Live data from Hacker News

How Google is Killing Organic Search

blog.tutorspree.com

141–150 of 220 posts

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#141

The auction model for ads basically ruins internet searches in transactional categories. If you want to win at the "italian restaurant" search game, you have to bid the highest for the ad, which means you must have the highest margin. The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients). Want the "cheapest car insurance"? Google is zero help. It sends you…

The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients).

That's a rather terrible example: a restaurant that had over priced wine and cheap ingredients would fail miserably in short order, regardless of how many Google ad auctions they won.

If you really want the cheapest car insurance, you need to find a company that doesn't advertise, and is non-profit

I doubt those two traits have any measurable correlation with providing the cheapest car insurance, or any other service or business, just as it's possible that a company with rampant ads on every medium and high margins provides the best value.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=lm&q=%22binary+tree%22 For me: 1) Wikipedia (in featured box), 2,3) Some Exchange/Notes migration software called "Binary Tree" that owns binarytree.com, 4) cslibrary.stanford.edu on binary trees w/exercises, 5) "Binary Trees in C++" from cprogramming.com, 6) "Binary Tree" at dictionary.reference.com, and 7) "Binary Tree" on mathworld.wolfram.com ...above the fold.

You've got to admit that 2 and 3 are pretty glaringly bad in this case. My fold ends halfway through 5. Half of the top 4 links are for the data structure, half for some irrelevant company, so DDG is effectively placing this company on par with the data structure. If you didn't know quite what you were looking for in advance, this could lead to serious confusion.

https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22binary%20tree...

1) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_tree

2) binarytree.com - Binary Tree: Exchange Migration and Notes Migration Software

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#143

The auction model for ads basically ruins internet searches in transactional categories. If you want to win at the "italian restaurant" search game, you have to bid the highest for the ad, which means you must have the highest margin. The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients). Want the "cheapest car insurance"? Google is zero help. It sends you…

What's funny is how different using Consumer Reports online experience is. What? There's no free content? I have to pay a monthly fee to read content and it's not trivial. Best investment I ever made. Especially when buying new appliances. Ha.. It's kind of pathetic that I flinched at spending a few bucks a month for good content. If you're getting information for free your information likely has a cost you're just p…

Best investment I ever made. Especially when buying new appliances. Ha.. It's kind of pathetic that I flinched at spending a few bucks a month for good content.

I have an entirely different perspective of Consumer Reports (the online variant which has external site ads on it).

Understand that they are entirely biased (as we all are): They take home the lucre by keeping you thinking that you need them, and that they're doing an important service. Hence why the big noise about things like not recommending the iPhone -- all just noise to keep the subscription dollars coming and to create a sense of utility. They're also prone to taking complex products and then trying to distill it into easily quantified values that they can put in a chart and categorize, leading to a detachment from real-world value and "need to fill this issue". I was a subscriber for several years and eventually came to realize that their top picks were usually not really top picks, and they were often in areas where they were entirely out of their depth (I discovered that particularly after buying a set of their top pick speakers).

After that print subscription ended, years later I was looking at getting a new furnace and saw that the online site listed furnace reviews, though they were hidden behind a paywall. Okay, bought a subscription to find that there were no reviews at all, but some useless summary about basic efficiency levels. Well that's useless. Oh well, a year subscription wasted. A year later I discovered that they auto-renewed (never signed up for that, but whatever), and put it on my todo list to jump through hoops to cancel at some point, wasting my time (as they give NO clear way to cancel, despite subscribing being a trivial painless step). The next year they sent me notice that my credit card had expired -- awesome, easy way to finally unsubscribe from an auto-renew that I didn't opt into without sitting on hold for half an hour! Imagine how funny I thought it was when they guessed my next expiry and just used that, continuing the subscription.

I have an extremely poor opinion of CU, and I think the belief that they're more pure or their opinion more useful is a bit naive.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#144
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure Google Maps predates both Google+ and the Zagat acquisition by a large margin.

Of course it does, but what's your point here? I said that the carousel is space given over to results from non-Web search, not just space given over to local results. The fact that there was already a chunk of the results page given over to non-Web search results doesn't alter the fact that the carousel is a new, further large chunk of space handed over to non-Web search results.

The point is that calling Google Maps anything but organic is wrong by any useful definition of organic.

It's fine to argue about whether Google should be showing anything but ten blue links (maps, images, calculator results...) But refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of searching anything but web pages is just absurd.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, sadly that happens sometimes. I revert to Google (with bang syntax) when I am looking for something programming related and want a lot of results from stackoverflow. However, DDG is definitely better at finding some things. I recently searched for gentoo+postgresql related stuff and got highly relevant results, which weren't in Google's SERP.

If you want just stackoverflow results and are already using bang syntax to get them from Google, then you should just switch from !g to !so.

An additional bonus of "!so" is that works with stack overflow search syntax like tag names between brackets.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#146
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

of course, but once you get to a point 50 minutes out of every hour is a commercial, and only 10 minutes is an actual TV show... you start to see a breakdown in the whole business model. Perhaps Google has reached the point where they will soon start experiencing a breakdown that forces them to show more 'content' and less 'ads'. However since the general public cant easily tell what links are paid and what are true…

That has always puzzled me - why does pay TV have ads within the programs. I can understand outside the programs to round out to half-hour slots, but handing over money to get shows with ads inside them? I just don't understand why people go for these things.

Cable TV didn't have that many ads when it started out. They increased the amount as it became more stablished and more people started beeing invested in it (at least thats the impression I get in my country).

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#147
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am happy to see other people finally pointing this one out. I will refine your hypothesis a little. a) It isn't companies with the highest margin who win, but the ones which are able and willing to devote the greatest percentage of revenue to performance driven advertising. If the company has a slim margin to begin with, they will never even be able to start in the "race." b) Education is a better example than car…

"many [for-profit colleges] spend more on acquiring a single enrollment than on educating them." According to the DoE, 4-year for-profit colleges spend 2.9x more on administrative expenses (albeit including student services and academic support) than instruction. Unfortunately I can't find a better breakdown of this category, but I'd assume this is mostly leadgen.

Do you have a comparable number for non-profit colleges? While I doubt it's 2.9, I'm sure it's still high.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#148
post #105

Maybe this is a misconception on my part, but isn't local search listings and map info a form of organic search, just derived using different signals for authoritativeness and relevancy, of which proximity is only one variable? If the above is true, Google is dedicating way more real estate to organic than ever. It's just a different form of organic.

I came here to say the same thing. But one of the other comments [1] points out how the "local" listings (Google-owned Zagat) or maps are actually Google's curated business listings, not the business' website. Same goes for Google shopping, Google books, etc, where in popular categories, Google slurps up all the content. On the one hand, that does level the playing field, because little guy doesn't need huge website…

> Let's say you change your business hours (and as a potential customer, I do love Google's display of today's business hours) or phone number, how quickly does Google update all that? Probably very quickly, but it's now out of your hands.

On the contrary, its completely in your hands: http://www.google.com/business/placesforbusiness/

The point of contention is that its a Google controlled affair instead of going through an external standard.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#149

The auction model for ads basically ruins internet searches in transactional categories. If you want to win at the "italian restaurant" search game, you have to bid the highest for the ad, which means you must have the highest margin. The best way to win is to open a restaurant with ridiculously high margins (over priced wine and cheap ingredients). Want the "cheapest car insurance"? Google is zero help. It sends you…

True that car insurance ads deliver little or no value - as in the end you always end up at one of the major carriers - and the price is no lower than if you had gone to them directly. The restaurant example assumes that you can continue to fool your customers with overpriced wine and low quality food. If you could stay in business long enough with that strategy you don't really need to run PPC ads! But these two examples completely distort the way Google's Ads are used by the vast majority of businesses - to whom they can and do deliver real customers and value. This includes the vast majority of cases - the long tail of search traffic that converts well for niche products and services that have little or no other way to directly market or get customers. When used correctly, Google Adwords is a godsend for such businesses. This could be a maker of high-end custom furniture cabinets in a little town in the middle of nowhere, or a small software company in a small town in India that has produced a killer app to learn Yoga, or a software developer in New Zealand, that has developed the perfect SaaS app for monitoring your server, and so on. These are the businesses that Google empowers - by giving them access to a potential worldwide market for their products.

Re: How Google is Killing Organic Search

#150
post #138
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this interesting. I didn't think of Google local listing as not organic but I did the search in the article[1] and sure enough it takes a lot of the real estate. Perhaps, Google could publish a standard way to write your own self-hosted Places page? We will still have questions on how the ranking will work and whether Google will prioritize its own Google+ place pages over self-hosted place pages but I think t…

Well, thereby hangs a tale. But the short answer is that, by and large, Google seems to be aggressively uninterested in scraping that kind of structured/semantic data from the public Web. In fact it even seems to have been active in trying to prevent that kind of data from finding its way into webpages at all: remember the arcane but nasty scrap about metadata in HTML5? Well, this is what that was all about.

Scraping/doing it semantically has copyright implications (Re: Europe) so realistically the Google-owned approach is the most viable one.
Post reply on HN