What would you do if you were GOOGLE?

by Chucky
19 replies
  • SEO
  • |
I was reading the following post and my mind started wondering...

Originally Posted by Zeus66 View Post

...... Google needs SEO to be murky and constantly in flux so a lot of people just throw their hands up and surrender. They want as many paying them for traffic as they can get. Follow the money... it's the solution about 99.9% the time. We're not meant to figure this stuff out. We're meant to give up and pay them. It's a cut-throat world, boys and girls.
There might be a truth in this statement, but I think Google is also trying to make the search results better. Before the first Panda wiped out all those EzineArticles and ArticlesBase articles, if any of those articles came up during a Google search, I would straightaway skip it and go to the next result, because I know it will not give me value (in most cases) other than pushing me to an affiliate link.

Like Napoleon Hill said in Think and Grow Rich, "The only way to accumulate wealth is to render valuable service" which I believe is a golden principle regardless of the business model. And Google knows this, if they go after shortterm money in the form of getting affiliates to spend on Adwords, I don't think that's going to be a sustainable business model for them. Giving REAL value to their users will be the correct thing to do.

What would you do, if you were Google?

Let some article directories or thin affiliate sites filled with copied and pasted (or rewritten; repurposed; spun content or whatever you want to call it) content OR authority sites like WebMd, MayoClinic, or CNET [EDIT: or other numerous genuine websites/blogs e.g.TechRadar in tech field, SEOMoz in SEO field] that truly helps you solve a problem rank on page 1?

How many of us Amazon marketers seriously add something more than Amazon.com mentions on their product page? How many of us marketers have actually bought the physical product or digital PDF (in case of ClickBank) and done a genuine review that is not available anywhere else?

Not trying to be a smart ass here. In my case, this update had a minimal impact on my sites compared to previous Pandas and Penguin. But I'm determined to change my business model and ADD VALUE TO THE WEB. Are you?

Chucky
#google
  • Profile picture of the author howto
    Yeah but you have to remember it's not just spammy sites that get hit but also the good ones that did a bit of dark side SEO. I think by only considering the big players as having quality content makes the web elitist and a shite place. Look at the site Ehow for example. Their articles are shite that was quickly written to generate traffic but since their a big site they rank well.

    Personally if I was Google I would help the little guys more as I don't want the internet to end up being the same as TV. Celebrity culture, elitism and a huge amount of advertising you are FORCED to watch. I would hate to see the internet go that way and thats what Google is doing at the moment. Monopolys are a terrible thing as all they do is make the rich richer and the poor poorer.


    Posted from Warrior Forum Reader for Android
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7101993].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Chucky
      Originally Posted by howto View Post

      Yeah but you have to remember it's not just spammy sites that get hit but also the good ones that did a bit of dark side SEO. I think by only considering the big players as having quality content makes the web elitist and a shite place. Look at the site Ehow for example. Their articles are shite that was quickly written to generate traffic but since their a big site they rank well.

      Personally if I was Google I would help the little guys more as I don't want the internet to end up being the same as TV. Celebrity culture, elitism and a huge amount of advertising you are FORCED to watch. I would hate to see the internet go that way and thats what Google is doing at the moment. Monopolys are a terrible thing as all they do is make the rich richer and the poor poorer.


      Posted from Warrior Forum Reader for Android
      Yes I agree, it shouldn't be a monopoly, just for authority sites (like Google having a search engine monopoly). That's not what I meant. That's why I said I'm going to add value to the web, I didn't say I'm going to let WebMD and CNET dominate the whole web.
      I'm definitely with you on helping the little guys, because competition among sellers makes the buyer the winner.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7102029].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rcostica
    In my opinion, you are partly correct. Google is trying to provide quality search results, but if you take a close look, you will notice that they are trying to find different ways of doing that, ways that will promote and sell their services. It was first the Google Places listings appearing in the search results. Then decreasing the search results to 7 when one of the results also has sitelinks. And I've also noticed that for some search queries where Google Places listings are returned, the number of regular, "organic" results is less than 10 (I even saw only 5 results once, but cannot find it anymore, so maybe it was just a one time thing). Let's top that with Google Plus mentions being favored in SERP's... So, if I was Google, I'd try to do exactly what they are doing: create a monopoly and advertise it as continuous struggle to create quality for the customers. And they're doing that very well.
    Signature
    Cadouri barbati, ideale pentru barbatii din viata ta
    Echipamente si camere video profesionale
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7102056].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nisha Sri
    Nice post Chucky
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7102347].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author raisuddintch1
    Yes, this is the fact.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7102360].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Anil Kint
      To be the top search engine in the market they have to give the best results for the keyword entered in the search box. Google has been trying to do it from the very beginning. But the problem is when the big companies and black hatters have realized that those rankings can be manipulated with keyword stuffing/backlinks etc. then the results did not provide value to the customer. As a result user experience on google has started to go down ( at least in some niches).

      Google knows that, if they have to survive - they need to provide top quality search results to the user. The moment the user sees crappy affiliates sites on the first page of the search results he is going to jump to another search engine. Its basically survival.



      .



      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7103367].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Tad 100
    I will manually review each site they deindexed and bring best sites to index back.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7103463].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Berkinb
    I'd partly agree with you Chuck.

    Many people still think they can make money without providing any kind of value whatsoever to their readers/visitors, and that is a fatal flaw.

    However, Google is not the "do no evil", "lets bring quality results to our users" kind of establishment as some people claim (and as they have somehow used to be).

    While it is true that authority sites may provide more value in total than smaller sites, it's not the case that they have the answer to every query and hence should be occupying the first page of results for every search.

    As it stands, Google tends to bring those sites (along with a few of their own properties) in almost every search, even if the content of their pages is remotely related to the search.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7103745].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Chucky
      Originally Posted by Tad 100 View Post

      I will manually review each site they deindexed and bring best sites to index back.
      Good point, not just deindexed, the penalized ones that are still in their index right? Practically a challenge no doubt!

      Originally Posted by Berkinb View Post

      .... As it stands, Google tends to bring those sites (along with a few of their own properties) in almost every search, even if the content of their pages is remotely related to the search.
      Yes that's what I'm seeing as well. I guess this is part of their 'trust' algorithm.
      I still feel that their search results are more relevant that those that Yahoo and BING give me in most cases.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7104158].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulgl
    Moot question. Google does what's best for it's customers,
    paid and free alike. Google has so many free kick-butt programs,
    man, it's laughable to talk about wanting only paid customers.

    (Look at apple's mini-debacle with google maps. Yes, stuff like
    that is what the real internet world talks about)

    Google also does what's best for it's shareholders.

    Google could give a rat's hat about anyone Joe Blow
    with a website.

    Paul
    Signature

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

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7104190].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Nelapsi
    I have no problem with Google or how it operates. Kind of funny some of these comments, manually review each website they de-index.. how do you pay for this again? Please don't think I am drinking the kool-aid because Google and I are currently in such a dis-agreement that I completely removed Adsense from my sites. Here is the thing, it is their company if you don't like it you have the choice do use something else. My wife likes Bing... You want to know why, because they have a nice picture. That is how your normal user thinks.

    If I put trash out in front of my house, someone hauls it away.. you put trash on the internet, Google hauls it away. Seems to work
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7104227].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Chucky
      Originally Posted by Nelapsi View Post

      If I put trash out in front of my house, someone hauls it away.. you put trash on the internet, Google hauls it away. Seems to work
      Absolutely! As Lucid said, they're a progressive company and they're getting better at detecting the trash and hauling it away! They have to detect the trash in order to please their users, customers and shareholders (thx Paul).

      What pisses people off is that they can't still separate the trash from the non-trash. If and when Google perfects that art, people (including myself) will have to stop complaining and up their game.

      But they should NOT penalize proper on page optimization. Without proper on page optimization how can I (or any other authority site) tell Google that this is what my site is about? Google has to figure out what they call optimum and over-optimization. An optimally optimized site is NOT trash! Just because it has an EMD, it's not trash! Just because someone has a site specifically talking about 'White Wicker Patio Furniture' on WhiteWickerPatioFurniture.com, that may not be trash. It can be an extremely useful site for the buyer searching for White Wicker Patio Furniture!
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7111049].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Lucid
        Originally Posted by Chucky View Post

        But they should NOT penalize proper on page optimization.
        I have no idea what you mean by "proper" on page optimization. Even less so that they penalize it.

        The software is sophisticated. It has a pretty good idea of what your site is about. You are telling it by the words on the page.

        Originally Posted by Tad 100 View Post

        I know some really good sites that was removed from index.
        You are not removed. You are simply being pushed further down because of not scoring on one or more of their ranking factors or others moving up. The page is still in the database, Google still knows about it. And as being discussed in another thread, just because you like or think the site is good (quality) is not Google's definition of quality. Improve the factor that made the site lose ranking and you may get it back.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7111802].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Tad 100
          [DELETED]
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7117487].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mkj
            I know what I would do straight away and that is make sure all my sites get a ranking boost and end up on the first page for all my keywords . Are they recruiting?

            Amendment
            Damn I thought the title was: What would you if you worked for Google? Come to think of it Google ain't a person but many persons so I am partially right.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7117497].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Tad 100
      Originally Posted by Nelapsi View Post

      I have no problem with Google or how it operates. Kind of funny some of these comments, manually review each website they de-index.. how do you pay for this again? Please don't think I am drinking the kool-aid because Google and I are currently in such a dis-agreement that I completely removed Adsense from my sites. Here is the thing, it is their company if you don't like it you have the choice do use something else. My wife likes Bing... You want to know why, because they have a nice picture. That is how your normal user thinks.

      If I put trash out in front of my house, someone hauls it away.. you put trash on the internet, Google hauls it away. Seems to work
      I always hear how they want to improve engine which brings best results for people. I know some really good sites that was removed from index. Even after many updates it is really hard to find high quality content just like that. Google update = more adwords clients.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7111383].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Lucid
    First, what Zeus says about SEO needing to be murky is ridiculous. Google or any other search engine for that matter doesn't care what website owners do as far as SEO is concerned. They don't say "let's throw them some curves and see who gives up". There will be a ranking of sites on a keyword no matter what happens, how many try or how many give up. Google's job is to provide the best results possible, not try to screw site owners. They couldn't care less who shows up on page one. They just care about improving their software to show those results.

    Now, true that they want to keep how they do things secret. I'd want to do that too. But that's not why there are constant changes to the algorithm. It's because Google is a progressive company, the most progressive I know of. Besides, it is so big and complicated, nobody can figure it out, at least not unless you create some committee which would mean building your own engine. Some will figure out some small piece but not the whole pie. Or they'll get lucky and rank well and feel proud of themselves only to lose rank later.

    Google is a business. The DNA of any business is to make money. But they are not out to get you and reduce your rank to get you to pay for your traffic. That's nonsense. When someone loses rank, someone else gains it. Explain to me how that helps Google.

    >> if they go after shortterm money in the form of getting affiliates to spend on Adwords, I don't think that's going to be a sustainable business model for them.

    There's a couple of flaws there. First, you assume, as an affiliate, that most Adwords are affiliates. They're not. Only a small percentage of Adwords users are, I'd say 5% or less. Most advertisers are those selling their own products. I've had over one hundred clients managing their PPC, only a handful were affiliates.

    Second, the model is working and has for ten years so why would it not be sustainable? Advertisers will advertise where it makes sense and search engines make sense, the most sense of any form of advertising. That's not going to go away.

    You also don't understand the model. Google doesn't go after the short term money. They go after the long term. If an advertiser quits, there's another right behind them that is better. This makes Google more money so they don't care if you are not willing to make it work, the one who does is who they are after.

    What would I do if I were Google? Exactly the same.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7104525].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Warock
    Banned
    I will implement a mp3 search engine if I'm google.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7111402].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author MaryPabelate
    Banned
    Google's popularity is based on its help to the society, if Google is altering its algorithm to help the society then we have to consider this thing.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7111469].message }}

Trending Topics