We’ve discussed this before and will likely discuss it again. Google. Google is again being scrutinized concerning their business practices. Anyone who has worked hard to generate significant search engine optimization for a client will know that Google keeps it a moving target. Their motto is “Don’t be evil.” However that hardly qualifies as verifiable transparency and accountability. The idea is nice, but what happens when their income streams thin out? About 8 or so years ago well financed marketing managers were falling all over themselves to give Google money. A click for Mesothelioma was worth $75 or more. That’s just one click!
It sounds absurd and that’s what it was. It took a while for the executives to realize that their ROI was going to make them look quite silly. In fact, many remained in denial for years. They dreamed that they could just pay Google and get all the sales they wanted. They assumed that the lack of conversions (or actual sales) was a mistake of their staff and just tried again with a different “guy”. Like someone who paid too much for their car (or a Mac owner) they bragged to their friends about how great their hot rod is. Their friends jumped in too. However, when pay-per-click did not deliver much beyond bills, as the now proverbial “ad blindness” set in and clicks only kept getting more expensive the “fancy car” failed to deliver for many of the markets that patronized it. The inexperienced still rush to buy up their “keywords” in hopes of a marketing miracle. However, the only marketing miracle is that Google made a killing in a market that had the lifespan of a Great Dane.
So the game is over, the hay day is exhausted, and Google is handing out vouchers for $75, $80, and $100 worth of free ad space. Sparky, our beloved but old Great Dane is spending most of his days sleeping on his mat and the vouchers amount to putting vitamins in his food. All they will do is allow the uninformed to discover for free how little value there is left in PPC advertising. After they’ve spent their $75 voucher and generated a few hundred clicks and maybe 2 or 3 conversions into something whose return amounts to ten or twenty bucks, then only fuzzy math will convince them to spend more. It’s an act of desperation that will mostly net folks that cannot use a calculator. There are some niches that this works in, but it is but a shadow of what it once was.
So where does that leave corporate Google and their motto “Don’t be evil?” It’s easy to do the right thing when the wind is blowing your way, but true character is only demonstrated when things get tough. It’s obvious there aren’t any Mac fans here, but one thing Steve did manage to do is create a sustainable fantasy. Google’s PPC fantasy was not sustainable. So what is Google doing to remain profitable? After all, “organic” search results don’t pay them, or at least they shouldn’t. The funny money valuations of “audience potential” are the stuff bubbles and bankruptcies are made of. Enter the FTC.
The Federal government, along with a lot of the more paranoid of us techie types, have our suspicions that Google’s “organic” results aren’t really as “organic” as they appear. You can believe what you’d like, but a company that built its business on scraping other people’s sites for content only to turn around and ban other sites that do the same thing citing “copyright” violations as their grounds sure doesn’t seem capable of not “being evil.” Press releases can say all kinds of things, but the cash cow was adWords and that dog just ain’t hunting. Android is great, and nobody really knows for sure, but on the face it seems to be open-source and royalty free. In fact there are rumors that Google has been paying manufacturers to use it. Yes, maybe 5 years ago Google could afford to have high standards, maybe they can for another 5 years. But, try to knock Wikipedia out of the top spot on a key term for your niche market, try to get about.com out of your way. About.com just so happens to run Google ads, Wikipedia, well while their is no obvious connection they are Google’s example of a “content is king” site. So it may well eat up so many SERPS simply as evidence in Google’s “don’t be evil” favor. If corps are paying for “organic” SERPS positions the connection will not be obvious. If Google is purposely burying their competition on top searches you can bet they will have some more obscure examples to show the Feds, and if they don’t now they will when the time comes.
What will the FTC find? It just depends on how deeply they dig, but Google is a corporation and they will do what they need to to keep the revenue coming. What will the FTC do if they do find impropriety? Well, here’s our guess, they will find a young man named Saddam Hussein and make him an honorary citizen of Detroit, then wink at him and tell him to “do the right thing.” In other words, it’s not likely any good will come of it. Sure Google is gaming the system. At least they have demonstrated a realization that there are limits to how much we will tolerate before giving Bing another chance. The government on the other hand seems to see no limit at all to how far they can manipulate. I say if Google wants to sell search engine positions let them. Just let the public know what they’re doing and let us decide how we deal with them. What we don’t need is “ObamaSearch 2011”.
You don’t think Google is a problem? I would like to add 5 illegal predatory practices observed from my own –business-experience with Google.
1. Google’s core business is to sell lists of links (search results) to advertisers. That’s how Google makes >80% of their income. A site’s searchengine rankings on Google’s SERPs are majorly influenced by the number and quality of back links. Any commercial site that sells these back links to advertisers (just as Google does) that improves a site’s SERP rankingson Google, will be put OUT of business. This is stated Google policy. Nothingcan be more predatory than this.
2. If one wants to advertise on Google’s search results, large companies that can already claim a top position in the very same results, get preferential treatment over new competitors. New entrants have a lower Google ranking for the item they want to advertise than the established competitors (which are Google’s best symbiotic customers). The lower search ranking of the entrant’s site is used by Google as the determining factor whether the “advertisement is relevant”. If it’s less relevant it will be virtually impossible to advertise on a competitive first SERP (search engine results page). This illegal tying between advertising and search results is to ensure that the competitive playing field is unleveled to the advantage of incumbent advertisers.
3. Predatory pricing. If one advertises at the top of Google search results and at the same time places a Google ad on the target page of that advertisement, the value difference between the two is more than 90%. In other words, buying the same ad from Google is more than 10 times more expensive than selling the same ad through Google. Claiming a decent margin is not illegal, but predatory pricing is.
4. Consumers may have the option to go to alternative search engines. Advertising businesses have no such option, unless they can affordto abandon 2/3 of the internet market.
5. Search results are rigged in Google’s own favor. Search for a local item or service, such as “My Town Therapist”, and you will not get the ten best results, but you’ll get Google’s own local Places pages instead. These Places pages generate advertising income that is –illegally-taken from other sites. In other words, the top ten sites before there was Google Places have been relegated to spots 11-20 because Google claimed the 10 most profitable rankings for themself. Google Places doesn’t rank that high because they came up organically through Google’s own algorithm. No, they rank so high because Google hard coded them there.
Perfect work you have done, this website is really cool with good info .
Lovely just what I was searching for.Thanks to the author for taking his time on this one.
“Love is metaphysical gravity.” ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
Hi There Vtek,
I just stumbled across this and, You wouldn’t think that a little old title (aka headline) could have any significant impact on your article marketing success, but it does! The common assumption is that the power is all in the article and the resource box.
Cheers