Comments on: Google Search Share Declines

By: Henry

Henry — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:38:30 +0000

1.3% seems like a small % with the rise of Bing.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:42:09 +0000

These companies have tremendously awful metrics. I’d give them plus or minus 10% of reality with a 95% confidence interval. A two percent change is statistically insignificant.

By: Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:26:14 +0000

Google is becoming more a content provider and less a search service (that sends traffic to other sites).

The metrics that are published by companies like comScore, Compete, Hitwise, and Nielsen really have no relevance to SEARCH — they are just estimating page views within the large networks that companies like Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, AOL (Time-Warner), and Ask operate on the Web.

There are currently no accurate, reliable measurements for search — a fact I have shared often but which others occasionally acknowledge as well (Cf. http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2009/08/why-katy-perry-can-predict-search-share-better-than-nielsen-comscore.html).

By: coxy

coxy — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:31:30 +0000

Whilst 1.3% may seem like a small figure – it’s not that small to those that benefit from it.

With Bing on 9.0% for July 2009 and Ask.com on 1.7% – a 1.3% increase for a competitor is a significant change.

What I’d question though is the accuracy and relevance of these figures? Primarily, where does Neilsen actually get it’s data – from the search companies themselves? And also, this is just for the US market – I’m sure Baidu is the #2 ranked search engine globally – and I would be interested to see whether there’s a Google-defect on a global scale or whether it’s just the US that are susceptible to marketing campaigns.

By: Ben Shepherd

Ben Shepherd — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:34:33 +0000

1.3% is significant?

Agree with the second point, not sure a 1.3% drop is a sign your first point is correct.