"Google plans major overhaul to search engine"

154 replies
"Over the next few months, Google's search engine will begin spitting out more than a list of blue web links. It will also present more facts and direct answers to queries at the top of the search-results page. The changes to search are among the biggest in the company's history and could affect millions of websites that rely on Google's current page-ranking results. At the same time, they could give more ways to serve up advertisements..."

What are your thoughts on this?
  • Profile picture of the author Paleochora
    Yawn. That's my thought.

    This only really matters to those silly enough to rely on one search engine to deliver free traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5831963].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JSProjects
      Originally Posted by Paleochora View Post

      Yawn. That's my thought.

      This only really matters to those silly enough to rely on one search engine to deliver free traffic.
      That's a pretty bold statement. I assume that millions of successful individuals and businesses are silly?

      It's smart to diversify, but SE traffic is a big chunk of a LOT of peoples traffic.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832018].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JOSourcing
        Banned
        Originally Posted by JSProjects View Post

        It's smart to diversify, but SE traffic is a big chunk of a LOT of peoples traffic.
        It's also the source of many 2nd (and 3rd, 4th) site clickthroughs, so with this change, millions of web sites which may even claim they don't depend on Google will lose traffic as well. Anyone who's serious about online marketing can not brush this off.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832907].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Bill Farnham
          Originally Posted by JOSourcing View Post

          It's also the source of many 2nd (and 3rd, 4th) site clickthroughs, so with this change, millions of web sites which may even claim they don't depend on Google will lose traffic as well.
          The above may be one of those responses you glance at as you read this thread, but I think there is a lot of truth in the above statement.

          The whole idea of 'surfing' revolves around this very concept.

          It wouldn't surprise me if JOSourcing's comment turned out to be one of the most astute assessments if Google's search world indeed is turned in a new direction.

          ~Bill
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834527].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author goindeep
            If it gives me better results and better answers then im happy.

            I find it fascinating at the amount of people that get both shocked and worried from this kind of news. I honestly dont know why people would feel these ways.

            Fear is the mind killer - someone famous, lol.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853141].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Salashwal
      Originally Posted by Paleochora View Post

      Yawn. That's my thought.

      This only really matters to those silly enough to rely on one search engine to deliver free traffic.
      Makes sense in theory unfortunately despite the fact that Bing/Yahoo are easier to rank in with link spam most people little get little to no traffic in comparison to the amount of traffic they could get from Google. Unless you're talking about paid traffic in which case that's a whole different ball game all together.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838162].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rus Sells
    Would you please cite a source for your claims? Otherwise your post is kind of worthless.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5831968].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jwmann2
      Originally Posted by Rus Sells View Post

      Would you please cite a source for your claims? Otherwise your post is kind of worthless.
      I agree. Pretty vague actually. The truth is, Google never wants you to know what it's doing. WHy would they?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854189].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author KimboJim
    Doesn't Google already do this for some searches? Like when you type in: "5cm to inches" it gives you a direct answer.
    Signature
    Ready for some great content at a low cost?
    PresentPLR Newest Pack: LED Grow Lights
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5831994].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author tylamro
    This may help as far as a source: h ttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304459804577281842851136290.html
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5831996].message }}
    • Surely this would only work for queries which can be solved with a quick precise answer? If somebody was searching for lets say a workout routine, they would need more than just a quick answer.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832055].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Paleochora
    I believe that it is always silly to rely on one source for traffic/customers/prospects.

    Ask the people who thought they were sitting pretty on page 1 of Google for their keywords and got their traffic turned off like a tap after Panda/Farmer.

    I enjoy free search engine traffic but I don't base my whole business strategy on that one source. I like to see it as a nice bonus.

    Never put your eggs in one basket.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832064].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author anja98
    Is there any target date that they will be launching this?
    Signature

    Visit my blog (http://www.ahdanweb.com) to discover all of my journey to build a successful internet business - challenges, failures, dos & don'ts, tips & tricks, advises, lesson learnt.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832153].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
    Here is an article that gives you more details.

    Google plans major overhaul to search engine | Fox News
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832208].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tim Franklin
    It was only a matter of time, when you look at the new Google TOS, and most people have not even bothered to read it, You have to acknowledge that something big is about to happen and in many ways its not a good thing at all.

    Its all about what you dont know...

    Things about about to radically change in 2012 and if your not prepared for those changes the way you do business online may change so quickly that you could get left behind in the dust of other more savvy marketers.

    One thing is clear, Google is Afraid, and they should be, for the most part they have been steadily alienating the very consumers that their advertisers hope to reach out to.

    When you disrespect your publishers, your advertisers and the consumers, you have not only a serious public relations problem but you have a CEO that needs to be fired.

    There was a lot of doubt expressed when the move was made to make that corporate change only a few years ago now, but the results of that change is obvious now.

    Bing, became more popular, the public back lash over Google and its draconian treatment of publishers, all this adds up to a nightmare for Google stock holders who are torn between the desire to maximize profits and the fear that someone up in that ivory tower, might make the ultimate mistake before they can Dump that Google Stock.

    In the Corporate world there are rumors of a shakeup in the works, as the old saying goes, "heads will Roll"

    But this is nothing unusual in corporate politics, it happens every day, however will Google wake up in time for the curtain to come down or will they continue in this unrealistic untenable, fantasy world where they are the Gods that cannot fall to earth.

    No matter where you come down in this very real battle, between consumers and corporate entities, make no mistake if your not ready for that change when it hits, you might be looking at a lot of wasted time and effort.

    (as many have suggested do not put all your eggs in one basket)

    Look at what the competition is doing, because what they are doing is making Google very nervous, sometimes when you get nervous you make dumb mistakes, and make no mistake about this, there is no irreplaceable man.
    Signature
    Software Development | Applications | OSX | iOS | Android | Cloud Software Engineering |
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832299].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author derrickp
    My thoughts are you should have posted this in the SEO section.

    Originally Posted by Arowana View Post

    What are your thoughts on this?
    Signature

    Slime England

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832320].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Troy_Phillips
      Originally Posted by derrickp View Post

      My thoughts are you should have posted this in the SEO section.
      Not really .. this is a make money section and a lot of people depend on G to make their money.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833264].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        It may come to more or less than expected. If Google sticks with the original aim to move more into semantic search - that could be a boon for many site owners and lead back to the "content is king" mantra.

        In question is what changes Google might make to its plans in 2012 based on whether calls for a federal investigation result in an investigation being launched.

        Wouldn't be the first time Google used a "big change" as cover to back away from previous changes that had raised concerns about its practices or to delete projects that didn't produce as intended.

        kay
        Signature
        Every child needs a pet because every family needs an optimist

        Saving one dog will not save the world....but will forever change the world for one dog.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833318].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Carlos Tabora
        During the day, I do social media and Internet marketing for a web development company that owns and operates several sites in mainstream niches. These sites are GREAT domains with only one (or two) keywords (and .com extensions) so even if the owner didn't run the sites like a real business and just used them as parked pages, he would still generate 5-6 figures a month easily on affiliate income alone. But he doesn't do that.

        He runs each of these sites like real businesses. We have outsourced programmers and writers from in India, Pakistan and the Philippines. We also have an in-house staff of writers, link builders, programmers and marketers.

        Since my focus is on social media, I get paid to be on Twitter, Facebook, Mashable and WebProNews all day. We have been monitoring how "social signals" will change how sites are ranked on Google, Bing, Yahoo within the next few years. And I have personally consulted with Eric Ward who I regard as one of the top 3 search engine/link building specialists in the field.

        Historically, your search engine rank has been established by Google's algorithm which ranked your site/page on content quality (keyword density, internal link structure, etc.) and the quantity/quality of sites linking to yours. Many sites focus on the site content initially because that's the easiest to do/control, but that will only take you to the second or third page of an extremely competitive niche. To give you an example of extremely competitive, we spend 6 figures a month on Google Ad Words (@$15-20 per click) for just one of our sites in this niche.

        What currently takes us to the first page is our link-building efforts. We have an internal staff that works on building relationships with different Webmasters on authority sites.

        However, with the introduction of "social signals". This will change significantly. I'm not talking about social media spam/bookmarks that can easily be done with any software like SE Nuke, etc. With things like Google's "Authorship markup", Google +1s and even Klout score, quality will mean so much more than quantity than it has in the past. It will no longer be about how many people are talking about you, it's "who" is talking about you and what is the "context" (i.e. - positive or negative) about what they are saying.

        TO SUM IT UP (and this is just a guess on my part):

        If the current formula (and no-one knows exactly what it is) for establshing your search engine ranking is:80% Google algorithm (which analyzes the quality of your site) and 20% link building (i.e. - who links to your site), I believe that within the next 2-3 years, it will be 60% (Google algorithm), 25% (Link Building) and 15% (Social Signals).

        So, if you're still trying to get into the top 3-5 positions of page one (above the fold) for your search term (and most people don't click on any sites beyond that), if you're not increasing your quality link building and social media relationship-building efforts now, you will be left behind the minute Google or any other engine flips that switch on their engine.

        Last, but not least, if you haven't noticed that Google is trying very hard to make you join and use Google+ as your preferred social network, you will when they flip that switch.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833513].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author drmani
          Originally Posted by buzzaddict View Post

          If the current formula (and no-one knows exactly what it is) for establishing your search engine ranking is:80% Google algorithm (which analyzes the quality of your site) and 20% link building (i.e. - who links to your site), I believe that within the next 2-3 years, it will be 60% (Google algorithm), 25% (Link Building) and 15% (Social Signals).
          ^^^ This = Gold

          Plus, there's the "local search" element that'll kick in big time,
          tied in to the explosion of mobile devices that will be used to
          carry out a growing share of these searches.

          Get positioned - or die!

          All success
          Dr.Mani
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853301].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author derrickp
        Yes really, then why have a SEO subsection.

        Originally Posted by Troy_Phillips View Post

        Not really .. this is a make money section and a lot of people depend on G to make their money.
        Signature

        Slime England

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833626].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Troy_Phillips
          Originally Posted by derrickp View Post

          Yes really, then why have a SEO subsection.
          SEO section .. an area that is used to discuss search engine optimization. This thread doesn't discuss search engine optimization. It discusses a search engines decision to change a policy. A company's decision. A business' decision.

          This thread could easily prompt one to go to the SEO board and find or start discussions on how to optimize for this change but it hasn't crossed the line of needing to be in the SEO section.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834039].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author derrickp
            Ok Troy sure. Thanks

            Originally Posted by Troy_Phillips View Post

            SEO section .. an area that is used to discuss search engine optimization. This thread doesn't discuss search engine optimization. It discusses a search engines decision to change a policy. A company's decision. A business' decision.

            This thread could easily prompt one to go to the SEO board and find or start discussions on how to optimize for this change but it hasn't crossed the line of needing to be in the SEO section.
            Signature

            Slime England

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834076].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Marty S
              "Rather, the company is aiming to provide more relevant results by incorporating technology called "semantic search," which refers to the process of understanding the actual meaning of words."

              This sounds like a direct attack on useless, computer-generated spun content. So this issue should not bother real content producers.

              "The only constant is change" has never been more relevant than in the digital world. The best way to prepare for constant change is to produce VALUE, over and over again. Then threads like these will never be a concern to you or your business.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834213].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author VChas
                Originally Posted by Marty S View Post

                "Rather, the company is aiming to provide more relevant results by incorporating technology called "semantic search," which refers to the process of understanding the actual meaning of words."

                This sounds like a direct attack on useless, computer-generated spun content. So this issue should not bother real content producers.

                "The only constant is change" has never been more relevant than in the digital world. The best way to prepare for constant change is to produce VALUE, over and over again. Then threads like these will never be a concern to you or your business.
                It makes me think they are trying to be like Siri.

                How tall is Everest... (generic data)
                How many more days until my birthday... (based on your Google+ info)
                Where can I buy an ice cream cone... (location collection)

                With google's best guess at the top and regular search results below.

                Just speculation
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5992668].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author agc
                  Originally Posted by VChas View Post

                  It makes me think they are trying to be like Siri.

                  How tall is Everest... (generic data)
                  How many more days until my birthday... (based on your Google+ info)
                  Where can I buy an ice cream cone... (location collection)

                  With google's best guess at the top and regular search results below.

                  Just speculation
                  Google already tapped into the "incredibly lazy" crowd from day one with the "I'm feeling lukcky" button.

                  I never understood who would waste their time with Google's first guess and who wouldn't at least want to SEE what the other ten are... but then it took me a long time to understand just how incredibly lazy people really are.

                  Siri is just Apple continuing that trend / theme.

                  The real problem here is that the "long tail" is rapidly collapsing into a new era of "winner take all" where the #1 result is for all practical purposes, the ONLY result.

                  Imagine a future where there will be only ONE plumber in Indianapolis who gets sales leads.

                  A chilling thought to be sure, but it's exactly where Google and Apple are taking us.
                  Signature

                  One man's terrorist is another man's patriot

                  Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground - Frederick Douglas

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5994820].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
        Originally Posted by Troy_Phillips View Post

        Not really .. this is a make money section and a lot of people depend on G to make their money.
        You could say the same thing about every other sub forum section. The main reason people talk about anything in any of the forum sections (apart from off-topic) is because it's about making money.

        I'm not saying that I think this thread belongs in the other section (although I can understand why someone might say it does), but your logic for defending it sucks.
        Signature

        nothing to see here.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834282].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Troy_Phillips
          Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

          You could say the same thing about every other sub forum section. The main reason people talk about anything in any of the forum sections (apart from off-topic) is because it's about making money.

          I'm not saying that I think this thread belongs in the other section (although I can understand why someone might say it does), but your logic for defending it sucks.
          Sounds logic Andy and you obviously have more experience at defending logic than me.

          Defense is not my strong point as I have always been more of an Offense person.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834426].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
            Originally Posted by Troy_Phillips View Post

            Sounds logic Andy and you obviously have more experience at defending logic than me.

            Defense is not my strong point as I have always been more of an Offense person.
            aah, that explains it then. I don't actually give a toss either way so I guess we can leave it there.
            Signature

            nothing to see here.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834443].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author King444
        Originally Posted by Troy_Phillips View Post

        Not really .. this is a make money section and a lot of people depend on G to make their money.
        This is the problem
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834319].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author jerry310
          Guess all my SEO learning over the past months have been shot to the crapper. Hope I'm wrong
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834405].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    This has been predicted for some time. Google is changing from a search index to drive traffic to other sites, to a destination where it does not want you to visit other sites.

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832337].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kelly Verge
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      This has been predicted for some time. Google is changing from a search index to drive traffic to other sites, to a destination where it does not want you to visit other sites.

      .
      ...and this will bring things full circle.

      Remember when Google started? Yahoo had become more of a destination than a search engine. Advertising was more important to them than quality search results.

      Along comes a fresh new search engine.

      All they had (at the time) was simple logo, a search box, and a search button (can't remember if they had the "I feel lucky" button at the start), coupled with great search results. People flocked to them. They quickly took over the search engine world.

      "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -George Santayana
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832501].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kurt
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      This has been predicted for some time. Google is changing from a search index to drive traffic to other sites, to a destination where it does not want you to visit other sites.

      .
      Yep...I made this prediction in my Big Page of SEO in 2006 that Google will start to develope its own content. It just makes sense. I'm only surprised it took them this long.
      Signature
      Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
      Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832506].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mraffiliate
        Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

        Yep...I made this prediction in my Big Page of SEO in 2006 that Google will start to develope its own content. It just makes sense. I'm only surprised it took them this long.
        Hey Kurt,

        How do you think this will affect search results for local businesses?
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835653].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by mraffiliate View Post

          Hey Kurt,

          How do you think this will affect search results for local businesses?
          That's a good question...Just a wild guess, but I don't see this affecting local business very much, if at all. Local is just something that Google can't compete with.

          ...But I could be missing something.
          Signature
          Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
          Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835856].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Arowana
    Page Layout Algo Change early this year and now this, Google is killing all MFA websites.
    This will affect many informative websites...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5832521].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    "Under the shift, people who search for "Lake Tahoe" will see key "attributes" that the search engine knows about the lake, such as its location, altitude, average temperature or salt content."

    So what about actual webmasters who might operate personal sites about Lake Tahoe? :rolleyes:

    Just stick to giving us search results and drop the crap already.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833201].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author IMdeaming
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

      Just stick to giving us search results and drop the crap already.
      THIS!
      Signature
      Something stinks...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833590].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
    Google's going to become more like Wolfram|Alpha
    Signature

    :)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833350].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Agoge Warrior
    In my opinion, this is big time HUGE as it affects us as IM'ers that rely on ranking high in the SERP's to get traffic and thus, ultimately make $.
    When the semantic search feature is implemented, Google will rely on it's huge database to post factual information about the keyword that is searched instead of a list of sites that are SEO optimized for that keyword.
    Think of buying keywords such as "LCD TV Reviews" or "Best LCD TV" for example. When someone types in that keyword, Google will refer to it's database and provide a list at the top of the search results as to what it thinks are the Best LCD TV's or links to view LCD TV Reviews. Maybe its sees that Amazon reviews are the most relevant or it will post images with links to popular websites so the user can check out the Best LCD TVs.

    Therefore is will not provide a list of optimized websites that relate to those keywords at the top of the results.

    I think this is big, big time huge and would ultimately destroy the online businesses of a majority of website owners who rely on their website to be at the top to generate traffic. Much more so than any Panda update.

    Very soon, what we have all learned over the years as it pertains to SERP rankings in Google will be no more. The game is soon going to change it appears and IM'ers will have to think outside of the box to take advantage of that. If that will even be possible.

    So you will have semantic searches surrounded by Google PPC Ads at the top and sides of a search page. This does not bode well for those relying on SERP rankings to make $ online.

    Just my 2 cents guys!
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833630].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
    Banned
    Yeah ... ho hum. Before they're done, Google properties will occupy the first two pages of Google.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833820].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seobro
    This is really gonna HURT me. Google will take our content store on their hard drives and serve it up. Sadly, we will not see even one penny.

    If you wanna know what year we graduated Google can tell you. Yeah, instead of pointing to my resume. Already big G takes my videos and images. Well, now my copy is gone.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833874].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author wolfmmiii
    Am I reading things incorrectly or does it appear that Google has (and will) collect data from our websites and then serve up that data (not our websites) to searchers?

    It sounds like they simply want to collect our data from our sites, store that data in their databases, then serve that (stolen) data up to searchers directly, leaving the webmasters out of the mix completely.

    Am I reading this right?
    Signature
    Want a REAL Online Business That's Fun to Run?
    CLICK HERE FOR INFO
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833905].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
      Banned
      Originally Posted by wolfmmiii View Post

      Am I reading things incorrectly or does it appear that Google has (and will) collect data from our websites and then serve up that data (not our websites) to searchers?

      It sounds like they simply want to collect our data from our sites, store that data in their databases, then serve that (stolen) data up to searchers directly, leaving the webmasters out of the mix completely.

      Am I reading this right?
      That's exactly what it says. It looks like they intend to serve up our content without sending them to our site and serve their ads on our content. But this is no surprise. When Google isn't benefiting me in any way, and they only are marginally as it is, I will remove all my Adsense and block Google from indexing my site. Why would people give them their content to serve their ads on with nothing in return?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834207].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author wolfmmiii
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        That's exactly what it says. It looks like they intend to serve up our content without sending them to our site and serve their ads on our content. But this is no surprise. When Google isn't benefiting me in any way, and they only are marginally as it is, I will remove all my Adsense and block Google from indexing my site. Why would people give them their content to serve their ads on with nothing in return?
        I was afraid of that.
        Signature
        Want a REAL Online Business That's Fun to Run?
        CLICK HERE FOR INFO
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834231].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        That's exactly what it says. It looks like they intend to serve up our content without sending them to our site and serve their ads on our content.
        Not quite. It's not as if they're going to be scraping passages of text from your web site and displaying them unmodified to visitors and without providing attribution.

        Go to Google and type in "how tall is the empire state building".

        You'll see something like you'll see below which cannot be attributed to any one specific web site. Google will be displaying more facts like this in response to questions people may have.



        I think we're going to see more like this. Nothing wrong with that - using computers to do something they're good at.
        Signature

        :)

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834409].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Supafly
          Yeah, I think you're right. If Google dropped our sites down to page 2 or 3 in order to provide its semantic content on page one - or similar scenario - then there'd be no incentive to create good content.

          And as far as the change goes, I think IMers need to be accustomed to regular updates and expect that this industry will always change, even in major ways such as this will be. To me, it's exciting and a great opportunity to find a new advantage, whatever that turns out to be.

          And by the way, Mojojuju, you're hot.

          Originally Posted by mojojuju View Post

          Not quite. It's not as if they're going to be scraping passages of text from your web site and displaying them unmodified to visitors and without providing attribution.

          Go to Google and type in "how tall is the empire state building".

          You'll see something like you'll see below which cannot be attributed to any one specific web site. Google will be displaying more facts like this in response to questions people may have.



          I think we're going to see more like this. Nothing wrong with that - using computers to do something they're good at.
          Signature

          User banned from this site for being relevant.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836311].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
            Originally Posted by Supafly View Post


            And by the way, Mojojuju, you're hot.
            Please read the short disclaimer above my avatar picture. Thanks.
            Signature

            :)

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836355].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
              Originally Posted by mojojuju View Post

              Please read the short disclaimer above my avatar picture. Thanks.
              LOL That is awesome haha. Although I totally did not see that until you enlightened me.

              I suggest a blinking banner saying that LOL
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836365].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
                Originally Posted by dsbusiness23 View Post

                LOL That is awesome haha. Although I totally did not see that until you enlightened me.

                I suggest a blinking banner saying that LOL

                People need to learn that 9 out of 10 hot women on the internet are men.

                BTW, I think I resemble my Twitter profile picture more so than I resemble my Warrior Forum avatar.
                Signature

                :)

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836384].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Supafly
              Yeah, I know. Was a joke. :p

              Originally Posted by mojojuju View Post

              Please read the short disclaimer above my avatar picture. Thanks.
              Signature

              User banned from this site for being relevant.

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840842].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author agc
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        That's exactly what it says. It looks like they intend to serve up our content without sending them to our site and serve their ads on our content. But this is no surprise. When Google isn't benefiting me in any way, and they only are marginally as it is, I will remove all my Adsense and block Google from indexing my site. Why would people give them their content to serve their ads on with nothing in return?
        I'm with you on this one. If only it were so simple.
        Signature

        One man's terrorist is another man's patriot

        Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground - Frederick Douglas

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836208].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rvrabel2002
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        That's exactly what it says. It looks like they intend to serve up our content without sending them to our site and serve their ads on our content. But this is no surprise. When Google isn't benefiting me in any way, and they only are marginally as it is, I will remove all my Adsense and block Google from indexing my site. Why would people give them their content to serve their ads on with nothing in return?
        Is that even legal? I actually think, and this is totally my opinion, that if they do "scrape" content off a site, they would somehow attribute the source, providing a link to it. They would almost have to, otherwise this would be copyright infringement in many cases.

        Not arguing, I think you are right and actually I am guessing that's what this rollout is all about. I just can't imagine how they would just blatantly take content from sites and pawn it off as their own.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838510].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
          Originally Posted by rvrabel2002 View Post

          Is that even legal?
          No, it'd be copyright infringement, in most cases; but then again, that isn't what they're doing.

          What they're doing, essentially, is aggregating and extracting data and information from pages and presenting it directly on their own site in answer to people's queries.

          Quite different, but equally frustrating for those of the mind that receiving Google traffic is a birthright, and that Google has some moral obligation, because of its size, to put everyone else's business interests before their own. :p
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838598].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author rvrabel2002
            Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

            No, it'd be copyright infringement, in most cases; but then again, that isn't what they're doing.

            What they're doing, essentially, is aggregating and extracting data and information from pages and presenting it directly on their own site in answer to people's queries.

            Quite different. :p
            But isn't that exactly what they do now? I mean, they are crawling my pages and presenting my content in the search results, and then referencing this information with a link to my site.

            So, does that mean that they will just display the information, without citing the source?
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838628].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
              Originally Posted by rvrabel2002 View Post

              But isn't that exactly what they do now? I mean, they are crawling my pages and presenting my content in the search results, and then referencing this information with a link to my site.

              So, does that mean that they will just display the information, without citing the source?
              I would expect citations in some form or other (they include them now, in a limited way), though what form and prominence they'll take is anyone's guess. We'll have to see.

              The important thing to take away is that they'll not be taking "your content". They're using the data and information it contains - probably only when multiple sources corroborate its accuracy and pertinence - and presenting it directly on their own site. It's the same data and information that anyone else is free to take anyway to weave into their own research and content, just like a majority of websites have taken theirs from elsewhere - other sites, books and whatever else.

              Recycling information isn't a new concept: it happens all the time. We all do it. People are just pissed for three reasons: (1) they might benefit less as a consequence; (2) these days, big and successful businesses can do no right; and (3) righteous indignation is hip.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838746].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author rvrabel2002
                Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

                I would expect citations in some form or other (they include them now, in a limited way), though what form and prominence they'll take is anyone's guess. We'll have to see.

                The important thing to take away is that they'll not be taking "your content". They're using the data and information it contains - probably only when multiple sources corroborate its accuracy and pertinence - and presenting it directly on their own site. It's the same data and information that anyone else is free to take anyway to weave into their own research and content, just like a majority of websites have taken theirs from elsewhere - other sites, books and whatever else.

                Recycling information isn't a new concept: it happens all the time. We all do it. People are just pissed for three reasons: (1) they might benefit less as a consequence; (2) these days, big and successful businesses can do no right; and (3) righteous indignation is hip.
                I see what your saying, so they basically want to create their own "mega-site" about all topics, and present recycled information they found from other sites as their own.

                I think I know what's going on here. For the past 10 years, google has been telling us to create a "useful" and "informative" site, and you will rise to the top. Since 90% of sites are generally recycled B.S., they have had enough. They figure, "If the website owners don't do it, we will, and will present it in the way we think it should be"

                So, in essence, they are using their own algorithm to naturally rank their own "mega-site", based on the content they have researched, and present it as their own information.

                Scary...
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838878].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yourreviewer
    Here is another article from Search Engine Land

    WSJ Says Big Google Search Changes Coming? Reality Check Time!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5833949].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mayan21
    i spent my last 6 months learning seo
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834192].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Troy_Phillips
    Although it is growing harder to find areas G hasn't stepped into ... I remember.

    Just over a year ago I was semi-crucified for stating on here that those using G tracking / gmail and such were setting themselves up for a privacy invasion unlike any seen in recent times.

    Hums Toby Keith song :-)
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834247].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author zerofill
    Originally Posted by Richard Odell View Post

    So Google finally stops being a scrapper site and simply gives the top spots to the highest bidder.
    Correction... The highest bidder willing to present their content in the exact way that Google wants lol.
    Signature
    Serp Shaker
    The IM World Will Be Shaken to the Core!
    Join my list at: IMCool.Biz
    New Podcast --> podcast.imcool.biz
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834258].message }}
  • Every website or place on the web does the best possible to make internet marketers lives a real hell. But we will find another method to reach the first places.
    And remember that more time you pass working on your website, and more high is the possibility to be in first position. Stop.

    See you soon,
    Alessandro
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834357].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author troybh
      So what is the nickname of this update. Farmer and panda have already been taken.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834386].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author agc
        Originally Posted by troybh View Post

        So what is the nickname of this update. Farmer and panda have already been taken.
        This is the "all your base are belong to us" update.
        Signature

        One man's terrorist is another man's patriot

        Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground - Frederick Douglas

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836220].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author JOSourcing
          Banned
          Originally Posted by agc View Post

          This is the "all your base are belong to us" update.
          Funny! (and perfectly fitting)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836239].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author JForsberg
        Originally Posted by troybh View Post

        So what is the nickname of this update. Farmer and panda have already been taken.
        Perhaps Thief.

        Well, once Google puts this into action, whats the odds that people leave Google for Yahoo, Bing, AltaVista and w/e else SE there are around?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837779].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author mraffiliate
          Originally Posted by JForsberg View Post

          Perhaps Thief.

          Well, once Google puts this into action, whats the odds that people leave Google for Yahoo, Bing, AltaVista and w/e else SE there are around?
          In the past 2 weeks I've seen a huge increase in traffic from Yahoo for some reason.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838812].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author retsek
    If you actually read what's behind this you'd know that this will not affect informational sites that are broad and an authority on their subject.

    It will no doubt harm narrow (thin?) sites. A good example is whatismyaddress.com. They are definitely feeling some pain and have now resorted to buying adwords even though they are listed #1 in organic search.

    So calm down and stop assuming Google is out to get IMers. They're not. A change like their can only help and benefit THEIR users. If you don't want to play with Google, then block their robot and look elsewhere.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834395].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author agc
      Originally Posted by retsek View Post

      So calm down and stop assuming Google is out to get IMers. They're not. A change like their can only help and benefit THEIR users. If you don't want to play with Google, then block their robot and look elsewhere.
      Correct. Google is not out to get you. Google just wants to eat 75% of the pie you bake.
      Signature

      One man's terrorist is another man's patriot

      Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground - Frederick Douglas

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836234].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MagicWhisper
    Oh Google...*sigh*
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834470].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
    Originally Posted by Chris Kent View Post

    If you think about it - nearly all quality traffic originates from the search engines. Yes, social media is more important now but it's not applicable for all subjects and is mainly a trending type of traffic.
    Or you run a business and pay for traffic. Just like all the "old fashioned" businesses have been doing since pretty much forever.

    And I'm NOT talking about PPC.

    There are so many places to buy quality traffic that you (or anyone) needs Google.

    * Solo Ads
    * Banners
    * PPC (from other Search Engines)
    * Facebook
    * StumbleUpon
    * CPV/PPV
    * Print/Offline
    * Radio/TV


    And finally, if Google goes off the deep end and does some wacked out sh*t that screws over the internet, the internet will revolt and a new, better search engine will take it's place.

    Nothing really to worry about, unless you built your business on Google. If so, do what all good businesses do - adapt and grow.

    Rob
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834571].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JOSourcing
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Rob Howard View Post

      Or you run a business and pay for traffic. Just like all the "old fashioned" businesses have been doing since pretty much forever.

      And I'm NOT talking about PPC.

      There are so many places to buy quality traffic that you (or anyone) needs Google.

      * Solo Ads
      * Banners
      * PPC (from other Search Engines)
      * Facebook
      * StumbleUpon
      * CPV/PPV
      * Print/Offline
      * Radio/TV

      And finally, if Google goes off the deep end and does some wacked out sh*t that screws over the internet, the internet will revolt and a new, better search engine will take it's place.

      Nothing really to worry about, unless you built your business on Google. If so, do what all good businesses do - adapt and grow.

      Rob
      Great points and resources. Thing is, traffic from some of those platforms will depend on browser bookmarks, while a significant number of 'other' search engines that aggregate data from Google itself may find themselves left with an empty database. With this change, the vast world of global access will have become limited to what we remember to 'favorite,' or seek from a search engine that no one has really used or contributed to up to this point.

      Offline resources (print and radio), as you mentioned, are certainly viable alternatives. However, they aren't as immediately accessible as Google is. You have to remember Google is an instantaneous and interactive search platform. "Ask and ye shall receive." You just can't get that immediacy offline, and I can't remember the last time I watched TV, read a printed magazine or newspaper, or listened to radio to find the best PHP editor.

      I do believe, though, that existing or new search engines will eventually replace Google should the company go forward with this decision on a massive scale. Might even be the answer to Yahoo's ongoing problems.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834670].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
      Originally Posted by Chris Kent View Post

      With the exception of offline methods, where do you think the traffic originates from?
      By people getting on the internet and browsing; traffic isn't "held" at Google and then released like a dam.

      Traffic is like currency - constantly moving.

      The media buy (banner/media) market has much more traffic than Google. You can get just about unlimited traffic from those networks.

      And I have sites I visit regularly that does not require me going to Google.

      I see targeted ads on those sites all the time.

      Web forums, such as this one, requires no going to Google. People gather all over the place.

      Blogs I enjoy reading are bookmarked and I don't need google to find related blogs because most have related blog links.

      Of course there is also Facebook and all those ads.

      Besides, if Google dies tomorrow, a new search engine will take it's place. And that's not counting Bing.

      My point being - adapt. The world isn't ending if Google goes down in flames or decides to stop being a search engine.

      I swear, the amount of people that think Google is some sort of "god" is both staggering and sad.

      Rob
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834964].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kelly Verge
        Originally Posted by Rob Howard View Post

        ...And I have sites I visit regularly that does not require me going to Google.

        I see targeted ads on those sites all the time.

        Web forums, such as this one, requires no going to Google. People gather all over the place.

        Blogs I enjoy reading are bookmarked and I don't need google to find related blogs because most have related blog links.
        True.

        Just remember that in the non-tech world, however, a SIGNIFICANT percentage of people still type url's in Google's search box.

        Google has an impact, even if it might not seem to have an impact to you.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838172].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author tpw
          Originally Posted by Kelly Verge View Post

          Google has an impact, even if it might not seem to have an impact to you.

          The point that Rob was making is that serious business owners don't rely on just one source for their traffic.

          As business owners, we have a choice: adapt to change or die.

          If Google stopped being good to Rob and I, we would continue to be profitable, because we have never relied on Google, nor have we tried to kick Google out of our beds.

          I am grateful for the 15k unique visitors Google sends me each month, but they still account for only 35% of my global traffic.

          How is that possible you ask...

          Because I seek traffic from a multitude of sources...

          The people who are concerned about Google turning off the free traffic tap are those who have only invested in Google SEO -- building links for the sake of Google and not for finding new customers.

          The thing that I find so amazing is that when new people start online, they ask how to get traffic for their sites, and almost unanimously, people tell them to do SEO for Google. That is all folks know how to do, because that is they only thing they have been taught to do.

          Yet, having done SEO, I know that SEO is expensive -- in either time or money.

          Free traffic is not free, because people will spend a ton of time to get that, and yet there are no guarantees that anyone seeking free traffic from Google will actually get it.

          SEO for Google is not a guarantee of success... Although it can be nice if you ever do achieve it.

          When you have nothing but time, then link building is a good strategy... But one should try to seek links of both kinds -- the links that will draw real customers to your site AND links that will impress Google.

          Ironically, I have found that if you seek links that will appeal to readers, Google will love those links as much as or more than links set up only for the sake of Google.

          I would encourage everyone to build links that focus on attracting clicks, more than links that Google will love, because in the absence of Google rankings, the person will be able to develop some additional traffic from outside of Google.

          When and if Google starts sending traffic to the person, then the webmaster will have both kinds of links and will be able to survive any changes that Google makes, because they focused on building traffic from a multitude of sources.

          In the real world, small business owners pay for all kinds of advertising... It is how local businesses get foot traffic in their shops...

          On the web, everyone wants it for free... You can get free traffic online, BUT ONLY IF you willing to spend a lot of time to get it.

          I strongly suggest that everyone pays for traffic, be it free traffic or paid traffic. One only needs to decide how they are going to pay for that traffic -- with time or money.

          I do both.

          Anyone who thinks that Google is the only traffic source they need is silly. Especially given that they will pay in time or money to get that traffic, and they will spend just as much to build links to attract Google as they will to build links to attract real people.

          Ignoring everything else for the sake of Google is a dead-end road, and those who do it have only themselves to blame when Google does not cooperate with their goals.
          Signature
          Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
          Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840109].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Black Hat Cat
            Banned
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            The point that Rob was making is that serious business owners don't rely on just one source for their traffic.

            As business owners, we have a choice: adapt to change or die.

            If Google stopped being good to Rob and I, we would continue to be profitable, because we have never relied on Google, nor have we tried to kick Google out of our beds.

            I am grateful for the 15k unique visitors Google sends me each month, but they still account for only 35% of my global traffic.

            How is that possible you ask...

            Because I seek traffic from a multitude of sources...
            Such as? I'm all for diversifying, but info in this area is seriously lacking.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840636].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author tpw
              Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat View Post

              Such as? I'm all for diversifying, but info in this area is seriously lacking.

              There is nothing revolutionary in this information. I promise you have heard it all before.

              There is nothing sexy about what I do...

              Social media - twitter and facebook
              Article Marketing - Article Directory Marketing and Syndication
              Forum Marketing
              Video Marketing
              Blog Comments - well thought out responses to high traffic posts
              Product Creation - links at the end of product
              Affiliate Marketing
              Free Reports - Document Sharing Sites
              Free Bonuses - Other people's products
              Email Marketing - My lists and paid advertising
              Press Releases
              Paid Traffic - wide assortment
              Paid Advertising - wide assortment
              Attraction Marketing - Giving the kind of content that people want to mention and link...


              Of all of the people on this thread, you were the last one that I would have thought would be confused about how to diversify...
              Signature
              Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
              Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840805].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Black Hat Cat
                Banned
                Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                There is nothing revolutionary in this information. I promise you have heard it all before.

                There is nothing sexy about what I do...

                Social media - twitter and facebook
                Article Marketing - Article Directory Marketing and Syndication
                Forum Marketing
                Video Marketing
                Blog Comments - well thought out responses to high traffic posts
                Product Creation - links at the end of product
                Affiliate Marketing
                Free Reports - Document Sharing Sites
                Free Bonuses - Other people's products
                Email Marketing - My lists and paid advertising
                Press Releases
                Paid Traffic - wide assortment
                Paid Advertising - wide assortment
                Attraction Marketing - Giving the kind of content that people want to mention and link...


                Of all of the people on this thread, you were the last one that I would have thought would be confused about how to diversify...
                No doubt about it, I rely too much on google search traffic, and it's past time I stop doing that. Throughout this forum and others, there seems to be little detailed discussion about legitimate alternatives when there should be more.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5841458].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
                  Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat View Post

                  Throughout this forum and others, there seems to be little detailed discussion about legitimate alternatives when there should be more.
                  Quoted for truth.

                  There is basically NO discussion of alternatives. Especially with paid traffic, which is sad considering the potential it has.

                  Rob
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5841907].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
                  Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat View Post

                  No doubt about it, I rely too much on google search traffic, and it's past time I stop doing that. Throughout this forum and others, there seems to be little detailed discussion about legitimate alternatives when there should be more.
                  Absolutely agree 100%

                  Im getting tired of hearing..

                  "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"
                  "Those that rely purely on Google will fail"

                  Give us some solid advice/alternatives, rather than the cheesy one liners.
                  Signature

                  BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5842547].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Thatgirl
                    Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

                    Absolutely agree 100%

                    Im getting tired of hearing..

                    "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"
                    "Those that rely purely on Google will fail"

                    Give us some solid advice/alternatives, rather than the cheesy one liners.
                    I agree!
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5842655].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author tpw
                    Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

                    Absolutely agree 100%

                    Im getting tired of hearing..

                    "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"
                    "Those that rely purely on Google will fail"

                    Give us some solid advice/alternatives, rather than the cheesy one liners.

                    Admit it... Some of my cheesy one liners make you laugh... :p
                    Signature
                    Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
                    Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5842680].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
                      Originally Posted by tpw View Post

                      Admit it... Some of my cheesy one liners make you laugh... :p

                      You're a funny man Bill
                      Signature

                      BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853958].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author King444
                    Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

                    Absolutely agree 100%

                    Im getting tired of hearing..

                    "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"
                    "Those that rely purely on Google will fail"

                    Give us some solid advice/alternatives, rather than the cheesy one liners.
                    I agree too...please give some solid advice.. :confused:
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5842893].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
                      Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat View Post

                      No doubt about it, I rely too much on google search traffic, and it's past time I stop doing that. Throughout this forum and others, there seems to be little detailed discussion about legitimate alternatives when there should be more.
                      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

                      Absolutely agree 100%

                      Im getting tired of hearing..

                      "Dont put all your eggs in one basket"
                      "Those that rely purely on Google will fail"

                      Give us some solid advice/alternatives, rather than the cheesy one liners.
                      You both may wish to check out this free traffic ebook by Kim Roach given away in the War Room. Contains 77 different ways to generate traffic;

                      http://www.warriorforum.com/war-room...ml#post2768788

                      Enjoy

                      Chris
                      Signature

                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5843027].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Andyhenry
            Originally Posted by tpw View Post

            Ignoring everything else for the sake of Google is a dead-end road, and those who do it have only themselves to blame when Google does not cooperate with their goals.
            As a lot of people find out when they get a Google slap that puts their business under.

            All you have to do is buy a few links and you could lose your rankings for months, but people just blindly use spammy techniques and hope they never get slapped.
            Signature

            nothing to see here.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840911].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Chris Worner
              Originally Posted by Andyhenry View Post

              All you have to do is buy a few links and you could lose your rankings for months, but people just blindly use spammy techniques and hope they never get slapped.
              And when they do get slapped silly they blame Google.

              -Chris
              Signature

              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5841057].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author rvrabel2002
        Originally Posted by Rob Howard View Post

        By people getting on the internet and browsing; traffic isn't "held" at Google and then released like a dam.

        Traffic is like currency - constantly moving.

        The media buy (banner/media) market has much more traffic than Google. You can get just about unlimited traffic from those networks.

        And I have sites I visit regularly that does not require me going to Google.

        I see targeted ads on those sites all the time.

        Web forums, such as this one, requires no going to Google. People gather all over the place.

        Blogs I enjoy reading are bookmarked and I don't need google to find related blogs because most have related blog links.

        Of course there is also Facebook and all those ads.

        Besides, if Google dies tomorrow, a new search engine will take it's place. And that's not counting Bing.

        My point being - adapt. The world isn't ending if Google goes down in flames or decides to stop being a search engine.

        I swear, the amount of people that think Google is some sort of "god" is both staggering and sad.

        Rob
        I agree with your post, but I think you are missing the bigger picture here. AS JOutsourcing mentioned in the first page of the thread, the change would affect all levels of sites, not just ones directly being displayed in the search results.

        For instance, the media buying platforms you suggest, where do you think the majority of their traffic originates? You guessed it (hopefully), search engines.

        The only media buy sites that would not be completely affected by something like this would be large sites that people manually type into the search bar (such as warrior forum).
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838605].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author stretch361
    So, how long do you think it will take before anyone tries to start a class action lawsuit for google 'stealing' content?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834876].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by stretch361 View Post

      So, how long do you think it will take before anyone tries to start a class action lawsuit for google 'stealing' content?

      Forever.

      Google only "steals" / curates content from websites that have not explicitly told them not to crawl the site.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834914].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author retsek
      Originally Posted by stretch361 View Post

      So, how long do you think it will take before anyone tries to start a class action lawsuit for google 'stealing' content?
      Who can claim ownership of the type of content that google is/will be displaying? how big is x lake? how tall is that building? what's the population of?

      Plus the display will be based on multiple sources.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834950].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ImHot
    Their doing this to compete with Facebook.
    Signature

    Epic Direct is the WORST CPA network. They have screwed their affiliates by not paying out commissions that are as much as 6 months due! Join the Facebook page and support the affiliate community:
    Epic Direct Advertising Not Paying Publishers

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834945].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ImHot
    and other SN networks
    Signature

    Epic Direct is the WORST CPA network. They have screwed their affiliates by not paying out commissions that are as much as 6 months due! Join the Facebook page and support the affiliate community:
    Epic Direct Advertising Not Paying Publishers

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5834949].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DireStraits
    Let's be realistic, though. For all the moaning (come on, that's what it is ) going on here (and I understand - I'm a webmaster/publisher and get a lot of traffic from Google myself), we all know that they, being a for-profit company, are in it for themselves. Let common sense prevail. Their relationships with publishers are held dear only for as long as they're maximally lucrative. The minute they're capable of weaning themselves off their reliance on other people's intellectual property and relinquishing themselves of all related reciprocative "obligations", they will. And they have. And they'll continue to.

    Heavy long-term reliance on "us" has never been a part of Google's business plan. Likewise, neither should reliance on Google be, or have ever been, a part of ours.

    Every time a new exposure-diminishing Google entity appears in the SERPs, there's an uproar - talk of Google's treachery; their backstabbing, leaching tendencies; how they're driving themselves to the grave. Blah, blah. So far as I can see, their profits are only going in one direction. Who's laughing?

    We all know what the answer is, and the longer we keep telling ourselves "it won't happen, please don't let it happen", the bigger the blow will be when it arrives.

    Masses of "free", organic search-engine traffic is not an inalienable right. It wasn't even a reality until the inception of the search-engine, and still businesses thrived. It's getting to the point where we sound like a bunch of career benefit scroungers who justify our outrage at having our handouts stopped because of the perceived injustice at corporations "monopolising resources" (which in their raw form would be of no practical use anyway) and so depriving the populace of its birthright to survive comfortably sans effort and without using its smarts.

    Not a perfect analogy, but close enough.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835090].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rob Howard
      Originally Posted by DireStraits View Post

      Masses of "free", organic search-engine traffic is not an inalienable right. It wasn't even a reality until the inception of the search-engine, and still businesses thrived. It's getting to the point where we sound like a bunch of career benefit scroungers who justify our outrage at having our handouts stopped because of the perceived injustice at corporations "monopolising resources" (which in their raw form would be of no practical use anyway) and so depriving the populace of its birthright to survive comfortably sans effort and without using its smarts.

      Not a perfect analogy, but close enough.
      Highlighted the key takeaway from your post.

      A lot of people think business will end if Google says so. Luckily, REAL businesses won't end - if they rely too much on Google, they'll adapt or die.

      And for those who don't rely on Google...like the millions and millions of businesses who don't, not much will change.

      Rob
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835106].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Brendan Carl
    I think that no one should heavily rely on SEO for traffic. If you do this, you are spending time and effort on a method that could become useless overnight. You should try to get traffic another way. SEO is nice, but should not be your main source of traffic.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835130].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
      Originally Posted by bcarl6 View Post

      I think that no one should heavily rely on SEO for traffic. If you do this, you are spending time and effort on a method that could become useless overnight. You should try to get traffic another way. SEO is nice, but should not be your main source of traffic.
      The main thing I take away from this entire thread is that a new Search Engine will rise. An event I have wished for, for many years now. There are far too many flaws in the "for profit" corporation Google.

      With that being said. Just like many SEO myths I will believe it when I see it. Thankfully I have started to adopt a more varied network in order to bring traffic to sites, but I do still rely heavily on SEO having studied years of it.

      Finally I feel like any smart marketer (whether they realize it or not) is not relying only on Google. I mean let's be real if you don't have facebook pages (Google and Google + A MUST) YouTube, Twitter, Web 2.0's etc. You have seriously missed a mark.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835219].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author tpw
        Originally Posted by dsbusiness23 View Post

        There are far too many flaws in the "for profit" corporation Google.

        Which flaws are those?

        The ones that relate to them being in business to make a profit?

        Or something else?
        Signature
        Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
        Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835324].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    I know the "politically correct" answer is to not rely on Google, but the fact is, for many websites Google delivers via SEO a monstrous amount of traffic.

    Without having to buy it.

    Can some sites or online businesses get along without Google? Sure.

    But any major overhaul in Google has huge consequences for many online businesses.

    To suggest there are alternatives, such as radio, stumbleupon, banner ads, grocery store flyers, whatever, is just silly.

    For many inquiries, searches for information, searches for answers, etc., people use Google.

    They sure as heck don't start with another site to see what "targeted" advertising banner ads may exist.

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835622].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MagicWhisper
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      I know the "politically correct" answer is to not rely on Google, but the fact is, for many websites Google delivers via SEO a monstrous amount of traffic.

      Without having to buy it.

      Can some sites or online businesses get along without Google? Sure.

      But any major overhaul in Google has huge consequences for many online businesses.

      To suggest there are alternatives, such as radio, stumbleupon, banner ads, grocery store flyers, whatever, is just silly.

      For many inquiries, searches for information, searches for answers, etc., people use Google.

      They sure as heck don't start with another site to see what "targeted" advertising banner ads may exist.

      .
      I agree completely! Yes, it is important to diversify and not rely on one strategy for your business, but lets not pretend that what Google is going to do can't have a big impact on peoples' sites. Google is the biggest and most used search engine.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835652].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author tpw
      Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

      I know the "politically correct" answer is to not rely on Google, but the fact is, for many websites Google delivers via SEO a monstrous amount of traffic.

      Without having to buy it.

      Can some sites or online businesses get along without Google? Sure.

      But any major overhaul in Google has huge consequences for many online businesses.

      To suggest there are alternatives, such as radio, stumbleupon, banner ads, grocery store flyers, whatever, is just silly.

      For many inquiries, searches for information, searches for answers, etc., people use Google.

      They sure as heck don't start with another site to see what "targeted" advertising banner ads may exist.

      .

      What is silly is thinking that Google is the best game in town.

      I get tons of free traffic from Google every month -- likely more than most people receive in a year from all sources, but they only account for 35% of my total traffic.

      Relying on one source is silly as is not seeking other sources for your traffic.
      Signature
      Bill Platt, Oklahoma USA, PlattPublishing.com
      Publish Coloring Books for Profit (WSOTD 7-30-2015)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5835688].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rayray7
    You should be including semantic keywords in your articles for your site. Hopefully, this will give more weight to websites with great unique contents.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836102].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Right, so not only is Google trying to compete on the social level by integrating G+ into their search results, but it appears they're also trying to populate those results with information that would be more suited to Wikipedia?

    Surely, this additional "stuff" at the top of the search results, in addition to PPC, will only push the organic listings further down the page. How does that affect those listed high in the search results? Whats the point of being listed first within organic search if your site is well below the fold?????

    At times I often wonder if the team at Google realises the amount of impact these changes have on REAL businesses. And for those that say "Seek alternative traffic methods, such as media buys, banner advertising and solo ads.."

    That might be all well and good for those with an understanding of those methods, but what about local business owners like hairdressers, optometrists, mechanics and florists? These people really have no idea of sourcing alternative traffic via other methods. Infact, many of them have no understanding of anything BUT search engine traffic.

    Im not siding with anyone here, Im just trying to make a point.

    Change is inevitable, we all know that, and we either adapt or find alternative methods. But one thing is for certain, and that is, over the past few years, the changes (in my view) that Google have implemented across a range of their services, seem nothing more than desparate, non directional and at times, verging on "copying" other sites and services.

    I dont know, its frustrating to say the least. Its almost like a high school popularity competition.

    Google should just stick to keeping it simple and provide us with what we all want. A clean, simple, and easy to use search engine, without all the unecessary BS.
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836247].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
    Heres an interesting screenshot of the new update.



    As you can see, Ive searched for "high how is the empire state building".

    Firstly, the semantic search feature which gives me Google's "best guess". Does this mean that its right? ...or not?

    Secondly, you'll note the three visible sites listed, being wikipedia.org, about.com, and answers.com. If I expand the list, I get yahoo in addition to those listed.

    But what took my attention is the site listed in 2nd spot.

    infoplease.com

    This site isnt referenced at all?

    Why? And how do they come to this conclusion?

    Also, as a final thought, would queries of this nature see more and more users NOT clicking on ANYTHING, because they accept the output within semantic search???
    Signature

    BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836388].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

      Heres an interesting screenshot of the new update.



      As you can see, Ive searched for "high how is the empire state building".

      Firstly, the semantic search feature which gives me Google's "best guess". Does this mean that its right? ...or not?

      Secondly, you'll note the three visible sites listed, being wikipedia.org, about.com, and answers.com. If I expand the list, I get yahoo in addition to those listed.

      But what took my attention is the site listed in 2nd spot.

      infoplease.com

      This site isnt referenced at all?

      Why? And how do they come to this conclusion?

      Also, as a final thought, would queries of this nature see more and more users NOT clicking on ANYTHING, because they accept the output within semantic search???
      First of all I think that just looks stupid. How do I as a searcher know that the best web page to visit is one of those? In the new system would it just be Google stealing that info and even wiki and infoplease would get screwed?

      Personally none of those options interest me!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836401].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author wolfmmiii
        Originally Posted by dsbusiness23 View Post

        In the new system would it just be Google stealing that info and even wiki and infoplease would get screwed?

        Personally none of those options interest me!
        I asked this exact question earlier in the thread and I'm afraid the answer appears to be yes.
        Signature
        Want a REAL Online Business That's Fun to Run?
        CLICK HERE FOR INFO
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837720].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post


      Secondly, you'll note the three visible sites listed, being wikipedia.org, about.com, and answers.com. If I expand the list, I get yahoo in addition to those listed.

      But what took my attention is the site listed in 2nd spot.

      infoplease.com

      This site isnt referenced at all?

      Why? And how do they come to this conclusion?
      There could be lots of reasons. One being that the information on infoplease.com may not be formatted in such a way that is preferred by the algorithm or parser used by this Google feature.

      Also, notice that Google says that the height of the Empire State Building is "Mentioned on at least 4 websites". That doesn't mean that it couldn't have used 100 different websites to arrive at the conclusion of the height of the Empire State Building.

      Also, Google may (is probably) using much different techniques to phrase match text with web sites than it is using to determine facts. It shouldn't be assumed that Google would use the #2 result for the phrase search "how high is the empire state building" to derive the actual number of feet.

      There's just a lot of **** going on here.
      Signature

      :)

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836462].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author THK
      Originally Posted by John Romaine View Post

      ......

      Also, as a final thought, would queries of this nature see more and more users NOT clicking on ANYTHING, because they accept the output within semantic search???

      If that is the case then I will make a guess that they will not use semantic search for all sorts of keywords. Good chunk of their revenue comes from clicks. Not getting clicks on buyer/high paying keywords will cut down their revenue. I don't think they would want to do that.

      Is semantic search even possible for buyer keywords? How will that look like?

      Tanvir
      Signature

      This is my signature!

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836750].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Fallen_Angel
    I know everyone loves google but have you logged out of facebook lately, didnt you notice theres a bing search integrated. Do you not think bing is taking a little market share away from google. Facebook does have 700+million users its law of averages.

    I stopped really caring about google search results after first panda update.
    Really google is dying they know it thats why they went mobile with android and social with plus. They even buying into streaming tv market with tests in two cities right now. They moving away from search. "google it" used to be "do you yahoo".

    I get way more traffic using social media sites and make more money now then ever off of google first page.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836436].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
      Originally Posted by Fallen_Angel View Post

      I know everyone loves google but have you logged out of facebook lately, didnt you notice theres a bing search integrated. Do you not think bing is taking a little market share away from google. Facebook does have 700+million users its law of averages.

      I stopped really caring about google search results after first panda update.
      Really google is dying they know it thats why they went mobile with android and social with plus. They even buying into streaming tv market with tests in two cities right now. They moving away from search. "google it" used to be "do you yahoo".

      I get way more traffic using social media sites and make more money now then ever off of google first page.
      I agree with you. I think that you can get a better amount of traffic through Bing PPC then through Google Adwords. They also have live chat which is great. I think that Bing may become more popular soon if Google decides to be something other than a search engine!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836457].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mayan21
    ok im already moved to bing, anyone knows in the bing keyword suggestion tool, what they mean by impressions? is it same like local monthly searchers in Google keyword tool?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836563].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author mattyprimmer
    I think this is dangerous. Their thing is to not be evil. The good thing about Google is that they are the middle man for everything we look for. I don't like this direction at all. I think the good thing about the Internet is that you can do your research and look at multiple sources for any questions you have. Yes, time is important and for something like, "how tall is the empire state building?" I don't really see a problem, but I can only imagine how far it could go.

    Noone knows everything, and I don't think the way it works now is broken. They have done a good job of being fair giving everyone a shot at showing up for anything. If they want to become the sole destination for information, and gather their information only from select sources...in my opinion that is just dangerous and I think it's the opposite direction to what they set out to do.

    For those of you that think this should only be in the SEO section, you need to think a bit more about how big of a role Google plays in this business. More traffic than any of us can even imagine. So anything they do let alone a big change like this I think is worth looking at for all of us.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836735].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author orpaz191
    There will always be a way to manipulate search engines. doesn't matter if it's SEO or PPC. as long as they have large amount of traffic and infinite longtails we will be able to find a way to manipulate our way to the top of their results. Just a matter of time and effort.
    Signature

    Karma is sweet :)
    The only way to succeed is to make others successful.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5836877].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837016].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Fernando Veloso
      Awesome information Mike, thanks! Have you got a link for the ebook? That would be great.

      Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

      if you want to start preparing for the coming changes, you need to focus on developing sites that provide a quality user experience, that are interactive and have EXCELLENT content and other resources.
      ^^ Ditto on this.
      Signature
      People make good money selling to the rich. But the rich got rich selling to the masses.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837808].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Marine0302
        Great insights in this thread, I've enjoyed reading it.

        A few of my thoughts;

        I am not a full time IM'er, it's more of a hobby for me. A couple of years ago, I bought an Adsense/micro site type course advertised here and followed the intructions to the letter. About 10 months into it, with about 20 active sites, I was making ~$2,000 per month from Adsense.

        I was tearing it up in November/December of 2011 and a couple of my sites were now making ~$200 per day and I knew I was headed for big things!

        Then, Google struck with an update and instantly, my earnings fell to about ~$100 per month.

        The forum was abuzz about how to overcome this update and get back to Page 1, etc., but for me, the lesson was clear...any model that depends entirely on the predictability and reliability of Google was not wise.

        I then started getting into product creation, specifically information guides and books on topics that I actually had subject matter expertise in. This has worked well for me, and I sell everything via related forums, blogs, websites. In other words, if I'm selling a book on sports nutrition, there's plenty of places to sell it besides depending on Google and SERP's.

        I realize that there are many here far more sophisticated than me, and the "smart guys" are likely already figuring out what to do in light of this new change by Google.

        With Google being a publicly traded company, and PPC making up around 75% of their revenue, they are probably going to have to disclose via an earnings release/analyst conference call, etc., how this change will impact their major income stream. It will be interesting to see what they say about this, why they are doing it, the effect they think it will have on their earnings, etc.

        Thanks everyone, for sharing your comments on this topic. I am always amazed at the level of knowledge that is resident on WF!
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837947].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author luane
    Google begins and end with profit. I was amongst many thousands of affiliates whose Google Adwords program was banned and it was at that moment that I realized that Big Daddy Google didn't care about the little guy or gal.

    Diversify your interests on line and don't be afraid to learn as many skills each day as you can. Then you won't have to rely on organic traffic alone.

    Hope that helps!

    Kristie
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837576].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BuriedAlive
    Whether it's true or not, we should always be prepared. After all, the world wide web is just so dynamic. So we must not rely too much on one thing because that could be detrimental as it makes us less adaptive to change. Oh well, come hell or high water!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5837592].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author brettb
    Google wants our content, but doesn't want to send visitors to our sites.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838101].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Salashwal
    Originally Posted by Arowana View Post

    "Over the next few months, Google's search engine will begin spitting out more than a list of blue web links. It will also present more facts and direct answers to queries at the top of the search-results page. The changes to search are among the biggest in the company's history and could affect millions of websites that rely on Google's current page-ranking results. At the same time, they could give more ways to serve up advertisements..."

    What are your thoughts on this?
    I read the article about this. I honestly don't really find this to be that revolutionary. They've already been doing this for certain searches for a while now so i guess their going to be directly answering a higher percentage of queries directly in the SERPS nowadays. That might hurt you if you're ranking for "How to get to Blue Ridge Mountain" type searches but if not then I can't really see the big deal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838174].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JasonParker
    Fact is... Opportunities change.

    (It sucks but it's reality)

    That's why it's good to have a solid foundation in sales and marketing skills.

    Not to mention you need to have your eyes open to spot new opportunities as they arise.

    And you need to have your eyes open to be able to tell when a current opportunity is closing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838248].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
    If you're not happy with what Google is doing with search stop using it. I stopped.

    Google doesn't care if you complain. They will care if market share drops.

    .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838490].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author usabids
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838796].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rvrabel2002
      Originally Posted by usabids View Post

      I hope that google does something im really sick of all the crap on the net.
      haha, thanks for your useful addition to the thread. Or, as some of the comment spam on my sites would suggest, "I reary reary like your post. I will be making sure to bookmark your site, and revisit again and again. I was very pleased to find this web-site.I wanted to thanks for your time for this wonderful read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you blog post."
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838822].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Cataclysm1987
    They are going to get in so much ****ing trouble if they scrape people's facts without proper accreditation. You know they will too.
    Signature

    No signature here today!

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838885].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
      Banned
      Some are speculating that they will just use your "data" to serve their ads on when giving these answers. I disagree. They will use your content to serve their ads on.

      They attempted this once already with sidewiki where they literally hijacked your website content with sidewiki, whether a site owner wanted sidewiki to appear by their site or not. Their intention was to begin to serve ads in sidewiki. Sidewiki was a dismal failure for them, one of many so they didn't get to hijack your traffic and content to serve their ads beside your site.

      They won't hesitate to use your indexed content to show answers and info without attribution. It appears for quite awhile now that their goal is to keep users on Google properties to serve their ads to users rather than actually being a relevant search engine.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5838934].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author mraffiliate
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        Some are speculating that they will just use your "data" to serve their ads on when giving these answers. I disagree. They will use your content to serve their ads on.

        They attempted this once already with sidewiki where they literally hijacked your website content with sidewiki, whether a site owner wanted sidewiki to appear by their site or not. Their intention was to begin to serve ads in sidewiki. Sidewiki was a dismal failure for them, one of many so they didn't get to hijack your traffic and content to serve their ads beside your site.

        They won't hesitate to use your indexed content to show answers and info without attribution. It appears for quite awhile now that their goal is to keep users on Google properties to serve their ads to users rather than actually being a relevant search engine.
        Do you have any inclination how this will affect local search results for small businesses?
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839198].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
          Banned
          Originally Posted by mraffiliate View Post

          Do you have any inclination how this will affect local search results for small businesses?
          No ... it's all speculation until Google rolls it out. I would expect if they attempt to serve content themselves and keep traffic on Google properties that will affect all websites except theirs.

          Like I said earlier, if it gets to a point where my sites don't benefit from being listed in Google, I will remove all Adsense from my sites and use robots.txt to block Google and Google image search from my sites. I won't give them content without benefits.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839235].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author mojojuju
            Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

            Like I said earlier, if it gets to a point where my sites don't benefit from being listed in Google, I will remove all Adsense from my sites and use robots.txt to block Google and Google image search from my sites. I won't give them content without benefits.
            How will Google survive without you?
            Signature

            :)

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839744].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author EMaria
              At first peep it seems that this so called "overhaul" will initally only effect certain types of searches. For example, if someone inputs general keyword terms such as "where is such and so located" or "history of such and so" the results in Google will be cued to activate the aggregated type information at the top of the SERPs. These types of searches are basically people looking for either quick information or conducting research (perhaps for a high school class or college course or thesis).

              For those searches where people are looking for more pointed answers regarding products and services, the most pertinent SERPs would necessarily have to (in my opinion) serve up those types of sites that can address these types of queries. I'm talking keywords such as "review" on a specific product or "the best" of a type of product that Google can not really come up with these best guess types of results.

              However, as pointed out by several posters, the implications for IMers will not become apparent until this thing rolls out. The common adage "time will tell" definitely applies.

              I will say that this has personally made me take pause and start thinking proactively as to other effective alternatives to marketing online and/or offline as well.

              For example, some marketers swear by Facebook as a marketing vehicle while others say it is a total waste of time. I don't know. All I know is that I believe that if at least one other person is making a good income using Facebook, then I know that it can be done so it's worth some consideration.

              Another vehicle might be Kindle publishing. For this market, people go straight to Amazon, bypassing Google altogether. I also know that there are marketers (maybe not thousands of them) that are earning a fair to very comfortable passive income in this arena.

              There are other viable possibilities. They just need to be explored, which is what I'm doing.

              If you are a hard core professional online marketer you already realize that this business is about making adjustments and figuring out what is working and what's not, and then going from there. People were making money online before Google came along, and they will no doubt continue to do so.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840183].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
              Banned
              Originally Posted by mojojuju View Post

              How will Google survive without you?
              Who really cares if Google will survive without me, and thanks for that brilliant contribution to the discussion.

              I'm not the only one who will remove content from Google if Google uses our content without sending the traffic to our sites. There was a huge protest against Sidewiki and guess what ... Sidewiki no longer exists.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840720].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author John Romaine
        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        They attempted this once already with sidewiki where they literally hijacked your website content with sidewiki, whether a site owner wanted sidewiki to appear by their site or not.
        Sidewiki.

        Wasn't that the biggest bucket of dog turd.
        Signature

        BS free SEO services, training and advice - SEO Point

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839518].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Supafly
        Someone else mentioned something like this earlier and I think you are right. Consumers use Google for only a few seconds. When they find the information they're looking for, then Google looses them to the content, or website.

        Google's competitors, on the other hand - Facebook, Yelp, others - keep consumers on their platforms.

        The longer Google can keep consumers on a Google web property, the longer that consumer is exposed to ads.

        Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

        ...It appears for quite awhile now that their goal is to keep users on Google properties to serve their ads to users rather than actually being a relevant search engine.
        And regarding local...

        Too many consumers search local to find a restaurant, salon, contractor, etc. I can't see Google messing with that too much and really, what's the alternative? Yahoo Local? Bing? Google Places is no walk in the park, but in terms of local, Yahoo and Bing are a clusterf***.

        As others have said, diversify. You can do that with your local clients for sure in mobile search, Yelp, FB, Daily Deals, online directories and so on...
        Signature

        User banned from this site for being relevant.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5841016].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Genycis
      Originally Posted by Cataclysm1987 View Post

      They are going to get in so much ****ing trouble if they scrape people's facts without proper accreditation. You know they will too.
      I sincerely doubt that one.... you already know Google is thinking 10 steps ahead of the game so they'll make sure that they do it in such a manner that no one can really try to take them down... and if they try, Google has it's big time high paid lawyers to pretty much guarantee that things will be iced and not taken to a higher playing field of legal dispute.

      I still feel that Google will eventually see its demise as well... don't know when, but it'll happen... maybe within the next few years. But time will tell... just have to try to focus around it and do the best possible to change things around to work for you. I was looking forward to doing more on the SEO front of things but I may have to wait to see how things really pan out with this, and just try to focus on continuing to update my merchant sites and delivering content rather than trying to simply focus on optimizing, though with my keywords being few and highly competitive anyway, I guess Google's changes won't affect me much regardless.

      Sad in some ways though because SEO and optimizing and search engines will always play a part even if it's a smaller step to a bigger plan. From what I've learned over the years, things like article marketing, or making Squidoo lenses or HubPages would focus on how well you do on site optimization to help you be found by Google and the other search engines (really only 3 total counting Google... who really uses sites like BestoftheWeb or Ask.com much anymore?). Providing excellent but optimized content on your own site would be something you'd want search engines picking up so that people can find your site. Doing blog posts on your blog or other places to build more backlinks and traffic again, falls under optimizing.

      Even if you plan to mainly go by building a list, you'd either have one of three options: Doing some kind of SEO work on articles or posts or blogs and onsite optimizing to build those organic visits, or paying for traffic whether by PPC or media buys, etc., or going completely social network and really spending lots of time networking on Twitter and Facebook and forums (which isn't as effective depending on the niches and the sites that allow or do not allow signature links and/or posts with links) and so forth to eventually build trust, relationships, and clients, which takes a lot of time on its own, at least for me i know it does. I can't take time to focus on building sites and content and product creation and such, and still try to spend 4 hours a day hitting Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, etc. to try to build a few email subscribers or purchases.

      It basically boils down to having to work with as many angles as you can possibly do, just in case a switch is shut off somewhere. Have to hope for the best and keep it moving. I just wonder what this change will do to many IM'ers who are writing and selling ebooks on how to do SEO per the methods now... may not be making so many of those sales anymore now with these changes going through soon. But, maybe it won't be as bad as anticipated... we won't know until we get there. Best of success to all.
      Signature
      Genycis
      -- Absorbing & implementing. Need hip hop beats for your business needs? Hit me up!
      -- Posting my experiences and so forth with my own blog.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839203].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Genycis
    I'm wondering how these changes will affect those that try doing major optimizations to eZine articles, HubPages, Squidoo lenses, and so forth in hopes of doing some article optimizing to build traffic from those pages to their sites. Would all of these not be impacted in such a way that renders it all ineffective as well? Would marketing now mainly have to be focused on going the social route of FB, Twitter, and such?

    Guessing I should've tried to make a content rich Adsense site some months ago... as it seems now would really leave my Adsense sitting in the dirt. Lol
    Signature
    Genycis
    -- Absorbing & implementing. Need hip hop beats for your business needs? Hit me up!
    -- Posting my experiences and so forth with my own blog.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839469].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tadresources
    Meh - I agree with another poster that it's all speculation until it comes out. I also think that it's going to be more of an issue for IMers who have put all their eggs in one basket, so to speak.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839557].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NACAdam
    Yawn yup I'm snoring .
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5839880].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author gojiberryman
    Originally Posted by Arowana View Post

    "Over the next few months, Google's search engine will begin spitting out more than a list of blue web links. It will also present more facts and direct answers to queries at the top of the search-results page. The changes to search are among the biggest in the company's history and could affect millions of websites that rely on Google's current page-ranking results. At the same time, they could give more ways to serve up advertisements..."

    What are your thoughts on this?
    Well, I think it shouldn't cause too much of a problem. I mean as long as media buyers continue to rank highly like they usually do and first page webmasters continue to build links like they already have been then there shouldn't be too much of an issue.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5840837].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Thatgirl
    Well I definitely learned my lesson about Google. My 1 niche site went from top 1-5 for about 5 keywords to positions 30-40 today.

    Literally 200+ visitors a day to 0.

    I outsourced my SEO to a warrior and I'm not exactly sure where his links were coming from or what he was doing.

    Oh well, it was my first site and now I know to:

    -Not only focus on GOOGLE.
    -Learn SEO for myself, build high quality links in a natural way and create high quality content
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5841956].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rich Strauss
      Originally Posted by Thatgirl View Post

      Well I definitely learned my lesson about Google. My 1 niche site went from top 1-5 for about 5 keywords to positions 30-40 today.

      Literally 200+ visitors a day to 0.

      I outsourced my SEO to a warrior and I'm not exactly sure where his links were coming from or what he was doing.

      Oh well, it was my first site and now I know to:

      -Not only focus on GOOGLE.
      -Learn SEO for myself, build high quality links in a natural way and create high quality content
      I see on your blog that "I have taken off Google Analytics/Webmasters tools off my blog and I will NOT be using them on future sites. I do not believe it is a good idea to give Google any info on my sites whatsoever. Google can only get limited data without GWT/GA installed."

      Would be good to hear other opinions on this...
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853080].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author WebPen
        Originally Posted by Rich Strauss View Post

        I see on your blog that "I have taken off Google Analytics/Webmasters tools off my blog and I will NOT be using them on future sites. I do not believe it is a good idea to give Google any info on my sites whatsoever. Google can only get limited data without GWT/GA installed."

        Would be good to hear other opinions on this...
        There are a number of marketers that are taking Analytics off their sites.

        But the question is- why don't you want Google looking at your site? are you doing something fishy?

        If you're building a solid business (and website), with quality backlinks and proper link velocity, I don't see why having analytics is such a bad thing.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853156].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Rich Strauss
          Originally Posted by Justin Stowe View Post

          There are a number of marketers that are taking Analytics off their sites.

          But the question is- why don't you want Google looking at your site? are you doing something fishy?

          If you're building a solid business (and website), with quality backlinks and proper link velocity, I don't see why having analytics is such a bad thing.
          Hi Justin, it's not me who doesn't want Google looking at my sites (or my clients sites for that matter, as I implement GA and Webmaster Tools for them too), I was commenting on a blog post that I read. But this is my question: Why in this case? Look at who I quoted and follow the link in that signature.

          Then, why "are there a number of marketers that are taking Analytics off their sites?" Because they are doing something fishy? Or are there other legit reasons?

          I also feel that "If you're building a solid business (and website), with quality backlinks and proper link velocity, I don't see why having analytics is such a bad thing."

          But what for example then with narrower but focused affiliate niche sites? Nothing fishy, but affiliate sites nonetheless.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853295].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author atlanta2008
    Originally Posted by mraffiliate View Post

    Do you have any inclination how this will affect local search results for small businesses?
    I have an example,
    My better half is in real estate, been there less than 6 months, catering mostly to out of state customers who relay 100% on SE to find a realtor.

    Her website is doing great, ranking for multiple keywords which in turn does bring good SE traffic and leads and prospects but only few sold so far. This is partly because of the market, partly because lack of experience. And this is all she can do for now, learn and grow.

    On the other hand, our friend, long time local realtor , who is #1 seller in the company although he owns website, which BTW is nowhere to be seen in SERPs gets 100% of his customers by the word of mouth.
    It takes talent and years of practice but at this level internet is just another tool to him he uses for checking emails nothing more.
    Google may not exist and still make no chip to his superb income.
    Signature
    Click Here For: Alexa Rank Improvement Service, Cheap Global Alexa Rank,
    100K only $29/mo*** , 100% US RANK , 100% Positive Reviews, 100% Money Back Guaranteed Results!
    *** Only $29/mo when you purchase 3 months of service in advance.Regular WF price is $33/mo. Bulk orders available
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5843031].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jerry310
      Very interesting thread so far
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5852489].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Johnm1141
    I am too concerned but I guess you can't do much so I will, and like most people, will just try to harder to spread their niche across the internet.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853097].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author whawk57
    WF is a bunch of amazing, great, and smart people. How about opening up a new OPEN Source search engine built by WF folks. Imagine now that WF stands around at 145th rank in Alexa, I'm sure it's easy to get the ball rolling thru all these great people here with all this knowledge too. lol
    Google and Microsoft started from their garages, so why can't we?
    Signature

    Peace!



    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5853435].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author jerry310
      Originally Posted by whawk57 View Post

      WF is a bunch of amazing, great, and smart people. How about opening up a new OPEN Source search engine built by WF folks. Imagine now that WF stands around at 145th rank in Alexa, I'm sure it's easy to get the ball rolling thru all these great people here with all this knowledge too. lol
      Google and Microsoft started from their garages, so why can't we?
      I agree...that would be something to think about indeed
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5857738].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jonathan Joseph
    Well there's always changes taking place. That's why it's important to keep our marketing diversified. And worse comes to worse there is always Bing and Yahoo to rank in for organic search if Google tumbles for some reason -- which is possible, but I don't see happening too soon.
    Signature

    Jon

    "Success comes when people act together; failure tends to happen alone." -- Deepak Chopra

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854039].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kurt
    Originally Posted by drmani View Post



    Originally Posted by buzzaddict
    If the current formula (and no-one knows exactly what it is) for establishing your search engine ranking is:80% Google algorithm (which analyzes the quality of your site) and 20% link building (i.e. - who links to your site), I believe that within the next 2-3 years, it will be 60% (Google algorithm), 25% (Link Building) and 15% (Social Signals).
    ^^^ This = Gold

    Plus, there's the "local search" element that'll kick in big time,
    tied in to the explosion of mobile devices that will be used to
    carry out a growing share of these searches.

    Get positioned - or die!

    All success
    Dr.Mani

    And let's add what I call "You Rank" to the equation, which is something I theorized about many years ago. I have a feeling that the data Google collects on YOU and YOUR websites will affect rank.

    For example, if Google thinks you are a link spammer from past actions, yet you build a new "100% whitehat" site, your known history could play a part in the ranking of any new sites you create, including your new whitehat site.

    On the other hand, if you have a known history of developing high-quality sites, any new site you create could get a boost based on your history, and not on "typical" SEO factors.

    There's some hints that this is already happening. For example, a situation Dr. Mani discussed with me in private a few months ago could be a case of You Rank, where all sites assiciated with a person were de-valued based on just a few of the sites.
    Signature
    Serious about Print on Demand? Discover how YOU can join my FREE exclusive secret alliance
    Plus how to get my Print on Demand Treasure Maps for FREE
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854058].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author erichammer
    Call me crazy, but I really don't see how this affects those who provide high quality content on their sites. Take the example in the Fox News piece about Lake Tahoe -- they would see key attributes about the site. Okay. So then what? People who just needed a quick fact aren't the ones who are likely to make a purchase of a vacation package at Lake Tahoe. They aren't likely to click ads in your site anyway. Those searching for Lake Tahoe because they want to read about it and what's nice to see there will still look for articles and content about it rather than just the facts that Google displays.

    I mean heck, as has been pointed out in this thread, Google already provides facts to people who do searches. This is just an expansion of what they were doing.

    Someone else mentioned that Google could provide a list of popular TV sets, leaving those who provide comparisons out in the cold. The thing is, most people who are doing a search for the best LCD TV set aren't going to just want a list from Google. They'll look at the list and then search for detailed reviews of those TV sets and that's something Google won't be offering them. All they'll offer is short facts.

    So again, provide real, useful information in long form and you'll be fine. Use auto spun junk which isn't even readable and you'll lose your shirt.

    Oh and by the way folks, I can think of at least half a dozen other ways to generate free or low cost traffic in addition to Google searches. Yes, you need to do SEO. However, let's never forget what backlinks originally were invented for -- to allow you to jump to another site which has information which may be related to what you are currently reading about.
    Signature
    Why waste your time hiring a cheap writer? Cheap writers don't write stuff that converts!

    Get the conversions you need and deserve with my professional, viral writing services.

    Free SEO included at no additional charge!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5854072].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dogstar
    Now there is a GREAT idea...my initial reaction was to create some kind of Big G boycott, or pool money to institute a law suit or something...or even try to all create a swing to bing or yahoo or something with an "Association of Internet Users" voluntary placed banner ads that promote such a move...but creating a new search engine...awesome idea! How would one go about doing that?
    Signature

    Truth About Marketing

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5894271].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
      Originally Posted by dogstar View Post

      Now there is a GREAT idea...my initial reaction was to create some kind of Big G boycott, or pool money to institute a law suit or something...or even try to all create a swing to bing or yahoo or something with an "Association of Internet Users" voluntary placed banner ads that promote such a move...but creating a new search engine...awesome idea! How would one go about doing that?
      I have thought of doing this before. You just have to be very careful as Google shuts down anything that rises up against it!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5894280].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yohoho
      Originally Posted by dogstar View Post

      Now there is a GREAT idea...my initial reaction was to create some kind of Big G boycott, or pool money to institute a law suit or something...or even try to all create a swing to bing or yahoo or something with an "Association of Internet Users" voluntary placed banner ads that promote such a move...but creating a new search engine...awesome idea! How would one go about doing that?
      I think these are great ideas. Google is getting to big for it's britches.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5992327].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
    haha I thought this thread had died. Creating a new search engine is gonna cost a lot of money if you want to be able to rival Google at all but I'm sure with all the smart minds here it could be done!
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5992341].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author dsbusiness23
    agc: It completely reminds me of what happened with YouTube. The winners clearly have a very unfair advantage over those just starting out. With a ton of extra features and control over how everything on their profile is viewed as well as partner advertisements and all that. Since they are owned by Google how long until that is exactly how the Google search engine works I wonder?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5994844].message }}

Trending Topics