Tags Archives

You are currently viewing all posts tagged with Search.

Generally I have not been a huge fan of registering all your websites with Google (profiling risks, etc.), but they keep using the carrot nicely to lead me astray. :D … So much so that I want to find a Googler and give them a hug.

Google recently decided to share some more data in their webmaster tools. And for many webmasters the data is enough to make it worth registering (at least 1 website)!

AOL Click Data

When speaking of keyword search volume beakdown data people have typically shared information from the leaked AOL search data.

The big problem with that data is it is in aggregate. It is a nice free tool, and a good starting point, but it is fuzzy.

Types of Searches

There are 3 well known search classifications: navigational, transactional, and informational. Each type of query has a different traffic breakdown profile.

  • In general, for navigational searches people click the top result more often than they would on an informational search.
  • In general, for informational searches people tend to click throughout the full set of search results at a more even distribution than they would for navigational or transactional searches.
  • The only solid recently-shared publicly data on those breakdowns is from Dogpile [PDF], a meta search engine. But given how polluted meta search services tend to be (with ads mixed in their search results) those numbers were quite a bit off from what one might expect. And once more, they are aggregate numbers.

Other Stuff in the Search Results

Further, anecdotal evidence suggests that the appearance of vertical / universal results within the search results set can impact search click distribution. Google shows maps on 1 in 13 search results, and they have many other verticals they are pushing – video, updates, news, product search, etc. And then there are AdWords ads – which many searchers confuse as being the organic search results.

Pretty solid looking estimates can get pretty rough pretty fast. ;)

The Value of Data

If there is one critical piece of marketing worth learning above all others it is that context is important.

My suggestions as to what works, another person’s opinions or advice on what you should do, and empirical truth collected by a marketer who likes to use numbers to prove his point … well all 3 data sets fall flat on their face when compared against the data and insights and interactions that come from running your own business. As teachers and marketers we try to share tips to guide people toward success, but your data is one of the most valuable things you own.

A Hack to Collect Search Volume Data & Estimated CTR Data

In their Excel plug-in Microsoft shares the same search data they use internally, but its not certain that when they integrate the Yahoo! Search deal that Microsoft will keep sharing as much data as they do now.

Google offers numerous keyword research tools, but getting them to agree with each other can be quite a challenge.

There have been some hacks to collect organic search clickthrough rate data on Google. One of the more popular strategies was to run an AdWords ad for the exact match version of a keyword and bid low onto the first page of results. Keep the ad running for a while and then run an AdWords impression share report. With that data in hand you can estimate how many actual searches there were, and then compare your organic search clicks against that to get an effective clickthrough rate.

The New Solution

Given search personalization and localization and the ever-changing result sets with all the test Google runs, even the above can be rough. So what is a webmaster to do?

Well Google upgraded the data they share inside their webmaster tools, which includes (on a per keyword level)

  • keyword clickthrough rank
  • clickthrough rate at various ranking positions
  • URL that was clicked onto

Trophy Keywords vs Brand Keywords

Even if your site is rather well known going after some of the big keywords can be a bit self-defeating in terms of the value delivered. Imagine ranking #6 or #7 for SEO. Wouldn’t that send a lot of search traffic? Nope.

When you back away the ego searches, the rank checkers, etc. it turns out that there isn’t a ton of search volume to be had ranking on page 1 of Google for SEO.

With only a 2% CTR the core keyword SEO is driving less than 1/2 the traffic driven by our 2 most common brand search keywords. Our brand might not seem like it is getting lots of traffic with only a few thousand searches a month, but when you have a > 70% CTR that can still add up to a lot of traffic. More importantly, that is the kind of traffic which is more likely to buy from you than someone searching for a broad discovery or curiosity type of keyword.

The lessons for SEOs in that data?

  • Core keywords & raw mechanical SEO are both quite frequently heavily over-rated in terms of value.
  • Rather than sweating trying to rank well for the hardest keywords first focus on more niche keywords that are easy to rank for.
  • If you have little rank and little work to do then there is lots of time to focus on giving people reasons to talk about you and reference you.
  • Work on building up brand & relationships. This not only gives your link profile more karma, but it sends you a steady stream of leads for if/when you fall out of favor a bit with the search engines.
Those who perceive you well will seek you out and buy from you. But it is much harder to sell to someone who sees you as just another choice amongst many results.

Search is becoming the default navigational tool for the web. People go to Google and then type in “yahoo.” If you don’t have a branded keyword as one of your top keywords that might indicate long-term risk to your business. If a competitor can clone most of what you are doing and then bake in a viral component you are toast.

Going After the Wrong Brand Keywords

Arbitraging 3rd party brands is an easy way to build up distribution quickly. This is why there are 4,982 Britney Spears fan blogs (well 2 people are actually fans, but the other 4,980 are marketers).

But if you want to pull in traffic you have to go after a keyword that is an extension of the brand. Ranking for “eBay” probably won’t send you much traffic (as their clickthrough rate on their first result is probably even higher than the 70% I had above). Though if you have tips on how to buy or sell on eBay those kinds of keywords might pull in a much higher clickthrough rate for you.

To confirm the above I grabbed data for a couple SEO tool brands we rank well for. A number 3 ranking (behind a double listing) and virtually no traffic!

Different keyword, same result

Informational Keywords

Link building is still a bit of a discovery keyword, but I think it is perhaps a bit later staged than just the acronym “SEO.” Here the click volume distribution is much flatter / less consolidated than it was on the above brand-oriented examples.

If when Google lowers your rank you still pull in a fairly high CTR that might be a signal to them that your site should rank a bit higher.

Enough Already!

Enough about our keywords, what does your keyword data tell you? How can you better integrate it to grow your business?

SEO Book.com – Learn. Rank. Dominate.

You need to be from the United States (or have access to a US IP address) to see this ad, but Yahoo! is testing monetizing their organic search results.

An ad in the “organic” results? A sponsored shortcut? Say it ain’t so.

And that is *before* Google releases their vouchers program & other ad options which will frequently extend AdWords ads and further push down the organic search results.

A bit of home cooking for the fellow IAC company.

Not that long ago I highlighted how exact match domains are often over-stated as an SEO strategy. The above is another dimension as to why. When you have 3 or 4 ads above the organics AND in some cases the organic results are monetized too, then if you rank #2 algorithmically you might be below the fold.

If that ranking for that 1 keyword is your strategy for building your unique competitive advantage, then of course you are going to lose badly to those who are investing into building solid brand equity. They will be able to outbid you for the clicks, so you are toast.

Domainers are already getting killed by parking revenue drops, browsers that turn the address bar into a search box, and now resell values are further being diminished by search engines which are deciding to eat the ‘organic’ search results with more ads.

SEO Book.com – Learn. Rank. Dominate.

Posted by Aaron Wheeler

 Brands and company-specific brand name products have become much more important to search engines recently. Google tries to serve us with relevant content, so if it thinks we want to know more about Adidas or Puma, it’s going to tell us about these brands rather than about the random online shoe stores that we’ll probably click away from (you know the ones!). This might be great if you’re a major brand, but what if you’re not? And what’s happening if you are? How is it working? This week, Rand is here to let us know more about search engines and how they rank brand name products and sites.

Embed video
<object width="640" height="360" id="wistia_217444" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000"><param name="movie" value="http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/flash/embed_player_v1.1.swf"/><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"/><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"/><param name="wmode" value="opaque"/><param name="flashvars" value="videoUrl=http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/b9d2e89507c9f37c70380428c84c919d58082f17.bin&stillUrl=http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/2655b490a2b5c3be3a3eb1c414b06bb77cc38f6e.bin&unbufferedSeek=false&controlsVisibleOnLoad=false&autoPlay=false&endVideoBehavior=default&playButtonVisible=true&embedServiceURL=http://distillery.wistia.com/x&accountKey=wistia-production_3161&mediaID=wistia-production_217444&mediaDuration=535.54"/><embed src="http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/flash/embed_player_v1.1.swf" width="640" height="360" name="wistia_217444" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="opaque" flashvars="videoUrl=http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/b9d2e89507c9f37c70380428c84c919d58082f17.bin&stillUrl=http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/2655b490a2b5c3be3a3eb1c414b06bb77cc38f6e.bin&unbufferedSeek=false&controlsVisibleOnLoad=false&autoPlay=false&endVideoBehavior=default&playButtonVisible=true&embedServiceURL=http://distillery.wistia.com/x&accountKey=wistia-production_3161&mediaID=wistia-production_217444&mediaDuration=535.54"></embed></object><script src="http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/embeds/v.js" charset="ISO-8859-1"></script><script>if(!navigator.mimeTypes[‘application/x-shockwave-flash’])Wistia.VideoEmbed(‘wistia_217444′,640,360,{videoUrl:’http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/b9d2e89507c9f37c70380428c84c919d58082f17.bin’,stillUrl:’http://seomoz-cdn.wistia.com/deliveries/2655b490a2b5c3be3a3eb1c414b06bb77cc38f6e.bin’,distilleryUrl:’http://distillery.wistia.com/x’,accountKey:’wistia-production_3161′,mediaId:’wistia-production_217444′,mediaDuration:535.54})</script><a href="http://www.seomoz.org/">SEOmoz – SEO Software</a>

 

Video Transcription

Dobar den! Welcome to Whiteboard Friday. That’s my attempt at some Bulgarian. I think "dobar den" means hello/good day in Bulgarian. We’ll find out. I’m sure someone will comment on the blog.

Welcome to Whiteboard Friday. Good to be back in the States. Good to be back here in Seattle at SEOmoz Whiteboard Friday studios talking about an interesting topic that’s come up quite a bit — search engines and brand entities. There’s this concept that’s been talked about in the SEO world for a while, for a couple of years now, that Google sort of has this favoring of brands, of sites that have built up what you would call brand recognition and brand entities in the minds of consumers. It is sort of interesting because SEO folks have been asking some questions like, "Well, how do I know if I am a brand? What constitutes a brand and what doesn’t? Why would Google be going in this direction? What can or should I be doing?" We don’t have scientific great answers to all of these questions, but we can start to try and tackle some of them and at least get a lot of folks in the search marketing sphere thinking more about this branding stuff. I think that definitely the changes that Google’s been making around the Vince update, maybe some of the things around MayDays, certainly some of the things around showing more branded results in queries when, for example, someone types in a search plus SEOmoz, they might be showing a lot more than just two results from the SEOmoz.org website thinking that there is a brand intent to show things from just one site.

So, first let’s start by talking about why brands? Why does Google care so much about this? There’s that famous quote, of course, from Eric Schmidt, Google’s president, that Aaron Wall has brought up on SEO Book a number of times saying, you know, "Brands are how we sort out the cesspool." So, there is this cesspool of content on the Web, a lot of it being stuff that users don’t want.

You can kind of imagine this if you
put yourself in the mind and the shoes of a searcher. Shoes particularly, right. So, in this case, Google is kind of looking at these the way a human would. So maybe we’ve got our guy over here and he’s sort of looking at these different sites. He’s done a search for running shoes. He sees Adidas, which makes tons of sense; Adidas is a running shoe brand. Great, great thing to have in the result. Puma, sure. Vibram, okay, that’s kind of an emerging brand coming up. And then there is tennis-shoe-store. Yeah, I mean, maybe they’ve done a great job earning links and maybe they have a good website and that kind of thing, but consumers get kind of suspicious of this. Searchers get kind of suspicious of this. The non-brand results bring some dissatisfaction. You can see that in some of the search engine research and result testing that various organizations have conducted, including the search engines themselves. You can kind of feel it viscerally. When you look through the results yourself you kind of go, "Man, I don’t know about these. It’s a lot of hyphenated domains and sites I’ve never heard of. Can I trust them?" I go and visit them and they look sort of almost SEO heavy but not content or usability heavy. It’s so frustrating, right. I think Google is kind of saying, "Hey, we’ve got some ways to identify this. Maybe we’ll send some of the preferences over to brands."

So, let’s try and tackle the question, what makes a brand? What is it that separates a brand from a non-brand in the minds of the search engines when it comes to domains, when it comes to websites and pages? You can think of a lot of different things. Certainly Google has put out some patent applications that suggest some of the things they might look at. They made an acquisition of a company called Metaweb that does a lot of these things, including a service called Freebase that kind of makes entity associations from context and text and word usage. These things can include stuff like appearance and repetition of text content. You can imagine that Adidas, Puma, and Vibram, these show up on the Web a lot more than tennis-shoe- store.info or whatever it is. There is kind of this idea, "Huh, maybe that’s a brand, maybe that’s not." And then there is context of use and positioning of that text and content. You can see that those brands are all mentioned in news and they’re mentioned in blogs. They’re in stores. They’re in different stores both on and off the Web. They’re in eCommerce shops. They’re featured in traditional media outlets, online and offline. You see them in offline media as well. They show up in links. They show up in advertising. Certainly things like Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick and looking at tools like the DoubleClick Ad Planner could give you some insight into things that they view as brands and entities and how they associate those verus sites that they don’t really have an audience association or brand association with. The brands appear in things like patents. They appear in licenses. They appear in government and official documentation. There is all this sort of context and use of positioning.

Finally, brands have these user base kind of signals as well. Brands get talked about when people participate in social media. They get talked about when people perform search queries themselves. If Google sees that lots of people are searching for things like Adidas, Puma, and Vibram, but not searching for tennis-shoe-store, that could be a signal that this is a brand entity and these aren’t. There is language and communication which Google has been getting heavily into. They have their GOOG-411 service. They certainly power Gmail. They power a lot of other services where they are essentially looking at what’s being talked about, what’s being said, what’s being recorded, and written by humans all across not just the Internet but across our societies. All of these signals might help Google to make associations around what is a brand and what is not and then return results that are sort of this brand biasing.

A lot of this is sort of interesting theoretical stuff, but I know that many SEOs are going to be asking the question, "Well, what do I actually do with this data?" So, some good things to keep in mind is that we as SEOs sometimes ignore branding. We ignore the impact of let’s do broad-based advertising, let’s participate in display, let’s participate in media or in video or in offline advertising or in things like getting our brand name out there and events, those kinds of things. We become very obsessed and focused on just sort of the very basic elements of SEO — the on-page, getting links, those kinds of things. That might work. But if you’re seeing this brand biasing, you might think about some of these branding tactics as a way to move your site and your rankings forward.

Secondarily, don’t let your SEO get ahead of your organic momentum. What I mean by that is, I see and feel a lot of the times that many SEOs who get very aggressive with their domains, particularly in competitive spaces where there is brand preferences or where Google appears to be trying to do some of those things, we’ll see that they’ll do a great job earning links. They’ll get lots of good anchor text. They’ll earn those links to those pages. They might not always be from the best sources, and they don’t do a lot of these types of things. People are not saying things about them in social media. They’re not positioned in context. They are not mentioned in the news and in natural normal blogs, offline stuff, and advertising. They appear to be these sort of solely pseudo Internet brands. That could potentially be a negative signal, or at least it might not track as well as someone who’s got both signals going.

You know, as part of that, finally, I would say, try and work on making your site and your product and the naming conventions that you use as brand friendly, as branding friendly, as possible. All of those things are going to potentially impact the way your brand is perceived.

The great thing about all of this stuff, about these recommendations and about the concept of branding in general, is that there’s a lot of psychology, a lot of years, decades of marketing science and research going to the fact that, hey, brands get positively associated in consumers’ minds and they drive a lot more behavior. They drive sales, traffic, demand, and all these kinds of things. Certainly search engines can help with that, but remember that in one case when you’re doing brand building, you are sort of building and creating demand that might not have existed otherwise. When you’re doing SEO, all you can really do is serve existing demand, rank for the kinds of things that people already are searching for. This is a great thing to be thinking about not just from an SEO perspective, from a rankings perspective, but from a company building perspective and from a holistic marketing effort. It certainly feels like SEO is going in that direction.

All right, everyone. Take care. We’ll see you again next week for another edition of Whiteboard Friday.

Video transcription by SpeechPad.com



Follow SEOmoz on Twitter! While you’re at it, follow me too: Aaron Wheeler.

If you have any tips or tricks that you’ve learned along the way, we’d love to hear about it in the comments below. Post your comment and be heard!

Do you like this post? Yes No


SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

The little guy often loses.

As market niches get saturated, the winners are typically those with the deepest pockets.

Up until the last few years, the little guy has been able to prosper with SEO. The little guy didn’t face much competition from big companies, because the big companies didn’t get SEO. However, Google’s current algorithmns and corporate strategy often have the side effect of benefiting large companies.

According to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, the Internet is a “cesspool” where false information thrives….Brands, he said, are the way to rise above the cesspool

There is a danger in reading too much into Schmidt’s words, however this statement mirrors a lot of what happens in the search results. A big company or brand, with a crawlable site, will find it easy to dominate the search results. A big company will be linked to, discussed in the media, and have established keyword query volume – all factors which Google rewards. All these factors are becoming increasingly difficult for the small guy to emulate.

Factor in Google’s ongoing moves to “own” verticals, and many more little guys will be crushed underfoot. It doesn’t matter if your site is white hat, grey or black, if your site competes directly with a big company, or with Google – who are now a big company themselves – you’ll almost surely lose.

This isn’t just true in the SERPs, of course. It’s also true in Adwords, which essentially rewards those with deep pockets. It’s true in print. It’s true across all media. It’s true in politics, in money markets, and in life.

Power is like that.

Even if you don’t face competition from big operators, you’ll face competition from a million other little guys, especially if there is no barrier to entry. This is often the case on the web. Check out this article by Tim O Shea, founder of the short lived UK group buying site Snippa. Snippa was similar to Groupon.

Due to the number of players, commission levels are being eroded far from the 40-50% that Groupon achieves down to 0% just to get the deal (at Snippa our deals averaged around 10-20%). Merchants are getting numerous phone calls from prospective group buying companies and the conversation with many is more about the commission level charged rather than how they could offer a great discount for a group of new customers. This will continue until a clear leader emerges that can demonstrate a large customer base allowing them to negotiate better deals and commission levels. Many companies chasing the same deal is counter productive for the end customer.

Too many competitors errode margins to zero. Eventually, the biggest operator wins.

How To Protect Yourself And Win

When you’re looking for a niche to get into, how do you evaluate it?

Do you look at the search volumes and look to position a site top ten for that search volume? An ok strategy, and one used by many in the SEO business.

However, lets take it a step further.

If you’re thinking long term, you need to consider other factors, especially competitive threats. Ask: is this niche likely to be so lucrative that it will attract big companies? If so, then you may need a strategy to become one, or be bought out by one. You may win such a fight for a while, but the big company will invariably win in the end through greater reach and purchasing power.

Are you the cheapest, or are you the best?

Pick one.

The little guy is almost always better off aiming to be the best at what they do. Being the cheapest requires volume, and is very difficult to sustain. Many companies, both big and small, get locked in a downward spiral of price cutting. Again, you’ll last being the cheapest until a bigger company turns up. Bigger companies can get price advantage through volume. If the internet equivalent of Wal Mart is your competition, you’re in trouble if you compete on price.

Zappos was a small company, that eventually became a big company, not by competing on price, but by competing on service. They aimed to be the best at service. Had they competed on price, they wouldn’t have got anywhere. The big shoe and clothing chains would have crushed them.

Is SEO your only strategy to dominate a niche? If so, then you’re vulnerable to the whims of Google. Instead, think about ways you can develop a brand. I use the term brand in the widest possible sense. Being the best guy in the world to talk to about, say, the eating preferences of neon tetra fish – is a brand. Whatever it is you do, if you’re not competing on price, aim to be the very best. If you have to carve a niche even finer, do it, at least until the costs outweigh the benefits.

Think about ways you can lock in customers/visitors and keep them coming back. If you only ever have search volume, then you rely on people who haven’t seen you before. Encourage visitors to bookmark you, or sign up for a newsletter. Hook them in some way. Above all, be memorable. Being memorable will create search volume out of nothing (how many people searched for Zappos years ago? Or SEOBook? ). Building an audience may not be enough to fend off big companies, but it will help you fend off other small companies and new entrants, especially if they only rely on SEO.

Be the big guy in the little niche :) SEO Book.com – Learn. Rank. Dominate.

When Bing launched, one of the interesting things they did to make the organic search results appear more relevant was to use link anchor text to augment page titles (where relevant). This would mean if people searched for a phrase that was mostly in your title (but maybe your page title was missing a word or 2 from the search) then Bing might insert those words into the page title area of your listing if they were in some of the link anchor text pointing into your page.

Before being switched over to Bing, Yahoo! would sometimes display the H1 heading as the clickable link to your site (rather than the page title). Bing also uses on page headings to augment page titles.

Historically if Google has thought it would appear more relevant to searchers, sometimes they have shown a relevant machine generated piece of your page displaying those keywords in context rather than the meta description in the snippet, but typically Google has been far more conservative with the page titles. Sometimes Google would list the ODP title for the title of a page, most until recently they have generally typically just listed the page title as the clickable link to your site.

Recently Google has grown more experimental on this front, being willing to use link anchor text and on-page headings as part of the listing. In addition, if the page title is short, Google may add the site’s name at the end of the title.

Here is an example in Google of the page title being replaced by part of an on-page heading & also showing the site’s name being added to the end of the link

And here is the associated on-page heading for the above

I have also seen a few examples of the link anchor text being added to the page title in Google, however it was on a client project & the client would prefer that I didn’t share his new site on an SEO blog with 10’s of thousands of readers. :D

Last November Matt Cutts recently did a video on the topic of Google editing the page titles for relevancy & how it was a fairly new thing for Google. Even back then Google was quite conservative in editing the clickable link … I think they have only grown more aggressive on that front in the past month or so.

SEO Book.com – Learn. Rank. Dominate.

I recently came across an interesting stream of search traffic.

The demographic using this search stream was one I had no direct experience of previously. I was amazed at the high level of site interaction this group engaged in. It was related to the wedding of two people I’d never previously heard of – Ti & Tiny. From the names of the people who responded, I determined the traffic was mostly African-American. Pretty obvious given the topic, right.

What was interesting was this group engaged and responded at a much higher level than other groups I was targeting on similar campaigns. It was a reminder of the different ways some demographics choose to participate online, especially when the marketing pitch reflects them.

Target Marketing

Target marketing, otherwise known as market segmentation, is marketing focusing on specific groups of people.

Marketers use demographic profiles to break down groups into a series of traits, such as gender, race, age, income, disabilities, mobility, educational attainment, home ownership, employment status, and location. This helps marketers determine the correct pitch, language and approach to use when trying to appeal to a given audience.

When we use search keyword lists, it’s often easy to lump people who use the same keywords together. However, if we add demographic information into the mix, our marketing can become more focused, which can translate to higher conversions, and higher returns.

For example, according to a recent demographic study, the African-American market makes up 13 percent of the U.S. population and spends more than 0 billion every year. African-American buying power is expected to reach trillion this year. 26 percent of African-American households had incomes of ,000 per year. 64 percent of African Americans—versus 51 percent of Caucasians—spend more on products they perceive as being “the best”. That last piece of information is very useful if you were designing a page to appeal directly to this market.

How about the gay market. This market tends to be affluent. The average annual income for a gay household is ,000, 20.4 percent higher than in a heterosexual household. This group tends to have a high level of education. Some 83 percent of gays and lesbians have either attended or graduated from college. This market is also brand-loyal. Approximately 89 percent of gays and lesbians are brand-affiliated and are highly likely to seek out brands that advertise to them – i.e. advertising that depicts gay lifestyles and models, for example.

How about women. Women make up 51 percent of the US population and influence at least 80 percent of all spending on consumer goods in the United States. By 2010, women are expected to control trillion, or approximately 60 percent of the nation’s wealth. Retail stores are designed around women, and it would be interesting to note how women and men may respond differently to the online retail equivalent.

General marketing one-size-fits-all messages may miss such groups. How much advertising language is geared towards white, middle class family groups, for example? That’s fine if a white, middle class family group is the target market, but it pays to be aware of groups we may be missing.

Relevance

Relevance is more than matching a search keyword to page topic.

“Know they customer” and reflect your audience in your site design, language and pitch. Do your pages reflect your world view, or the world view of your customers? Is there a difference? Can you use keyword terms to identify and segment specific demographic groups? Are there keywords that women are more likely to use than men? Keywords that Hispanics are more likely to use than African Americans? Think about the ways different groups in our society use language.

Your website should hold up a mirror to your target audience, using their language, depicting their lifestyles, and speaking directly to their wants and needs.

Research

In my Ti & Tiny example, the demographic was pretty obvious. It was easy to picture the fanbase, and adjust the language, and pitch, accordingly.

For more in-depth demographic information, you could look at census data, available at the US census beureau, or your regional equivalent. Check out the Country and City databook.

Using keyword research tools, look for broad keyword associations to get a feel for language use and associated areas to target.

The Inside Facebook Blog often provides interesting snippets of demographic data about Facebook usage and trends, which will likely be reflected in the wider online community.

Professional data mining companies, such as Nielsen, are great sources, if you have the budget. And if you want to dig even deeper, check out the VALS survey.

VALs. SEO Book.com – Learn. Rank. Dominate.

Posted by Justin Briggs

Hey everyone! My name is Justin Briggs, and I’m a SEO consultant at Distilled. A few weeks ago, I packed up and moved across the country to come to Seattle. Some of you might know me better as "seozombie" on Twitter. This is my first post on SEOmoz, but you can expect to see more from me here and on our blog at Distilled.

With the transition of Yahoo! to Microsoft’s Bing backend, webmasters have lost the ability to perform advanced searches using the link: and linkdomain: parameters. Rand Fishkin wrote a post about replacing the Yahoo! linkdomain: data with other data sources. Although Linkscape and Open Site Explorer provide a great data source, there is some functionality that Yahoo! had that isn’t present in other tools yet. The primary functionality I missed was the ability to perform searches against page content; not just page title, URL, and anchor text.

These link searches can help you identify link opportunities from other websites’ (such as competitors) backlinks.

Searching Content of Backlinks

To solve this problem, I setup a Google Custom Search Engine using data from Open Site Explorer. There are two exports of data you can use, which are links and linking domains. I’ll briefly go over the pros and cons of each as a data source in GCSE.

Linking URLS

Pros

  • Only search content that has links
  • Less noise

Cons

  • Limited to top links
  • Limited to 25 URLs per domain
  • Multiple links per domain reduces domain diversity
  • Limited content (5,000 annotations = 5,000 URLS)

Linking Domains

Pros

  • Search all indexed content on a linking domain
  • Find linking sources not included in OSE export
  • Greater domain diversity
  • More content (5,000 annotations = 5,000 domains of content)

Cons

  • More noise
  • Large linking domains like WordPress.com and Blogger.com have subdomains (lots of noise)
  • Results that don’t have link

Setup of Custom Search Engine

Setup of your custom search engine is very easy. For this example, I’m going to use linking domains from OSE.

1) Perform search in Open Site Explorer

Search Open Site Explorer

2) Pull linking domains for all pages on the root domain,  export to CSV

Link Domains in OSE

3) Get list from Excel

Domains in Excel

I used Find & Replace to add a * to the end of all URLs, for matching. You can sort by DA or linking domains. Google Custom Search Engine only allows 5,000 annotations, so only copy up to 5,000 domains.

4) Create Custom Search Engine

Go to Google Custom Search Engine.

How to Create Google Custom Search Engine

5) Perform your searches

So here are the pages on domains that link to distilled.co.uk, that include “link building” in the content and “resources” in the title.

Replace Yahoo linkdomain with GCSE

This solution gives you a new way to mine for backlinks opportunities using your competitor’s backlinks. You can also include linking domains from multiple competitors at the same time. However, you can only include up to 5,000 annotations at a time, so you might want to use some Excel filters to remove noise and duplicate entries.

Tips

Here are a few quick tips to speed things up.

  • Remove massive domains – Large domains like wordpress.com and blogspot.com can produce a lot of noise.
  • Use the –site:  search to reduce noise – If a particular domain is creating a lot of noise in your search, use a negative site search to remove it.
  • Search brand mentions – A search for the brand can help find the linking pages on these domains.
  • Search top anchors from OSE – Find the pages that include the anchors the site is targeting.

Example Queries

"powered by wordpress" "distilled"

Find pages that mention the brand “Distilled” and include “Powered by WordPress”. This is an easy way to find the blogs linking to Distilled.

“guest blogger” OR “guest post” OR “guest article” OR “guest column” -site:blogspot.com -site:wordpress.com -wordpress.org

Find guest blogging opportunities, but filter out domains that may create a significant amount of noise.

"powered by vbulletin" AND seo

Find vBulletin powered forums mentioning SEO.

“link building” intitle:resources

Find link building resource pages.

Give it a Try & Search SEOmoz’s Backlinks

A few queries to try:
"top seo tools"
“link building” intitle:resources
"open site explorer" "powered by wordpress"
allinurl:seomoz

Go ahead, try it, you know you want to!

Loading

I removed linking domains with a DA greater than 90, just to remove some noise from larger domains. (Selecting this value to filter by was completely arbitrary and is just to make the example easier to use.)

Need More Queries?

Long List of Link Searches (SEOmoz) 21 Link Builders Share Advanced Link Building Queries 74 B2B Link Building Queries 106 Sponsorship-Based Link Building Queries

I hope this helps everyone replace some of the functionality of the Yahoo! linkdomain comand. If you’ve got more link searches or ideas to add, please share.

Technorati Tags

, , , ,

Do you like this post? Yes No


SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog

Posted by Suzzicks


Ok, in the mobile world, it is important to understand that Google sometimes lies (Uhhh! Say it ain’t so!) Actually, all of the major search engines do it with mobile results – It is called ‘transcoding.’ In some cases, the search engines will want to rank a particular page in mobile results, but they know they shouldn’t because they can tell that it will be a bad mobile user experience. (Usually because the file size is too big, or the page has lots of mobile-unfriendly code like Flash or loads of JavaScript).

When this happens, the search engine will show the full search engine listing for the mobile-unfriendly page (like normal), but when you click on it, they will automatically take you to a temporary url that represents a ‘transcoded’ version of the page you requested, (rather than delivering you to the actual page listed in the search results). This temporary transcoded page actually lives on a subdomain hosted by the search engine, and shows a scraped version of the page you requested. The scrape usually just shows the text and small images of the page, but omits anything that might cause problems for a mobile browser; sometimes this can include background images, big images, animations, videos, iFrames, and heavy/complex code.

You Might Want Transcoding, but Probably Not

If you have totally ignored the mobile web, transcoding can be a good thing, because it allows you to rank in mobile results when you otherwise might be omitted. (Ranking with transcoding is better than not ranking at all). Unfortunately, none of the search engines do a stellar job with their transcoding. In Google, pages that are transcoded usually closely resemble the ‘text-only’ version of the page that Google keeps in its cache. In some cases though, the transcoding can really mess up a page, missing core navigation, breaking long pages into multiple pages at odd places, or cutting out important sections.

Remember that the search engine use of transcoded pages differs from phone to phone, so just because pages are not being automatically transcoded from search results on your phone does not mean that they are never being transcoded by the mobile search engines. The less sophisticated a mobile browser is, the more likely the search engine is to transcode a page; based on my experience, this is happening mostly on BlackBerry’s and WindowsMobile devices. To see what a page looks like when Google transcodes it, there are two options:

1.) You can perform a search on a mobile phone, then click the ‘options’ button to the right of one of your results in the SERP, and then select ‘Mobile formatted.’ (Illustrated below)

2.) You can also put your url into Google’s tool, here: http://www.google.com/gwt/n? from your computer or your mobile phone.
 

Google Mobile Formatted Page from SERP

 

The image below shows what Realtor.com looks like when it is transcoded by Google, and it is obviously not a great experience. You can see, in this instance, that two header images are missing, including the logo. It also turns the JavaScript navigation into text links that are a bit squished together, and hard to understand (Find a Home Home Finance Home & Garden). Last, since the transcoding software can’t render JavaScript, it has been served an error message, telling it to turn on JavaScript.

 

Bad Search Engine Transcoding Reltor.com

Preventing Transcoding

If you are pretty confident in your mobile site rendering, you can include the ‘no-transform’ cache control in the headers of your template, and that will usually prevent your pages from being transcoded by the search engines, but it is not 100%. The good news is that with faster network connections and better mobile browsers, transcoding by the search engines is becoming much less common. The important take-away here, is to at least test to see what your pages look like when they are being transcoded (even if you have a no-transform cache control in place). In many cases, minor on-page code tweaks can make the transcoded experience much more user-friendly and palatable, improving your ability to reach the widest range of mobile customers, regardless of the phone they are searching from.
 

 

Do you like this post? Yes No


SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog
Post image for I Wish We Had Google Understand Not Google Instant Search

Earlier this week Google launched the latest iteration of the SERP’s, Google Instant. While I, like everyone else, had fun playing and finding some of the holes in it, it’s really not a product that I think will succeed. To Google’s credit, I can’t ever say that I’ve heard people complain that Google takes too long to serve them results. What I do hear and personally experience is that I wish Google understood what I was looking for …

Google didn’t learn that all this complexity isn’t what people want from the failed Google wave and Sidewiki experiments …

 I understand why Google launched a product like Google instant search: they feel that, because they are smart enough at predicting what you are looking for, they can interpret your query after a word or two–or sometimes after just a few letters. They think they know you so well that they can guess what you want without being told. Without getting too involved in what’s going on behind the scenes, Google is using previous search volume to predict the most likely term(s) you are looking for. It’s a sophisticated leap forward in technology to be sure, but it’s not something that solves a problem I hear people complain about. (As a side, this does give a lot more context to the bizarre statement Eric Schmidt made a few weeks ago: “They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next.”)

The problem that I have is getting Google to understand what I meant by that query. I work with search engines all day, so I like to think I have some expertise and can form queries that will get me the right result after one or two tries–or at least help me figure out what I should be searching for. Recently I was searching for a way to import an accountant’s file into Quickbooks on a Mac, so I started with [import accountants file quickbooks mac]. It turned up all sorts of lovely sales pages for the Mac version of Quickbooks. A few tries later I found that the combination I needed was [quickbooks mac accountant’s copy]. Now, if Google was able to figure out my intent and serve up the results for the second query and save 15-20 minutes of digging around, that would be a great product, but serving me the wrong information faster via an ajax interface doesn’t solve my problem and doesn’t help me as a user. Oh–and for the record, at the time of this post’s writing, you can’t create or import an accountant’s file in Quickbooks for a Mac.

by using search volume as a predictive indicator, Google is almost always going to be showing the highest dollar advertising …

Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist nutjob, but what we’ve really got going on are the two wrong problems being solved. Google engineers and developers are smart people, and they want to do cool stuff and need to feel challenged (see users vs developers) . However, they move at pace much faster than most of the world and think that, if the rest of the world would just catch up with them, everything would be better. So we’ll just opt everyone in to this new advance we made. No need to thank us. Google opting everyone in without asking is pretty much standard operating procedure. It’s how they have decided to drag everyone into the future.  Secondly, by using search volume as a predictive indicator, Google is almost always going to be showing the highest dollar advertising first. I get it, NO ONE at Google will ever say that profitability has anything to do with user experience. Eric Schmidt says some bat shit crazy things on a predictably regular basis, but even he won’t say that out loud. They will all just realize it without it needing to be said.

Personally, I don’t think it’s useful. In fact, I think it’s distracting, like your annoying, nerdy, know-it-all nephew who answers your questions before you finish speaking. However, Google didn’t learn that all this complexity isn’t what people want from the failed Google wave and Sidewiki experiments. I can tell you that if I wasn’t an SEO, this would push me over to Bing … I suspect I’m not alone …

This post originally came from Michael Gray who is an SEO Consultant. Be sure not to miss the Thesis WordPress Theme review.

I Wish We Had Google Understand Not Google Instant Search

tla starter kit

Related posts:

  1. How TED Helped Me Understand Personalized Search Long time readers here will know that I’m not a…
  2. Why You Should Be Worried About Google Search Wiki I’ve been beating the drum about why personaized search and…
  3. Google Personalized Search – Don’t Become a Google Traffic Addict Recently I was doing a bit of research on personalized…
  4. Google Search Tricks, Tips and Hints Even though I work in the search engine space I…
  5. How to Turn Off Personalized Search in Google Chrome With the impending arrival of Google OS I’ve been spending…

Advertisers:

  1. Text Link Ads – New customers can get 0 in free text links.
  2. CrazyEgg.com – Supplement your analytics with action information from click tracking heat maps.
  3. BOTW.org – Get a premier listing in the internet’s oldest directory.
  4. Ezilon.com Regional Directory – Check to see if your website is listed!
  5. Page1Hosting – Class C IP Hosting starting at .99.
  6. Directory Journal – List your website in our growing web directory today.
  7. Content Customs – Unique and high quality SEO writing services, providing webmasters with hundreds of SEO articles per week
  8. Majestic SEO – Competitive back link intellegence for SEO Analysis
  9. Glass Whiteboards – For a professional durable white board with no ghosting, streaking or marker stains, see my Glass Whiteboard Review
  10. Need an SEO Audit for your website, look at my SEO Consulting Services
  11. KnowEm – Protect your brand, product or company name with a continually growing list of social media sites.
  12. Scribe SEO Review find out how to better optimize your wordpress posts.
  13. TigerTech – Great Web Hosting service at a great price.

Michael Gray – Graywolf’s SEO Blog

Posted by randfish

Today, Yahoo! formally announced that it’s fully transitioning its search engine backend to Microsoft’s Bing. While this is good news on many fronts for marketers (simplification of advertising platforms, a bigger competitor for Google, etc), it’s a big loss to webmasters who relied on some advanced link data available from Yahoo! Search that’s now unavailable.

While Yahoo! is maintaining their Site Explorer service, the use of advanced query parameters on searches using the link: and linkdomain: operators will no longer return results.

Yahoo!'s Linkdomain Command No Longer Returns Results

For the query above, Yahoo! previously showed pages that pointed to any page on SEOmoz.org from sites with the .edu TLD extension (these now return no results)
_

Webmasters and marketers will no longer be able to use advanced parameters on link: and linkdomain: searches such as inurl, intitle, site, etc. breaking many data sources for software tools and limiting link research abilities. However, there are several worthwhile solutions/replacements, including tools from SEOmoz (though I’ll also cover a few others).

#1 – Linkscape Advanced Reports

SEOmoz PRO members now have unlimited access to Linkscape advanced reports, which can apply filters through the UI in much the same way one could with Yahoo! link searches.

Linkscape Advanced Report Filtering on EDU sites

Using the filters and search capabilities, I can add nearly all of the filters previously possible through Yahoo!, and many others unique to Linkscape.
_

This tool is available at www.seomoz.org/linkscape

#2 – OpenSiteExplorer CSV Exports

Another methodology without quite as many bells and whistles, is to use Open Site Explorer. While Linkscape offers filtering right inside the interface, Open Site Explorer is built for speed, meaning you can see lots of links, but only in the views directly ported from our API. To get into the deep filtering, you’ll need to use the CSV export + Excel (or your favorite spreadsheet program).

Filter on OpenSiteExplorer

The filters in OSE are more limited than Linkscape, but most reports take <10 seconds to generate
_

When I export the results to CSV and open in Microsoft Excel, I can easily filter for the .edu links (or any other modifier I’m interested in). OSE also shows up to 10,000 links per report vs. Linkscape’s 3,000.

CSV Export Filter on EDU Links from Open Site Explorer

Using the "find" command in Excel is the simplest methodology, but you can do all sorts of awesome filtering using more advanced techniques
_

This tool is available at www.opensiteexplorer.org

#3 – Majestic SEO

A UK-based search engine built using distributed crawlers, MJ-12, offers an SEO tool for backlink research. The index varies slightly to how major search engines and Linkscape build – instead of new indices built from regular crawls, MJ-12 adds new links and pages as they’re discovered to an ongoing index. This means a much larger dataset, but not always the same level of freshness and limited de-duplication/canonicalization. However, many SEOs like this project a lot, and MJ-12 enables the same filtering available in Linkscape:

Majestic SEO Filter for EDU links

Many cool filters and ordering are available via MJ’s tool and reports typically return fairly quickly
_

This tool is available at www.majesticseo.com

#4 – Yahoo! Site Explorer CSV Exports

Just as CSV exports from Open Site Explorer can enable link searching, so too can exports from Yahoo! ‘s Site Explorer. The big limitation is the 1,000 link limit (1/3rd that of Linkscape and 1/10th that of Open Site Explorer). Previously, SEOs would use modified queries to make requests and get more link data from Yahoo!, but with this switch, the only remaining option is to request links for many pages on a single domain to help get a better sense of sites with greater than 1,000 external links.

Yahoo Site Explorer

The "Export first 1000 results to TSV" button + Excel filtering option enables marketers to do research, but is limited in quantity
_

This tool is available at search.siteexplorer.yahoo.com

#5 – The SEOmoz API

For those with some programming skills, SEOmoz offers a free API for link data with up to 1 million calls per month, as well as a larger, full featured link data API starting at 0/month. This is the same API that powers both the Linkscape tool and Open Site Explorer, as well as integrations with Conductor, Hubspot, Flippa, Brightedge and many others.

SEOmoz's API Wiki

The APIWiki offers lots of information and examples on how to make calls to the service and integrate with your own softare or practices.
_

This API is available at www.seomoz.org/api

#6 – Other possibilities

In addition to these sources, there are a few other options, albeit with less fully functional or open systems. These include:

Other sources may yet emerge, and certainly players like Majestic and SEOmoz are working hard to improve their coverage, quality and functionality. It will be interesting to see how this change affects the link research landscape – hopefully Bing is working on something valuable to help replace this functionality and to serve up data when Yahoo! Site Explorer is also retired (currently scheduled for 2012).

 

Do you like this post? Yes No


SEOmoz Daily SEO Blog