Comments on: Search in Search: Raising Panic and What Else Google Has to Say http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/ Seo Consulting Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:06:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Michael Sprague http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1365 Michael Sprague Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:02:22 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1365 Yes, there is the danger that Google, allowing people to search specific pages within a company's web site, may cause that company to miss out on some revenue. Otoh, this seems like it also may make my shopping experience, and my web surfing experience in general, more productive. If retailers lose out, well, too bad. Better learn to innovate like, well, google does. How this is evil, I cannot see. Creative, useful, handy, sure. Evil? Not even close. Suck it up, buttercup. Life's not easy. Why should internet be? Yes, there is the danger that Google, allowing people to search specific pages within a company’s web site, may cause that company to miss out on some revenue.

Otoh, this seems like it also may make my shopping experience, and my web surfing experience in general, more productive.

If retailers lose out, well, too bad. Better learn to innovate like, well, google does.

How this is evil, I cannot see. Creative, useful, handy, sure. Evil? Not even close.

Suck it up, buttercup. Life’s not easy. Why should internet be?

]]> By: Google Introduces New Social Media Like Feature to Reorder Search Engine Results. | SEO Design Solutions SEO Blog http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1220 Google Introduces New Social Media Like Feature to Reorder Search Engine Results. | SEO Design Solutions SEO Blog Wed, 02 Apr 2008 21:30:14 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1220 [...] has already been a backlash from some webmasters regarding the Google search in search function which allows the top site for a competitive search their own search box to explore addition content [...] [...] has already been a backlash from some webmasters regarding the Google search in search function which allows the top site for a competitive search their own search box to explore addition content [...]

]]> By: Malte Landwehr http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1175 Malte Landwehr Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:21:38 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1175 I guess Google says "SIS cannot be turned on again" to scare us from requesting its removal (because you cannot know how the feature might develop in the future and whether it might be useful soon). I guess Google says “SIS cannot be turned on again” to scare us from requesting its removal (because you cannot know how the feature might develop in the future and whether it might be useful soon).

]]> By: Tin Pig http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1167 Tin Pig Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:34:53 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1167 @Pocket SEO - You're exactly right in that Google is doing this to increase searches, and thus pages views, and thus the likelihood that a searcher will click on a PPC ad. What everybody has to remember, however, is that Google is a *For-Profit* business. Just as other sites whose monetization strategy is directly tied to ad impressions take steps to find that balance between maximum page views and user experience, Google is doing the same. We give Google our site content basically without restriction on what they do with it from there so it's kind of hard to complain, no? @Pocket SEO – You’re exactly right in that Google is doing this to increase searches, and thus pages views, and thus the likelihood that a searcher will click on a PPC ad.

What everybody has to remember, however, is that Google is a *For-Profit* business. Just as other sites whose monetization strategy is directly tied to ad impressions take steps to find that balance between maximum page views and user experience, Google is doing the same.

We give Google our site content basically without restriction on what they do with it from there so it’s kind of hard to complain, no?

]]> By: Gab "SEO ROI" Goldenberg http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1142 Gab "SEO ROI" Goldenberg Thu, 27 Mar 2008 04:17:30 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1142 "Google can claim that this feature is “for the benefit of users”, but it’s increasing Google’s pageviews and ad impressions so one has to wonder at their motivation. I saw one site where the company is bidding on their own brand name. So Google increases the chance that the company has to pay for a referral (as well as increases the chance that users click on a competitor’s ad). The statement, “These companies, however, may not be able to reverse their decisions”, comes off sounding like a threat." Excellent analysis, and I also felt that the 'you can't turn it back on' thing was like a warning 'omg! no!' wait! why would you do that?! do you know what it means?' -Owner: uh yeah, we get more PVs on OUR site and thus more ad sales on OUR site. Off please. G: Err yeah, but still, it's really not cool. But from G's perspective, it's business - trying to boost volume of searches. I don't see it as evil. Evil is trying to create a monopoly - here they're just boosting how much people search. “Google can claim that this feature is “for the benefit of users”, but it’s increasing Google’s pageviews and ad impressions so one has to wonder at their motivation.

I saw one site where the company is bidding on their own brand name. So Google increases the chance that the company has to pay for a referral (as well as increases the chance that users click on a competitor’s ad).

The statement, “These companies, however, may not be able to reverse their decisions”, comes off sounding like a threat.”

Excellent analysis, and I also felt that the ‘you can’t turn it back on’ thing was like a warning ‘omg! no!’ wait! why would you do that?! do you know what it means?’
-Owner: uh yeah, we get more PVs on OUR site and thus more ad sales on OUR site. Off please.
G: Err yeah, but still, it’s really not cool.

But from G’s perspective, it’s business – trying to boost volume of searches. I don’t see it as evil. Evil is trying to create a monopoly – here they’re just boosting how much people search.

]]> By: rishil http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1135 rishil Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:02:45 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1135 @Stephen T - awesome idea on the use of the OpenSearch protocol! @Stephen T – awesome idea on the use of the OpenSearch protocol!

]]> By: Stephen T http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1134 Stephen T Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:08:10 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1134 If SiS provided a link into the site's own search then I think it would be much better as the control of search results would then be in the hands of the owner of the site. This could easily be implemented using OpenSearch protocol and automatically detected by Google, but I doubt the would ever do this as it's of no benefit to them! If SiS provided a link into the site’s own search then I think it would be much better as the control of search results would then be in the hands of the owner of the site.

This could easily be implemented using OpenSearch protocol and automatically detected by Google, but I doubt the would ever do this as it’s of no benefit to them!

]]> By: Pocket SEO http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1111 Pocket SEO Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:11:30 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1111 Google can claim that this feature is "for the benefit of users", but it's increasing Google's pageviews and ad impressions so one has to wonder at their motivation. I saw one site where the company is bidding on their own brand name. So Google increases the chance that the company has to pay for a referral (as well as increases the chance that users click on a competitor's ad). The statement, "These companies, however, may not be able to reverse their decisions", comes off sounding like a threat. In my opinion it's evil. Google can claim that this feature is “for the benefit of users”, but it’s increasing Google’s pageviews and ad impressions so one has to wonder at their motivation.

I saw one site where the company is bidding on their own brand name. So Google increases the chance that the company has to pay for a referral (as well as increases the chance that users click on a competitor’s ad).

The statement, “These companies, however, may not be able to reverse their decisions”, comes off sounding like a threat.

In my opinion it’s evil.

]]> By: rishil http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1110 rishil Tue, 25 Mar 2008 07:26:15 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1110 Thanks for that Brent D. Payne - it helps verify the post above. ;) Thanks for that Brent D. Payne – it helps verify the post above. ;)

]]> By: Brent D. Payne http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/comment-page-1/#comment-1098 Brent D. Payne Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:14:59 +0000 http://www.seosmarty.com/search-in-search-follow/#comment-1098 Got this from an Amazonian . . . It appears there is a screenshot of Amazon with an SiS result so . . . unless it is PhotoShop'd (highly unlikely), Amazon did get it removed at some point. http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/23/some-retailers-oppose-googles-secondary-search-feature/ Brent D. Payne Got this from an Amazonian . . .

It appears there is a screenshot of Amazon with an SiS result so . . . unless it is PhotoShop’d (highly unlikely), Amazon did get it removed at some point.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/23/some-retailers-oppose-googles-secondary-search-feature/

Brent D. Payne

]]>