didn't Photoshop it.

 

I searched for the URL of this thread and that popped up in a long list of g##### + listings that all had that same description.  When I clicked on that result, it wasn't matt cutts.  For a minute there I thought he had finally come to his senses.  Afterall, who can escape from the logic of Glyn armed with the "Lie Big" Condenser? ;)


Edited by chuckfinley, 17 October 2013 - 02:10 AM.


#14 WPMuse

WPMuse

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:30 AM


No wonder people are despondent, dejected, and depressed.

 

 

I know of sites totally and completely playing by "the rules" and they were put out of business by g#####'s latest attempts to stop spam.   Very cool sites, all the boxes checked.

 

I am now of the opinion that spam to g##### is anyone who they can squeeze ad dollars from.

 

We now live in a day where playing by the rules doesn't pay and the only one really listening to the market place is the NSA.

 

The only way to approach all this is pretty elegant in it's simplicity:

 

Create the best site for your market, and concentrate on providing the best product/service possible -- then nurture the customers and relationships that come your way to build partnerships for the long haul. 

 

That's all you can control -- so be the best at it that you can!



#15 bwelford

bwelford

    Peacekeeper Administrator

  • Site Administrators
  • 9018 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:41 AM

Spot on, WPmuse.  As an extension of that, I believe Google has a major problem in that spam fighting is a negative, sort of burnt-earth policy.  There's no guarantee that will produce good search results in the first few places of the SERPs.  The only criterion for measuring quality in the first few search results is how people (perhaps via social media) react to those presented results.

 

I believe Google may currently be wallowing, not sure where to head for better search quality.  It has a number of dimensions it could put emphasis on.  I believe Authorship will prove to be the strongest contender in pointing towards improved search quality.  I believe it's important to develop your Authorship strength as this becomes more determining.



#16 EGOL

EGOL

    Professor

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 5477 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:07 AM

I believe it's important to develop your Authorship strength as this becomes more determining.

 

I believe that this is the only way that a small site or an emerging site can have any hope.

 

So, that is it for information sites... how do they identify small retail sites?      If there is no way then they must become authors and accomplished and driving visitors to sales. 



#17 Ken Fisher

Ken Fisher

    Mach 1 Member

  • 250 Posts Club
  • 418 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:48 AM

I believe that this is the only way that a small site or an emerging site can have any hope.

 

Guess I  better get cracking on it then? I've been so shell shocked and handcuffed as some that have followed my troubles over the past year may realize. I even deleted a related industry blog (100 pages or so started in 2007) about three months back. Never tried to monetize it, so it's not about money. Figured maybe I was sending too many links to my real site...or connected to GA...footprints. Maybe a dozen...not that many but...what the hey. Sad, real sad. Depressing.

 

https://plus.google....partnerid=gplp0

 

So I have to put a byline on every page I have...one site? It's my site, plain and simple. I don't write in other circles (except message boards) It's all about the paranoia of The Gorg. I almost feel like Chuck nowadays


Edited by Ken Fisher, 17 October 2013 - 11:58 AM.


#18 WPMuse

WPMuse

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:21 PM

If there is no way then they must become authors and accomplished and driving visitors to sales.

 

I know of retail sites with Blogs that got hammered.  And they were not keyword stuffing or pushing their products -- they are actually providing actionable info and commentary in their purview.  Didn't matter to g##### -- and no recovery with authorship.

 

The disadvantage of being in a niche where it is what it is, is that you will be using a set of keywords a lot.  It doesn't mean you have tricky intent or are stuffing -- some things just are what they are with very little variation available for keyword SEO. 

 

Google could, if they really genuinely cared about presenting the best most relevant sites as they claim, add back the human factor.  Where a set of human eyes actually looks at a site, it's structure, it's setup and ease of use and makes a judgement based on that. 

 

Unfortunately my experience has me seriously questioning the sincerity of wanting to produce the best sites for a query.



#19 WPMuse

WPMuse

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:56 PM

Guess I  better get cracking on it then? I've been so shell shocked and handcuffed as some that have followed my troubles over the past year may realize. I even deleted a related industry blog (100 pages or so started in 2007) about three months back. Never tried to monetize it, so it's not about money. Figured maybe I was sending too many links to my real site...or connected to GA...footprints. Maybe a dozen...not that many but...what the hey. Sad, real sad. Depressing.

 

https://plus.google....partnerid=gplp0

 

So I have to put a byline on every page I have...one site? It's my site, plain and simple. I don't write in other circles (except message boards) It's all about the paranoia of The Gorg. I almost feel like Chuck nowadays

 

I'm with ya, Ken -- as are the too many to count clients I work with.  We are all the small fish trying our best to play by the rules and end up being the collateral damage in g#####'s effort to monetize (sorry, provide quality in) the SERPs.  

 

The good news is that if you are a good guy your customers will know that.  I see a resurgence in folks finding partners and suppliers that they can trust and rely on -- and recommend -- to give them the truth, best product, great service -- whatever you have to offer.  Be the best at it to those who appreciate that and nurture *those* relationships.  Hang out where they do, participate, help them out. 

 

Sites that are me-too, are nothing unique compared to what is out there or cannot capture a dedicated market -- should just save their money.

 

Being most SMBs don't have the budget to compete with the big brands, to worry about g##### is futile and a waste of time.  (NEWSFLASH g#####:  If I want Amazon, eBay or Wikipedia results I'll go there and don't need that in search).  I stopped fretting over g#####'s every change after Panda when I saw the collateral damage to perfectly good hard working Mom and Pop sites -- some of which went out of business -- others are barely hanging on. They didn't do anything so foul as to deserve that.

 

And while g##### still aggravates me and I keep up just so I'm up to date because of what I do for a living, for my own sites I don't live or die by every update or Matt Cutts video.  I know, I know -- "everyone" uses g##### so you have to think about it.  No, you really don't.

 

If you create the best site you can for a needed/wanted/desired topic/product/service worry about your customers and partnerships.  Those are what you can control to build awareness and therefore business.  That's what I do and if g##### rankings happen -- whoo-hoo.  If not, I'm no longer relying on that as part of my business model.



#20 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:19 PM

So, that is it for information sites... how do they identify small retail sites?      If there is no way then they must become authors and accomplished and driving visitors to sales. 

 

I agree that this is important.  Small businesses, especially, need to take advantage of every opportunity g##### serves up that allows them to compete with the big brands.

 

But what happens when everybody is an author?  What's the edge for the small business then?

 

The writing is on the wall.  If you're in the SEO business, time to diversify -- design, usability and conversion is most likely the next "growth" profit center.

 

If you're a small business that g##### doesn't think is relevant, which is pretty much all of them, you're in trouble.

 

Unless, someone knocks g##### out of the top spot. ;)


Edited by chuckfinley, 17 October 2013 - 02:25 PM.


#21 clandestino

clandestino

    Honored One Who Served Moderator Alumni

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 985 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:34 PM

Maybe g##### is giving in to Amazon.  Maybe g##### doesn't care about serving up e-commerce except in a limited number of verticals that can produce a lot of profit for them and shopping results, PPC,,,,,,,

 

Amazon is a better shopping experience than g##### by light years.......

 

It solves g#####'s spam problem.......

 

Hmmmmmmmm.......


Edited by chuckfinley, 17 October 2013 - 02:34 PM.


#22 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2135 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 04:52 PM

 
If I want Amazon, eBay or Wikipedia results I'll go there and don't need that in search

Exactly. When I do e-buying I go directly to the shop in question. Have a list of vendors. Hardly vary.  Guess I'm not a really good e-customer for all those selling stuff. Well except for Wikipedia. I'm glad they hardly show in the SERPs anymore.

 

Did I just invent the words e-buying and e-customer? Don't remember ever seeing that.



#23 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2577 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 03:58 AM

As I've mentioned, I think that the idea that Google promotes the good stuff is cr**.

 

Create the best site for your market, and concentrate on providing the best product/service possible -- then nurture the customers and relationships that come your way to build partnerships for the long haul.

 

This sounds like something I'd read in the comments section of a Matt Cutts blog. It's of course true - if you don't get these things right from the start you are basically digging your early grave.

 

However, in order to get there you need to bring people your business and frankly it doesn't matter how good you are, how much you care about your customer, and want to serve them. No one will hear your cries.

 

Largely people go online to make a saving, brands dont' really get built online in the way the marketing fluff will have people believe. People think Internet=cheap and Adwords is the lowest common denominator on that. Not to say there is not money to be made, but your typical customer that comes via a campaign is unlikely to want to get touchy feely with you, and would rather have a cheap price than some kind of "brand" experience.

 

People "trust" Tesco banks and bathroom services because they feel they can walk into a shop and break someones balls over a poor service - and they've poured millions into convincing you via Television that they are a brand that really cares about you. Look at some of the biggest suppliers on the online market look at their "brand experience" and you get a pretty quick picture on what people expect.

 

Remember the days of Overture? I was always staggered in the homeloans sector how much one person was making with the most disgusting web-page I've ever seen and a form. In terms of brand experience, there was none.

 

When one stands back and really thinks about the brands you trust. How many of them are online. Now write down what you feel about them. Now do the same exercise for your best supermarket.

 

:)

 

G.



#24 WPMuse

WPMuse

    Whirl Wind Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 09:36 AM

Hey, Glyn -- I totally get your point! ;)  The difference is I'm not making the statement in the context of SEO -- so Matt Cutts would have never said that!  It is very common for folks to go online seeking something that they saw a friend had and bragged about how great it was, the super service and quality product.

What you say about big brands is valid and a consideration.  But the truth is that statement reflects what I see sites that are succeeding, growing their market share and competing against the known brands are doing. Sites that have gained market share against the "big guys" because of the personalized, prompt and courteous service and great products.  And solid brand building from first contact.

These sites are not trying to be everything to everyone.  They make sure that when they get that possibly once-in-a-lifetime connection -- they make it matter.  From e-mails to packaging and after the sale communications.  They keep mindshare by only appearing in inboxes when they have something important to say and that something is of value to their customer (not only their marketing efforts).  They do social as best they can and nurture what happens there.


Brand is more important than ever -- what do you stand for, what is your methodology, when folks think of your company name -- what do they think?  Is it an after thought, or a brand that they can't wait to brag about and refer others to (with your help and perks of course)?  If you can accomplish the latter, you don't have to worry about folks hearing you scream. ;)



#25 glyn

glyn

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2577 posts

Posted 18 October 2013 - 01:53 PM

I hear u



RSS Feed

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users