Month: November 2004

Funny that I was in Florida last week, because the webmaster boards are lighting up with speculation that Google is about to do another major update to its index. When this happens, the rankings of many keywords and websites shift dramatically, with major implications for the business models of thousands of small sites.

The last major update, dubbed Florida, was just about a year ago, and it killed a lot of affiliate spam. But it also took out a lot of innocent bystanders. Site owners and the SEO community are battening down their hatches, as the holidays are usually the times when Google hurricanes hit. Why? That’s when the pressure to make money on the web is most intense (many online retailers make 80% of their profits in the fourth quarter). That means the attempts to game Google also intensify. Should be fun to watch…but I wouldn’t want to be a small online retailer right about now…

Gary points us to a new report (PDF download) issued by the folks at Consumer Union that reviews the disclosure policies of major search engines.

Key findings:
• Paid inclusion was not satisfactorily disclosed or explained by any of the search engines tested. The credibility of this practice is of such concern to the industry itself that, after Consumer Reports WebWatch testing had been completed, two of the top five search engines announced plans to terminate paid inclusion programs.
• Meta-engines, which present results from several search engines simultaneously, repeatedly failed to adequately disclose the presence of paid placement and paid inclusion within search results.
• Disclosures are generally hard to find, accessible by headings and hyperlinks that often blend in with the page, making them easy for consumers to overlook. • Information disclosed by the sites on business practices with advertisers — and how these practices may affect search results — was often confusing and jargonladen.
• Some engines, like Google – one of the few majors not named in the original FTC complaint – took pains to visually segregate paid results from non-paid results. Consumers may want to avoid others, like 1st Blaze, because of inadequate or absent disclosures that undermine the integrity of search results.

According to a release I rec’vd from Fathom Online today, keyword prices are still rising at a healthy clip.

Fathom Online, a leading search engine marketer, released its October monthly Keyword Price Index™ showing an overall 14% increase in the price of keywords from the September average of $1.37 per keyword to $1.55 for October.

Search advertisers in some sectors of the market found that the start of Q4 was definitely more costly than September. For instance, in the consumer services category, which includes entertainment, spas, and other related goods and services, prices increased on average 78% from $.54 to $.96 per keyword. Retailers faced increases on average of 52% from $.32 to $.48. Other advertisers fared better, particularly in the automotive industry where prices dropped 10% from $1.43 5o $1.39 and in telecom/broadband where the average fell 5% from $1.89 to $1.78.

Slashdot has details on Apple’s integrated search function, noting that metadata will play a starring role. Apple’s new search technology, which will incorporate desktop search, is called Spotlight. More detail here. Spotlight is expected to be integrated into Apple’s next OS release, Tiger, due in Spring. From what I can glean from the thread, it seems Apple’s search tool will be well received. As a Mac guy, all I can say is hurry up!