Kate Morris

One of the classes I am taking right now is IT Management and we had the pleasure of reading a case for discussion this week on Google. This was of particular interest to me because of my profession, but I knew I had to be good, and let others make their points. This class is all about participation, not being a smart—.

So I sat back and was very good, and took notes. No not for class purposes, but as a marketer. This was the greatest focus group I could ever ask for, real users with no agenda. There were three things that stood out other than the fact that everyone thinks Google can do no wrong (I’m kidding).

1. One classmate compared Google to Enron - HUH?
Yeah, I am not kidding here. One guy said that Google isn’t transparent in its accounting practices and since there is no “product” that there is a higher possibility that there is fraud happening. I didn’t buy it, barely understood his point, but thought I would send it out to the masses and see if anyone in Search Marketing agreed.

2. Google’s only downfall is going to be a change in focus/people.
The only downfall we could all agree on for Google (why their growth wouldn’t be sustainable) is if their focus changed from the “Don’t Be Evil” core in search. As time goes on, we all know there is a possibility that Google will change as the people change. It is their people and their ethics that keep them doing such a good job. If they lose the focus on the end user, balls will drop all over the place and then they will crash.

3. There is still a minor fear in privacy concerns.
Our professor brought up the web history thing (to which I pointed out that you can opt out, not login and delete history) but at least most people understood that it is that information that Google uses to make the results better. I still have to point out that no matter what Google knows about us, our ISPs know more. So whatever.

There was one part even that I asked everyone in the class who used MySpace (people were very reluctant to raise their hands, interesting) and then followed up asking who used the search bar in MySpace. I was proving a point that people do in fact leave MySpace to search, my professor diagreed. But even that small poll was very insightful.

What do you think? Is Google going to fail like Enron??

Google has released a feature in Webmaster Tools that grants a wish I have had for years. Within the list of 404s that Googlebot finds on your site, Google now tells you who is using that broken link. You now know who to contact to change links and/or what links to 301 in the case of a redesigned site.

So I must say THANK YOU to Google. This is something I have been bothered with for years. I don’t have much to work with on my current company site, but I know this feature will come in handy many times in the future.

For more info on it, see Matt Cutt’s take on it, and the actual release from Google.

Cuil - said “cool.” Nope. I want to say “coolie.” Sphinn worked for me, but not this one. Though there are still people that mispronounce Sphinn, so whatever. It’s the engine just released from former Googlers. Last night it was all over Twitter, so I thought I’d check it out this morning, especially after the Austin American Statesman talked about it too.

First searches: I don’t like the picture thing and the layout. Maybe it’s like Facebook (I personally like the new layout), sometimes it’s just something to get used to.

I think this is too simple for the core searchers to use. Maybe it’s more for the “normal” person … but I don’t think you are going to get far by ignoring the SEM world. We are the ones that make recommendations. While we are finiky, Google knows how this works. Cuil founders, you worked there, you should know that. Give us ways to check things and test things. You give us nothing right now.

On the upside for them, there is a possibility that this will change everything. The title tags I have now look really stupid on this layout and the mass of text below is weird. I now want to know more about where they are pulling info from and how to edit it. If this takes off, SEO will change yet again. It makes results change and we will have to grow to fit it.

For right now, am I worried? Nope. So far from what I’ve seen on twitter, no one else is impressed either.

Final thought: If you want to go after the top search engine, don’t announce it that way. Google didn’t get to the top by releasing as the “next Yahoo.” Be your own damn engine. Do something remarkable and leave it up to the world to decide.

Search #1: “auto refinance”

Reasoning: I know the space VERY well, and wanted to see how things showed up.
Outcome: The “rankings” are about right … but the pictures throw me off. Some have pictures some don’t. But good so far (read my company shows first).

Search #2: “kate morris”

Reasoning: My name. Again, I know these results.
Outcome: How is my website, katemorris.com, while not updated, third. And then there is a picture of grapes? WTF? That appears no where on my site. It’s old, but not that ripe! Then there is my SEOmoz profile and old picture. I changed that like a month ago. Old results guys.

Search #3: “austin sem”

Resoning: Checking for logos
Outcome: Pathetic. The largest agency in Austin is listed 5th, with another companies logo. FAIL.

Search #4: “seomoz”

Reasoning: Lots to cover here … just interested.
Outcome: Still no company logo. Some of the pictures are right (about 60% of the time they are), but the most fascinating thing is the “Explore by Category” Box. Rand … you got “Black_hat_seo” as a category. Teehee.

Search #5: “austin pizza”

Reasoning: Local search
Outcome: Nope. This is bad. And the Category only gives national chains. Austin doesn’t work this way people. Maybe small towns, but Austin Pizza, Flying Tomato, and Mangia would be pissed here.

Cuil Wishlist

• How many of my pages are indexed? site: doesn’t work
• No Advanced Search
• No way to edit the photo that appears or guidelines on how to change that
• Local Search
• What are yours?

Maybe someone has a solution to this, but for now I am calling this a “would love” feature in AdWords.

Situation: My company wants to test placing the phone number in the ad text and how that converts better than other ads. There is some debate about this and I want to try it. So we assign a phone number to the campaign and a landing page with that phone number. Full tracking since people might click and then convert online and we want to know that.

Also know that we track all keywords with keyword specific URLs in AdWords. AdWords give precedence to keyword specific URLs (and I LOVE that) meaning they override the ad copy URL.

Problem: With these new ads, the new landing page is only specified in the ad URL, which is being overridden by the keyword URL. I can’t start a new campign with new keyword URLs because it’s duplication. The ads won’t be rotated correctly.

What I need: A way to attach trackers in the keyword to append to the ad URL. That was hard to say. Let me explain.

Ad 1 URL: www.example.com

Ad 2 URL: www.example.com/lp

I want to set a tracker on all keywords in that campaign so that when someone searches “blue widgets” and gets Ad 2, they get www.example.com/lp/?source=bluewidgets. If they got Ad 1, it’d be www.example.com/?source=bluewidgets.

Basically what I’m looking for is a choice of changing the keyword desination URL if need be, but also have the option of appending a tracker on the end of the ad URL.

Anyone agree? Got ideas for me? I’m posting on webmasterworld too, see what happens there.

I remember when I first got an inactive notice in AdWords. It didn’t make sense to me then, but now I don’t get them at all. Makes me wonder if I’ve gotten better, or has AdWords?

When you put ads up with Google, there are many best practices to think about when writing ads, picking landing pages, and crafting out which key phrases to use. I don’t want to review all of them, so instead I’ll point you to a few nice reviews of them recently posted on SEOmoz.

What I am thinking about today is if Google is getting too bogged down. Just last week, I noted an ad showing up third for a highly competitive term in my client’s industry. I will, like most SEMs, click on competitors ads to get the “feel” of the user experience with their site and ads versus our own. This ad perplexed me though. When I clicked on the ad, I was taken to the domain listed (an AdWords requirement), but given a slow loading picture of a page that had a hyperlink.

Once I clicked that hyperlink, I was redirected at least three times (ad is gone now, so I can’t test it now), and finally landed on a short-term loan page. This had nothing to do with the original search! How was this showing in AdWords, much less at the TOP?

I informed the “authorities” but by the end of the day, the ad was mysteriously gone. Huh. I guess props go to the AdWords police. But oddly only after I noticed it. Yes, I know, what happens when a tree falls in the middle of the forest, if no one hears it and all that.

THEN …

Ciaran over in the UK gets some funny results from AdWords as well. He ends up wondering the same thing I wondered, why is this showing at all?

Advertiser Lead Time

So part of me knows that there is some lead time from when you put up an ad before Google completely knocks it down. That’s at least what I told my bosses when explaining the situation to them. Most advertisers want their ad up RIGHT NOW. So Google learned from Overture (who used to make you wait days, even weeks, while they reviewed your stuff) and started putting things up almost immediately.

But it seems to me that they are getting a little lax on their review time. I’m curious to know if anyone else has seen this phenomena recently.

Funny, I started this post in Seattle and with the blog move, never got back to it. Now Rand has gone and done so much better, but I still have somethings to say about all this.

I recently asked Matt Cutts about topics he thought I might research for my Master’s thesis. I thought paid linking and he said it was going to be sooo 2007. I disagreed because I had seen so many people still doing it. When we got to Seattle, what I said was backed up.

Now I am a seasoned veteran of sorts in this space. Not a leader by any means, but I’ve been around the block a time or two. Hearing black hat things at the show did not bother me, I enjoying hearing some of them. It was more something Jay Young said: “We are marketers not moralists.” Jay is a smart man, and a great guy from what I hear, but that kind of thinking is so irritating to me.

I almost left business a few years ago. I was tired of the BS, the backstabbing, and the greed. I wanted to be somewhere that I could use my talents for the betterment of other people, not myself. Does that make me pathetic or a bad marketer? I don’t think so. It makes me a good person. And I really don’t like being made fun of for it.

But the rest of his speech made some good points about fear. No one should fear Matt Cutts. No one should fear link brokers. They all have their jobs, and they are not out to mess with anyone else. Matt does what he does for society as a whole. Trying to give them the most unbiased answers to their questions. Putting the small company on the same playing field as the big ones. The internet is not about who has the bigger marketing budget and that is what I see as Google’s standpoint.

But the link brokers are just helping small companies play the games that the search engines set up themselves. Links are needed and they are helping people get them. Is paid linking going to die totally? No. But should the search engines stop trying to discount them? No. That is their job, they are going to do it. This industry is risky at times. It’s like gambling, if you want the short term fast results you have to put a lot on the line. And sometimes, and more recently a lot, you get burned, bad. That’s the game.

Fear shouldn’t have a place in our industry - good business sense, ethics, and all that should. Do your job the right way, and with some patience, the best results will win out.

We got a call from AOL marketing services yesterday. Bit of a surprise to me, but then I thought about how many times I’ve heard AOL’s name in the past week and was surprised no longer. From new executives to the acquisition of Bebo, their like 105th acquisition in the past year (I exaggerate), I can see they are on the move.

Then thinking about how Time Warner is planning to spin them off got me thinking. Ask just made a dumb move focusing just on women (I am one and all, but really??), Yahoo is in trouble, and AOL is going psycho.

Humor me for a second. How interesting would this situation be? Ask and AOL merge, which is highly probable according to other industry experts (and AOL’s 106th acquisition), forming the now AOL. I propose another name or something — but with AOL’s base, Ask’s technology, Quigo/Ads.com and AIM/Bebo, they have something there.

Take that company and put that up against the top 3. Now remember that Yahoo is in danger of being bought out. I don’t want that to be Microsoft, so why not merge the new AOL/ASK and Yahoo? Talk about a powerhouse! Ideas, technology, subscribers galore! That is the only way I can see anyone giving Google a run for their money.

Everyone knows that my hero is Matt Cutts. I don’t hide that fact. But I came across something really funny today … to me at least.

I started with a new auto refinance company (It’s my blog, I can link to who I want), and presented my 24 Hour Strategic Plan to them yesterday. That’s my plan I came up with in 24 hours. Well, in that plan I mentioned that in marketing material (website copy and ad copy on AdWords) does best with numbers in it. People love numbers, and in resumes they are solid gold.

Well this Wired Q&A with Matt posted today asks the question: Does SEO (search-engine optimization) work? Well … Duh. But his answer was priceless:

It does to some degree. Think of it this way: When you put a resume forward, you want it to be as clean as possible. If the resume is sloppy, you’re not going to get interviewed for the job. SEO is sort of like tweaking your resume . . . It’s helpful if you just think about which words people would use to search for your content. If you’re writing something about Mount Everest, for example, people are probably going to look for ‘How high is Mount Everest?’ . . . If done responsibly, [SEO] can be a great thing.

Love it!!!

I just read a story about how Google is heading downwards in financial terms. Of course this has little impact on their status as the search engine leader, but its interesting to read today. One reason really … Ask.com

The morons (sorry, its true) at Ask.com have decided to go back to the 1996 way of doing things and stop playing with the big boys.

Partner this with Yahoo’s downturn … and all of a sudden I am scared. Seriously. I really don’t like MSN. I don’t like AdCenter, and I don’t need them taking Yahoo and the second position. I want innovation. I want the ideas at ask!

So I’m with Lisa … today sucks for the search world. I finally get happy about the state of the US, and then my search world goes to hell. *sigh* I want all parts of my life out of hell at least once.

Microsoft tried to buy Facebook to no avail. Now they are trying with Yahoo. And Google got flack with Doubleclick? Wait … why isn’t anyone noticing that MSN is buying EVERYONE again. There may still be competition, but really??

I am still riding the fence on this one though. There is some real good that COULD come from a Yahoo/Microsoft merger. But I still am not a fan of Microsoft. So what I really need to say is Go Ask Go!