It appears Google is yet again playing around with the results pages, particularly in local markets such as the UK and the Netherlands. In posts by both SEOHome and SearchCowboys, the option to browse results from a particular country appears to have been removed as the following snapshots

Source: SEOHome (via SearchCowboys) – UK Results

Source: SearchCowboys – NL Results

The option by Google to change both of these certainly could significantly change results particularly where users rely on localising results. Whilst the UK market would probably only account for about 20% of searches (not official stats), what about mainstream Europe, places such as Belgium or Switzerland where countries may often have more than one language. Removing the obvious filter could have a significant impact on ease of use – one of the main things that I personally believe Google do better than any other mainstream search engine.

I haven’t yet been able to verify such behaviour (despite trying to utilise a number of contacts around Europe – thanks in particular here to Fellow SearchCowboy @basvandenbeld), however I will be watching this test closely over the next couple of days. Whether or not this will kill local search is open to debate – certainly localised results have been more and more integrated into regional (ie .co.uk) searches for a while – even without the impact of the ’search pages from the uk only’ option. In addition to this, Google have recently release the ability to show options which allow users to filter yet further within the search results, and I would suggest this would be an obvious choice to integrate any further localised filtering.

The incorporation of 'show options into mainstream results

In the lastest of Matt Cutts’ videos on SEO he addresses the issue of the priority field in the XML sitemap, following a question from a Google user. The user asks whether having the same priority will be penalised.

For those who may be concerned you will be glad to hear that Google will not be penalising your site any time soon, instead where priority has been set at the same level (or not provided at all), Google will look to determine the priority of the pages themselves

As many advertisers are probably now aware Google have been testing a new set of functionality within the paid search ads whereby products associated with an advertiser can be retrieved via clicking on a plus icon next to the paid search ads – refered to (you will be amazed to know) as the Google Plus Box. Currently this is in beta in the UK, and was in the US until recently however I understand this has now been pulled.

Google plus box on entry

On entry, paid search ads which incorporate Google plus box results, show as normal bar a + icon and link to click for the enhanced results. Users clicking on this link will then be presenting with around three results taken from the advertiser, which have a significant impact on browser experience and obviously the impact of any organic results which may be appearing on the page as a result.

Google plus box result activated. Note the impact of the result

So how do you optimise for these results. As you may know Google Product results are often ‘populated’ by XML feeds from Google Base.

1) Have a high quality Google Base Feed (and obviously remember to submit it). Make sure this is accurate, comprehensive thus ensuring you have current prices, no out of stock items, real images etc)

2) Within your paid search campaign, ensure you have a range of product related terms, not just brand, core generic and long tail terms. Google Plus box results often appear on these types and terms, and above all are likely to be far more successful in terms of conversion.

3) Use analytics such as GA to measure your conversions on product pages. By doing so you can focus your attention on those keywords that really drive you the conversion/visibility.

4) Make sure your campaign receives a lot of search impressions. IF your campaign is not receiving a high volume of impressions, it is unlikely you will get much traction from this.

I would add to conclude, this has already been stopped in the US, and one would suggest that it is only a matter of time before this is stopped in the UK (although knowing Google it is likely this will be back at some point in the future. Thus I would suggest any work on this should be considered, however with Google Product results already incorporated into main blended (product-related) searches and thus this is really an extention of any Base related optimisation.

Whether Bing is a suitable name for a search engine aside, there is no getting away from the fact that there has been a significant build up to the launch of Microsoft’s Bing search engine for a while, since early Kumo rumours leaked out – and in particular in the build up to SMX Advanced. However there is no doubting that Google did a fantastic job of ruining Microsoft’s big day.

Source: Searchengineland.com

Whether Google Wave changes digital communications in the same way Google changed search engines is a different matter, Googles timing of the launch of Wave was clearly designed to reduce coverage of the launch of Bing, something they have achieved in droves, and at the same time made those looking to cover the initial Bing launch choose between the two – ie the Next Google Yahoo killer (and then maybe Google in the future) or the next big communication tool (and perhaps a Microsoft IM killer in the process) – one has to say its an interesting scenario.

Source: Searchengineland.com

That is something that certainly wasn’t lost on press coverage. Rather than devote entire coverage to the launch of the Bing search engine, they now had to choose between the two. This is something we have come to expect from Google, having seen similar ‘Guerilla’ announcements previously in particular prior to the launch of Cuil where Google announced a significant increase in the amount of content indexed, something which was the cornerstone of the Cuil product. 1-0 to Google before a ball has even been kicked.

There is no doubting that the level of coverage regarding Bing will significantly increase again over the coming weeks as more people get access to the new search engine (in particular us UK search marketing types), however Google certainly has – as the title suggested – rained on Googles parade.

By James Hanson

As part of our ongoing Guest Post series, James Hanson explores whether Wolfram Alpha can be considered a serious rival to Google

Every other week a new search engine gets released and is touted in the “mass media” as a Google rival, but ask anyone to remember the name of the new engine in a couple of weeks and I doubt if they can, let alone use it.

So another week and another new launch this weeks is Wolfram Alpha – hailed by the BBC on its new Home page as ” a significant rival to search giant Google” – ( I wonder if the BBC also reports every time a new shop opens somewhere in the UK, as it being latest rival to Tesco?)

So how is Wolfrem different its called a computation knowledge engine but what does that mean – well instead of sending you results and links to other internet pages (a search engine) it give you direct answers to queries you type in (although at the moment it’s a little US centric). The results are a little geeky, lots of graphs and stats – its more of a Wikipedia than, a Google.

So a noble try by a small start up, but destined to rival Google, probably not.

In the last couple of weeks Ask re-introduced the butler in a new multi million pound advertising campaign – but even this is good for Google, as in the UK they get advertising revenue as their sponsored ads appear on Ask.

Yahoo are still in decline and MSN never really took off.

At the end of all this we get back to the question, can anyone topple Google? – my answer John Connor !!

James Hanson is a PPC Specialist at MVi in Manchester. Follow all James thoughts at twitter.com/jamesehanson

Yahoo’s market share has been somewhat volatile recently, andaccording to some experts a continuing decline is to be expected, particularly if some reports from the Dow Jones are to be believed. According to a report by the Web Street Journal Yahoo’s share may decline by around another 3% and lose around 12-18% of its current search volume. Much of this can be attributed to the loss of partnership deals with major computer hardware manufacturers such as HP and Acer.

A secondary impact of the loss of such deals is probably more notable, particularly when you consider the lack of ‘competition’ in the sector. Lose Yahoo and you only really have  a choice of three – in realistic terms two search engines to choose from namely MSN and Google. Given Google’s dominance in the market, I would suggest there is only one suitable competitor and that competitor happens to be your nearest rival in terms of market share.

It is indeed further noticeable that Microsoft have indeed been quick to exploit these opportunities. Partnerships with HP (replacing previous engine of choice Yahoo) and Dell will have given Microsoft some added impetus – and the potential to immediately target around 55% of PC shipments in the US. With Google continuing to dominate the search landscape it is increasingly becoming a race for second place, something neither engine has managed to make a clear move on.

Yahoo have been quick to suggest that the loss of such parternships shouldn’t affect market share as much as the above report would have us believe suggesting “consumers will continue to use Yahoo search even if they buy a new computer pre-loaded with a rival’s toolbar.”. I personally would suggest the only engine that could guarantee that level of loyalty would be Google, and that taking that for granted in the current climate is possibly a bit foolhardy – particularly given the apparant focus on search from Microsoft, and even the rise of channels such as Twitter as a search engine of sorts.

Whilst the US search engine market is very different to that of the UK, the share of Google being far higher in the UK, I would suggest this could still have some significant knock on effects. With Google still taking nothing for granted, in a continual drive towards further relevance (and lets face it increased revenues), the other two need to continue to be innovative in order to attract both advertisers and searchers alike to utilise them more. Lets be brutal both of them could do no worse by starting at:

• Looking further afield. The world doesn’t end at the US, new products are generally slow at moving to foreign markets (if at all).
• Giving users value add. I am always disappointed by the relevance of a number of searchers on both engines – and whilst I personally use them more than most – it comes through a requirement of considerable data mining more than anything
• Giving advertisers value add. In my opinion natural search battles is continually ongoing. Monetising and ‘Management’ or organic search and digital asset value adds would seem to be natural progression
• Hitting new channels hard. Google in particular seem to be pushing mobile hard. The other two need to be hitting this – harder!!

Search engines can’t take anything for granted. Lets just take a look at Altavista. They have to continue to evolve – otherwise things can change and change very quickly. I personally would expect a very different landscape in 5-10 years, but I guess only time will tell.

It appears that the enhancements to the Google search results continue unabbaited. Do a search for a broad keyword such as pizza on Google and your increasingly likely to see a local result as part of the results page

Localised results with Google SERPS

The results currently appear below the fold, in the example below the results were below the video search results. Further searches were run for:

1. Golf Clubs
2. Cinema
3. Movie
4. Football (not soccer)
5. Advertising Agency

This would appear a fairly widespread test from what I have seen thus far, and it will be interesting to see whether this remains a permanent part of the Google search results page. It could really throw the cats amongst the pigeons should it stay about, pushing local search optimisation into the mainstream of many organisations SEO and blended search campaigns

According to Advertising Age, Microsoft are looking at throwing between $80 and $100 Million to try and wrestle market search marketing share away from Yahoo and Google. The work is expected to be given to to WPP agency, JWT and Crispin Porter & Bogusk. The campaign is expected to see iterations on multiple channels including online, TV, print and radio executions.

According to the release on adAge

According to one person close the situation, the forthcoming campaign will be careful to not position “Kumo” as a competitor to Yahoo or Google and instead cast it as a reimagined search engine that ups the game by yielding fewer but more-focused results. The proposed strategy is probably a good — if not the only — way to go.

Many search-industry watchers say the only way to challenge Google, the current category leader, will be to present something markedly different. The thing is, at first glance, screenshots of “Kumo” don’t look too different from the current search format used by most major search engines: organic search results in the main part of the page, with sponsored links across the top and the right side. The new Microsoft interface does appear to have some interesting filtering features, both in the organic-results area and along the left side of the page, to help searchers drill down into more specific topics.

As previous experience will tell us, significant spending on advertising is not a guarantee of success. Ask.com have spent significant amounts on above the line advertising in the past, with limited (and varying degrees of success). It is therefore not a given that this shift in spend to focus on the search product will indeed bear any fruits, and given them any traction within the search marketplace.

Indeed, success in my opinion may lie elsewhere, and even closer to home. Microsoft themselves have launched a number of innovative new products and solutions in the last couple of months, something which may provide the key to greater market share. Products such as Cash Back and some of the other new products/features may help gartner greater usaage of the search engine, however greater uptake is going to rely heavily on the quality of the search product – particularly when compared to the Google product itself which has seen some significant enhancements over the last couple of weeks.

Commentators suggest a more successful approach may be to partner with Yahoo, however whether this is enough to compete against Google is a different question. In my personal opinion the biggest battleground is that for second and third place . Is the $100 million enough to compete against Google – no. Is it enough to help compete against Yahoo – possibly. Only time will tell.

Other articles on this subject:

Microsoft to throw $100 million at their search market share problem – Search Engine Land

[The views in this post are those of Peter Young, and not necessarily those of his employers]

Firstly, I should highlight much of the rationale for this post comes from an earlier post from Bigmouthmedia’s Andrew Girdwood who highlighted the use of search in the current MVA (Thats Monsters vs Aliens) trailers currently doing the rounds on the television here in the UK.

In the final frame of the ad, the viewer is prompted to search for ‘MVA’. Now I am a big fan of prompting viewers to integrate with search for four main reasons

1. Many browsers ‘multi-task’ . That is they watch television whilst browsing the internet.
2. Search phrases are often easier to remember than domains
3. Potential for greater interaction with potential browsers – PPC, Organic and Blended search results
4. Ability to track the influence of the advert.

However the implementation of such campaigns is done very badly, and sadly Monsters vs Aliens is no different. There have already been a number of posts regarding its implementation on Google primarily, mostly regarding the PPC, however it is the lack of organic placement that is a secondary concern. With a rough 75% (organic)/25% (paid) breakdown it hugely suprises me that organic is often a forgotten channel in these campaigns leaving these types of campaigns open to cannabalisation from competitors (albeit limited in the MVA example) and limited impact.

And talking of limited impact, I would add that I would suggest that is exactly what the MVA implementation will be having. Whilst there is no doubt it will inspire users to search…

… What about those searches on Yahoo

Monsters vs Aliens advertising on Yahoo - erm Where??????

and MSN

Monsters vs Aliens on MSN

Now admittedly Google is the majority shareholder as far as search volumes in the UK is concerned however that doesn’t mean Yahoo and MSN should be ignored, particularly if the premise of the campaign is to encourage people to search for the campaign. After all by ignoring the other two engines, surely you are getting a slightly inaccurate reflection of the impact the ad has had on search engine traffic?

It should also be noted the impact it appears to have had as far as searches are concerned.

Impact on search trends

Just imagine the impact it could have had if:

• They had complimented the paid search ad with an organic ad
• They had thought better through the PPC creative
• They had run the ad on multiple engines.
• Considered the impact of blended search. Video search optimisation should have been a given….

Many of these campaigns are still in their infancy, with many organisations still in early rollouts, however one would suggest they may want to think about what they want to get out of the campaign – and develop a campaign best suited to maximising those targets.

At present too many of these campaigns, appear half thought out and half implemented and as such I would suggest are only getting half the returns they could be getting. Moving forward greater integration (and greater thought) is required – if these integrated campaigns are to be a fully effective marketing strategy.

Dave Naylor did a post yesterday regarding the expansion of the favicon testing in the UK, something which has been getting increased coverage over the last couple of weeks. This doesn’t appear to be widespread testing, certainly on all the accounts I tried it on, there was little or no usage of the new ‘branding features’

Source: Dave Naylor

Testing of the ads was first reported on Search Engine Land highlighting testing in Poland and Germany, however recent observations have been reported in the US and the UK suggesting a much broader test.

Given the recent ‘Vince update’, one can’t be suprised with the increased focus on brand within the search results, particularly given the recent ‘improvements’ to the search pages – in particular the increased snippet lengths rolled out last week. I would suggest the increased snippet lengths, the reduced organic search results and the incorporation of blended search must be dragging eyefall (and subsequent CTR) away from paid sources, thus the incorporation of such a visual component can only have a positive impact on CTR for paid search ads.

Other articles on the Google Adwords favicon testing

Dave Naylor – Online Bingo ads in Google

Search Engine Land – Google expands Adwords fav icon test

Kerstin Baker-Ash – Google uses new partner icons in paid search results