Burden of Truth

Friday, November 21, 2003

IS GOOGLE BROKEN?

I really wish I could believe it was as simple as that....

At time of publishing this entry, the Google returns are in a mess. For niche topic after niche topic the most appropriate focused niche sites are buried deep below the large vanilla portals: Amazon, ZDnet, etc.

The quality of the SERPS is diminished accordingly. So much so, that in the opinion of many, Inktomi, and a number of the other search engines, now produce better quality results.

BUT HOW AND WHY?

A week ago all was fine. Google was producing normal results, and was almost the undisputed king of quality. Then.... it happened... Saturday the 15th November... a new algorithm was introduced. Perhaps not an algorithm, more of a filter.

The filter seems to work on the basis of a combination of anchor text of the incoming links, page content, and the authority status of the site (or otherwise).

The latter is particularly important, because it helps drive the bottom line phenomena: big deep-pocket sites rising up the SERPS to displace the niche focused sites.

Sadly for those countless niche site webmasters now facing ruin, this smacks of CALCULATED change, not error. A recent adjustment (Thursday) increased the rich-v-poor differential even further.

NOW FOLLOW THE MONEY

Yes, people are asking the obvious questions: Why? Can't Google see that the SERPS are now dodgy, to say the least? I would imagine they can see exactly that. But there is a bigger picture. Consider the following proposition:

If they change the balance of returns dramatically in favor of big money players, who own Amazon/etc, there are two potential fiscal effects:

1) A massive boost in income for those companies. A visible demonstration of what Google can do for them. And of course, guess what may around the corner? IPO.

The argument is that those companies will thus be more inclined to invest their mega profits to sustain the new status quo, which in turn will push the IPO value up.

2) A percentage of the fallen webmasters will rush straight into Adwords advertising in a desperate attempt to keep afloat. A short term but direct increase in revenue for Google.

Some people are thus suggesting that there are many ways to sell out to advertising. They argue that MSN/etc took the blunt route, filling many of their returns with paid ads. Maybe Google is being somewhat more subtle, playing a longer game. In the end these amount to the same thing.

BUT WILL IT STICK?

Well, if quality is king, it shouldn't. So on this basis perhaps what happens next will be an indicator of whether there is any foundation at all to the above story.

In the meantime, spare a thought for all those niche webmasters, who spent all those hours producing high content quality web sites on the understanding (partially fostered by Google itself!) that this was the route to better ranking.

The general message from these guys? And a happy Christmas to you too Google!

posted by Art Saturn [6:01 AM]

Wednesday, November 12, 2003

YAHOOGLE, YAHVISTA, YAHINK OR YAHFAST?

With Yahoo now settled into ownership of AltaVista, Inktomi and FAST, speculation is mounting regarding the future of Yahoo's prime search facility. Which of it's acquisitions will be promoted to replace Google? And of course, when?

Most bets seem to be on Inktomi. But is it the foregone conclusion that the pundits seem to think?

One the face of it, yes. It has the most mature PFI model, and it has been in ownership for longer than the other two. In addition, there have been reported glimpses of returns which do seem to be aligned to the current Inktomi SERPS.

However, I would suggest that this is no betting certainty. There are simply too many variables and unresolved factors. For example:

a) The quality of Inktomi simply does not match that of Google yet. Yahoo will surely be aware of that

b) What about the prospects of a merger of results from two or even three of the above?

c) What of the Yahoo directory? This is still of fairly high quality and is a good earner. It is not difficult to imagine this playing a bigger role in the final search returns

d) And even Google. Yahoo owns a part of Google - the timing and nature of the change must surely have some regard for this.

These, in my opinion, must cloud the decision to some degree. In addition, I see no pressing need for a quick decision. The change could well take place only when Google's contract expires.

The race is far from over, and all the chips are still on the table.

posted by Art Saturn [4:19 AM]