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

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.

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]

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

As part of the ongoing Guest Bloggers series, Rishi Lakhani, a Search Marketing Strategist strategist in the UK tackles one of the hot topics of the moment – that of brands and search engines

Note: The post below is meant to push your buttons, make you think. There are more questions than answers. But there are times when we need to question, and I think this is one of them.

For time immemorial, there have been secret organisations. Some of these organisations are rumoured to have existed for centuries, descending into a mix between myth and urban legend. (Cue: Illuminati).

However, we least expected to find them in our midst. Meeting in secret with one of the world’s most powerful organisation. An organisation that could take down Economies of several countries at one blow. I am not paranoid – it’s true. These meetings most likely decide how you and I work. They probably influence our strategies for the future. We just didn’t know. These societies are by invite only, and no one except for the members and organisers really knows who attends them.

We don’t see any minutes, any updates, hell, not even the agenda. We don’t know how much of our life is being influenced by them.

No I am not going mad and waxing lyrical pointlessly. I am talking about the company that many of us battle daily. Google.

Yesterday Search Engine Land published Big Brand Media Wants A Google Bailout. One of the more interesting parts of the story is that Google has a Publishers Advisory Council. Did you know it existed? What goes on in these meetings? Why do only the big boys get to know? Is this unfair market advantage?

But the GPAC isn’t the ONLY secret council that google has. In 2007, Darren Rowse published Secret AdSense Online Advisory Council Revealed, which exposed the birth or emergence of the GAOAC. I can’t find a members list, an agenda, or any resolutions or learnings from this council.

In Feb 2009, George Michie from the Rimm Kaufman Group Revealed that he had been invited to join the Google SEM Advisory Panel. That makes GSAP, and number three secret society. I don’t know how many more there are.

My question to all of you out there is – Why not keep it all out in the open? After all, the proudly published the formation of the Google Health Advisory Council. Is this unfair advantage for the big guys? Are these the new Illuminati? Do they impact our work?

I reserve opinion, but I am sure my tone gives you an inkling as to what I think. This is food for though.

As a by note – Yahoo has also joined the ranks in forming secret councils

Rishi Lakhani is a Search Marketing Strategist. Feel free to follow him on twitter.

In keeping with their recent raft of improvements through the range of Google products, Google announced the introduction of comments to  Google Reader. This follows a number of improvements over the last year or so which have included the ability to choose friends and share with notes, however I would suggest this is possibly the biggest change introduced to the product since launch.

To get started, click “Comment View” at the top of your Friends’ shared items in Reader, or just write a comment by clicking “Add comment” at the bottom of any shared item.

If you need any further information as to how comments work, check out the Google Reader blog.

For many of those in the industry the story of late has been that of Googles recent ‘pay-per-post’ campaign out in Japan, to promote Google in the Japanese marketplace. Unlike in much of the Western World, Google is not numero uno in Japan, instead that recognition goes to arch enemy Yahoo. However in their enthusiasm, Google appear to have tripped a rather important filter – which co-incidentally just happened to be one of their more contentious guidelines off recent years – that of paid links.

The furore centered around a ‘pay-per-post campaign’ with Cyberbuzz – A Tokyo based internet marketing company with many participants in the post referencing the Cyberpuzz campaigns. However again this is where Google failed to follow their own guidelines as not one of the links appears to contain the nofollow attribute highlighted by Google as best practise in these instances. A case of pot, calling the kettle black you may think…

Matt Cutts twitter post on Google.co.jp "penalty"

However it appears Google have penalised the Google.jp with a -4PR penalty, as announced by Matt Cutts (first highlighed by Hobo-Web and Patrick Altoft). Call me a cynic, but one can’t help thinking that this is somewhat suspect, and nothing more than a PR masterstroke on Googles perspective. After all, in real terms it is unlikely to have any significant knock on impact. Most people at the end of the day, do not Google Google, however it will have a number of knock-on effects:

• Significant Buzz – THere is already a lot of Google penalising themselves, and other posts similar to this one.
• Linkage – The amount of linkage generated on this subject is likely to be significant. Not really that much of an issue for Google, however as many SEO related sites tend to have high PR, something to consider all the same

Given the speed of response, there is little doubt Google have been carefully monitoring this. Certainly a quick look at Matt Cutts conversation history in Twitter (particularly those from February 9th ), show that the WebSpam team at Google would have been aware of the issue and the level of ‘interest’ it was provoking within the industry. I would thus suggest the powers that be at Google would have therefore been aware of the impending PR issues and this is merely a direct response to that rather than the traditional penalty system.

Google.co.jp "penalty" references on Twitter

Whether or not this is the type of noise the Japanese market want to hear is a different story – and to a certain extent whether this has even filtered through to the general public over there. Only time will tell on those.

However in my opinion is a brand reputation masterstroke.

It has certainly been a busy year in terms of refinements of the search engine results pages (SERPs), after a couple years of stability. First we had the incorporation of blended search back in 2007, with another major shakeup coming late last year with SearchWiki. Since then we have seen PPC ads being incorporated to image searches, and the incorporation of longer snippets on the results pages.

It is however interesting to see Google testing yet more pages. One of these has been something I have seen on a number of references to blogsearch results, however as yet I had not seen this integrated into the mainstream SERPs – until now

A number of interesting points can immediately be seen, most notably the ability to filter searches by:

• Anytime
• Last 24 hours
• Last Week
• Last Month
• Last Year

This is then followed by a breakdown of results, as well as an extra part to the title with the date found beside it. Given the context it was found in, it was something extremely useful in terms of finding the most recent and relevant document relating to the research I was doing, and it has to be said one of the better improvements I have seen being tested over the last couple of years (certainly infinitely better than the SearchWiki functionality)

I understand from Jon Myers, Head of Search at MediaVest that Google tested something similar in the US back in September, however it isn’t something I have seen here in the UK before. This also differs from previous slightly in display from previous observations back in September, and is controlled via the parameters ‘&as_qdr=y’ on the URL string.

Further to this, there also appears to be further enhancements off the extended snippets we have previously covered on the Holistic Search blog. In the previous post, most of the results saw extended snippets, however on the testing highlighted below we are seeing segmented testing with only the first result seeing an extended snippet. As with sitelinks this can only serve to extend the amount of real estate that the top two positions take up – and further enhance paid search as the prominent channel within the initial results presented to potential searchers.

I would suggest given the amount of innovation we are seeing at the moment this won’t be the last testing we will see, and it will be interesting to see how other aspects of the search experience impact on the SERPs, certainly I personally think blended search still has some significant mileage in it.