13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
13 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Google Should Give More Results Per Page

by HigherPrThanGod
11 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Any search provider would be advised to give people more results per page. Perhaps, up to 50. Maybe even do what Google does with their images now. Where they load (dynamically) within the page.

This would encourage search users to go further through the listings and give people further down the list more of an opportunity to get clicks. It'll also give people on PPC more opportunities for more traffic.

Of course it'll weaken the top spot, but it'll strengthen the spots further down the list. And as such, perhaps it'll stop people from OBSESSING over getting on 1 page, spot 1 of ONE freaking results page.

Just a thought. (The goal is to get people to SEARCH MORE. I NEVER seem to get any traffic unless I'm on page one AND in the top 8 spots. So why have the other pages?)
#give #google #page #results
  • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
    Originally Posted by HigherPrThanGod View Post

    Any search provider would be advised to give people more results per page. Perhaps, up to 50.
    Google already gives searchers that option. If you disable instant search, you can go into preferences and elect to have up to 100 results on a page.


    Frank
    Signature


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3490267].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HigherPrThanGod
      Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

      Google already gives searchers that option. If you disable instant search, you can go into preferences and elect to have up to 100 results on a page.


      Frank
      I bet less than 5% of users would change that setting. I was referring to them upping the default results to spread the traffic around. If so few view the 2nd page and beyond, why have them? lol
      Signature
      http://amazonpcbuilder.com/
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3490272].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Frank Donovan
        Originally Posted by HigherPrThanGod View Post

        I bet less than 5% of users would change that setting. I was referring to them upping the default results to spread the traffic around. If so few view the 2nd page and beyond, why have them? lol
        And that's probably on the high side. My guess is that it's to do with the speed of results - the fewer delivered, the faster the response.


        Frank
        Signature


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3490316].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author GarrieWilson
          Originally Posted by Frank Donovan View Post

          And that's probably on the high side. My guess is that it's to do with the speed of results - the fewer delivered, the faster the response.


          Frank
          More ad clicks too.

          -g
          Signature
          Screw You, NameCheap!
          $1 Off NameSilo Domain Coupons:
          SAVEABUCKDOMAINS & DOLLARDOMAINSAVINGS
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3490565].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author wolfmmiii
    Originally Posted by HigherPrThanGod View Post

    This would encourage search users to go further through the listings and give people further down the list more of an opportunity to get clicks.

    .....And as such, perhaps it'll stop people from OBSESSING over getting on 1 page, spot 1 of ONE freaking results page.

    ..... I NEVER seem to get any traffic unless I'm on page one AND in the top 8 spots.

    Easy answer....

    Google doesn't care. Why would they??

    These are the types of things that folks need to forget about.

    No, you are not entitled to:

    more clicks
    better visibility
    easier ranking

    The processing power involved to expand the first page to 100 would be massive. That processing power costs money.

    In addition, why reduce competition for AdWords advertisers? Google WANTS people spending top dollar to get on the first page.

    Folks....We really need to start looking at things from Google's perspective (big picture) instead of looking at them from our own little corner of the world.
    Signature
    Want a REAL Online Business That's Fun to Run?
    CLICK HERE FOR INFO
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3492518].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      After the first 10, the results are considerably weaker.

      50 would page 5 of a 10 result/page.

      Less is more.

      The processing power to put 50, or even 100 on
      one page would be very, very small. You would not notice a thing.
      This is after all, 2011. There would be no extra money needed.
      In fact, that whole idea about processing power is laughable.

      100 results would be cluttered.

      If people really want to see page 2, page 3,....they can.

      Scrolling down that far is not a good visitor experience.

      10 at a time is easily digestible.

      If people don't think google has this already figured out, well,
      I don't know how they became a company with $25 billion in
      the bank.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3492594].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author wolfmmiii
        Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

        The processing power to put 50, or even 100 on
        one page would be very, very small. You would not notice a thing.
        This is after all, 2011. There would be no extra money needed.
        In fact, that whole idea about processing power is laughable.


        Paul
        Although I agree with much of your reasoning, I'm not sure you understand the technical aspects of such things. Care to support your reasoning that processing power is "laughable"??
        Signature
        Want a REAL Online Business That's Fun to Run?
        CLICK HERE FOR INFO
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3492994].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lucid
    Although I use the option to display up to 100 results, I think very few people know about it and probably 1% or less use it. To be honest, I don't need 100 results for all my searches, only a few percent. 10 results is good enough the vast majority of times.

    I don't believe having more would encourage people to go further down. Once they see the listing near the top that appears to give them what they want, they'll usually stop there so giving 5 or 10 times more results provides no further value. Of course, a bummer for you if your site is on page 3 but that's life.

    As for the PPC side, same thing. People tend to click more on the top ones. The 20th ad on the page would get little extra benefit and thus little extra revenues for Google. The quality of those last ads would also likely not be that good, not something Google wants. Besides, when you set to show 100 results on a page, the number of ads doesn't change, it's still only up to 8 on the right side.

    > Of course it'll weaken the top spot

    I assume your logic for saying this is that people would check the last results on the page. As explained, few would so it would not weaken it at all.

    > perhaps it'll stop people from OBSESSING over getting on 1 page

    Do you really think Google worries about people obsessing about their site's position? Besides, it would change nothing. The 51st site on top of page 2 would obsess just the same. You just move the "problem" to different people who would used to be on page 6 but now on page 2.

    The extra processing power is minimal. But, Google handles millions of searches each day and that will add up. Any little thing they can do to reduce time to process a search is worth it to them. That's what Caffeine was all about.

    Ten results is a good round number, easily digestible as Paul said. No need to change.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3493285].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jordan Kovats
    Originally Posted by HigherPrThanGod View Post

    Any search provider would be advised to give people more results per page. Perhaps, up to 50. Maybe even do what Google does with their images now. Where they load (dynamically) within the page.

    This would encourage search users to go further through the listings and give people further down the list more of an opportunity to get clicks. It'll also give people on PPC more opportunities for more traffic.

    Of course it'll weaken the top spot, but it'll strengthen the spots further down the list. And as such, perhaps it'll stop people from OBSESSING over getting on 1 page, spot 1 of ONE freaking results page.

    Just a thought. (The goal is to get people to SEARCH MORE. I NEVER seem to get any traffic unless I'm on page one AND in the top 8 spots. So why have the other pages?)

    Even if there were more results on the first page, the end user is probably going to find what they are looking for in the top 10 anyways. If not, they will probably refine their search and start again.
    As far as PPC is concerned, nobody wants to be the first ad at the bottom of a listing of 50. It is prime real estate people pay for, hence the top of the page.

    I am sure Google and the others have spent more on testing these ideas than some people may make in a lifetime. There must be a reason things are the way they are.
    Signature
    Travel Insurance
    Term Insurance Quote
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3493435].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HigherPrThanGod
      I made a video explaining why most of you are wrong about this;


      There's no good reason not to do this. Some of you just eliminated any reason to even have search results beyond page 1..

      My goal would be to encourage people to go deeper through the results. If that's not a goal, then why have more results pages and not just stick to 1? The reason I believe this is important is regarding the now useless nature of back links. Back links used to be a good barometer of site popularity but not anymore and as such Google needs to give people more search results to spread the love around and not focus so intensely on PAGE 1.

      Just my opinion.
      Signature
      http://amazonpcbuilder.com/
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3532199].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lucid
    Why do you want people to go deeper? There's no good reason for this. When people find what they want, usually in the top listings, there's no reason to go any further. And if people do go further, your search engine is crappy because they haven't found what they wanted on the first page.

    Granted, it may be the way they did their search and there is a lot of people who don't know how to search. So the goal is really to educate them so they find what they want right away, not encourage them to look further in 100s of listings and continuing to do crappy searches because they would eventually find it on page X. I take the opposite view and would show ONLY one page of ten results.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3533781].message }}

Trending Topics