Jan
25th

Food For Thought: Bing Goes “Bam!”?

Posted by Kathryn on January 25, 2010 at 11:35 am

12510_spamA pinch of salt, a little bit of pepper and don’t forget the essence—BAM! Okay, now turn your speakers up and try typing your favorite food, like beets, into a Bing search query. Bing? Well, it’s not quite Emeril, and I guess you didn’t need your speakers on. But, you may have noticed recipes for a Lemon-Basil Beet Salad and a Beet and Apple Soup from Delish.com in the prime SERP real-estate.

Bing is now dishing up recipe results for food searches. This is part of the ongoing battle in the search world to deliver the most “relevant” and “personalized” search results. But is this just a lot of sizzle without the bacon?

From a self-described foodie wannabe, here’s my beef with Bing’s recipe results:

  • Discriminatory tastes. Supposedly Bing selects the most popular recipes from sites like delish.com, MyRecipes.com, and epicurious.com. But what about brussels sprouts? Or Spam? For some reason, not all foods generate recipe results. And before you disregard this omission as a computer algorithm’s personal bias against the small cabbage-like vegetable, try this recipe.
  • Limited options. Sometimes consistency is a good thing. It’s comforting to know that whether you go to New York City or Paris, Kentucky, you can always count on the same steamy burger from your favorite fast food burger joint. But if I go online for a recipe, will Bing always serve up the same four recommendations—or do the results change over time?
  • Quality of recipes. Collaboration and sharing is a good thing (I’m sure Martha would agree). But not all recipes are created equal. User-submitted recipes aren’t always reliable—or safe. Safe-handling of foods like chicken and beef aren’t always described. And under-cooking food, like chicken, can happen if the recipe doesn’t indicate whether or not to use raw or pre-cooked chicken. Of course, Bing doesn’t test their recommended recipes, but they do seem to be generated from credible sources.

No Spam, Just Search
There are different methods for quickly and easily finding recipe ideas. Google doesn’t offer recipe results, but when you enter, say, “chocolate chip cookies,” the search engine’s autofill feature does give you the option to search for “chocolate chip cookie recipes.” Likewise, Bing’s autofill feature also recommends searching for “Spam recipes,” even though this term doesn’t generate recommended recipes on its own.

Search is about helping us, the users, more easily find relevant information. Search engines, like Google and Bing, work relentlessly to deliver results that are both meaningful and satisfying to us. And both of these search engines are smart enough to know that if we blurt out “Parsnips!” we are probably interested in eating parsnips. A search engine is probably better at guessing what you want from a one or two word phrase than your significant other. But are Bing’s recipe recommendations really making our culinary lives better? There is more than one way to cook brussels sprouts and search for a recipe online. And the ongoing evolution of search engines is about giving you what you want, even if that is 101 ways to cook Spam.

As a business, you want to make sure that you can connect with the people that are searching for your product or services. That’s where Oneupweb comes in. We’re like digital marketing chefs, whipping up a unique mix of search, social and creative services. It’s the house special.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Dec
14th

Amazon vs. Walmart: The Epic Battle Wages On

Posted by Lawrence on December 14, 2009 at 4:07 pm

As we continue to move full speed into the final days of the holiday shopping season, there have been many interesting headlines surrounding the battle between retail giant Walmart, and the little engine that could, Amazon. I didn’t realize the history behind this epic battle that has been waging on for more than a decade. A little like the Hatfields and the McCoys, these entities have been duking it out for what is comparable to centuries in internet years.

Recent updates to the feud have the two companies in a price battle over everything from new books to Easy-Bake Ovens. Just before this year’s Black Friday, Walmart reduced the price of the Easy-Bake from $28 to $17, with Amazon responding that same day, dropping their price from $28 to $18. The same thing is happening with DVDs, video game consoles, mobile phones, and any other product these two companies have in common.

While online shopping is said to account for only about four percent of all retail sales, that number is destined to grow exponentially. With more and more people gaining access to broadband internet, reduced skepticism over the security of online purchasing and the falling prices of PC equipment, many more of today’s shoppers are embracing the internet as their main source for product ideas, reviews, comparison shopping and eventually, purchasing. And this trend is proving itself to be true. During the economic downturn, eCommerce wasn’t as heavily impacted as brick and mortar retail sales, and Amazon even saw a 24 percent increase in sales during the third quarter of 2009.

Walmart’s revenue has grown 9.1 percent per year (averaged over the past three years) in comparison to Amazon’s 31 percent increase per year. And while Amazon’s annual $19.2 billion in revenue is still dwarfed by Walmart’s $400 billion, the tortoise will eventually catch up and beat the hare in this race of time.

Utilizing these annual revenue figures and the current growth trends extended over time, the graph below visualizes when Amazon’s revenue will match that of Walmart, given that all other variables remain the same.

121409_walmartvsamazon

Things to consider that could affect the trends:

  • This graph is a comparison of the average growth of these two companies, based on today’s estimate that online shopping accounts for only about four percent of retail sales. What if that figure grew to 10 percent or  25 percent some day?
  • Currently, Amazon’s customers do not pay sales tax in most states. Meanwhile, lobbyists for Walmart and other retail chains are trying to eliminate this disadvantage these brick and mortar stores are facing.

Your business can learn a lot from these game changing enterprises. You don’t have to be Amazon or Walmart to reap the rewards of increased sales and exponential growth. While Walmart is still expanding globally, relying mostly on their brick and mortar stores, Amazon has built their business on an online foundation and continues to experience exponential growth as the future of the internet grows around them.

You don’t need to be a Fortune 500 company with a Fortune 500 budget to be a successful online retailer. A smart investment in online marketing  paired with constant monitoring and optimization can now afford you a chance to compete with larger companies. SEO, PPC, Social Media, Display Advertising, Digital PR, Creative Services, Mobile Websites & Campaigns, Search Analytics, Podcasts, Consultation Services or a whole new website based on a solid SEO foundation can all lend a hand to help land you where and when your future customers are looking. Look to Oneupweb if you want the best, and let us grow your business. After all, it’s what we do.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
28th

Google Social Search: Part Two

Posted by admin on October 28, 2009 at 10:19 am

First off, I would like to clarify something that may have not been black and white in my last post. Even though Social Search was announced amongst the buzz of Twitter being integrated into Bing search results and Google’s new deal with Twitter, Social Search is NOT real time search or Twitter Search.

That being said, Social Search, to reiterate, is a new search product from Google that allows you to see results from people you are connected to through social networks. These types of results will only be returned if you have a Google profile and have configured it to recognize people within your social networks.

Google Social Search was launched in Google Labs early this week with the intent of recognizing the people you trust and making sure that you receive relevant content from them in your searches. Unfortunately, I do not have the proper set up in order to show you specific examples, but I will do my best to give you a run down of how this product works. Also, here’s a quick Social Search video demonstration from Google:

When you perform your first search, while logged in, you will see results from people you are connected to at the bottom of the page under a heading that is similar to this:

“Results from people in your social circle for (insert query here)”

Typically you will get their picture, an indication of how you are connected to them (via Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, etc), as well as a snippet from the relevant content. Sometimes, but very rarely, Google will return a bit of information about the social network that you and your “friend” are connected through.

To get more results, simply click on the Results link (mentioned above) and you will be taken to a different section that is organized by category and people in your various networks. It will default to the Social Search category with a list of people in your network.

You will also have the option to reorganize your results based on the regular categories: news, blogs, videos, images, etc. If you click on a specific person from your social list, you will see how they are connected to you, usually accompanied by a photo and a snippet about the content that is relevant to your query. Results order is determined by regular Google ranking methods. Typically, the results should be in the same order as your list of “friends”. For example, if Bob Smith is the first person listed, the first result should be through a connection with Bob Smith. However, this is still new and there are some kinks to be ironed out.

In addition, due to this tool being based on your personal Google profile, there are limited privacy issues as this point.

Now, again, I don’t think I am going to run right out and sign up for a Google profile. I don’t think it will provide any additional benefit to my searching habits. Do I think this will have a big impact on search or search engine results and rankings? Not at this point. I do, however, think this is one step closer to the integration of real time search and the human element. Thoughts? Comments? Experiences you’d like to share? We’d love to know your opinion on this new Google product.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
15th

Google Place Pages: Local Search is Looking Up!

Posted by Teal on October 15, 2009 at 10:18 am

If you’re a local business owner or franchisor who depends on foot traffic and local customers, then listen up (I’ve got good news). Google is making it easier for you than ever to enjoy local visibility—make that good local visibility. With the improvement of their Local Business Center, Google is helping businesses become more “findable” to their customers and offer more helpful information online.

Over the past few weeks, Google has been rolling out Place Pages. An evolution of the original Google Maps and a new rival for Yelp, Place Pages offer local business owners the opportunity to include a wealth of information for potential customers directly through the Local Business Center. Here’s an example from one of my favorite restaurants in Traverse City.

101509_placepage

The beauty of the new Place Pages is that now, searchers can review all sorts of information right in Google Maps (it’s almost like a microsite). Local businesses and franchises can upload photos and include videos and many other types of information. The pages also include online reviews from other sources, nearby locations, directions to the business, etc. It’s really a great way to get people interested in your business without clicking through to your actual website (we still recommend having another online presence).

What’s even better is that, depending on the keyword the user is searching, Google Maps can get you a top position in the search results. Searchers are getting more reliant on search engines to do some of the work for them, and Google is obliging. For example, a search for the term “dry cleaners city, state” in Google will most certainly return Google Maps results at the very top of the page.

101509_drycleaner

Interestingly, a search for the term “dry cleaners” (no geo-qualifier) will also return results including Google Maps results based on the searcher’s location (IP address). This means service-specific search terms are likely to return Google Maps results, whether they include a geo-qualifier or not.

It’s still not fool proof, but more and more, local search is becoming a critical part of some companies’ digital strategy.

If you’re a small business owner, a franchisor, a regional multi-branch operation, or any company that depends on local visibility, it’s important that the time be taken to optimize on the local level. A lot can be done (call us if you are stumped), and Google Maps is a great place to start.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.
Oct
9th

Some Ado About, Well, Almost Nothing: Meta Keyword Tags

Posted by Christopher on October 9, 2009 at 12:59 pm

100909_googlegingerbreadmanOK, so, big deal. Google came out and said “no, we don’t take meta keywords into consideration for ranking (so stop trying to sue us over them).” Then Yahoo!, at SMX on October 6th, said “hey, neither do we.” Big surprise, that. (Does Yahoo! even really care about search anymore is a bigger question. Hey Y!ou – make up your friggin’ mind!)

Then, in the same brief Search Engine Land article announcing Yahoo’s meta keyword news, Barry Schwartz said “Bing doesn’t support the tag.” Really? That’s not what Bing says. A July blog post from the Bing Webmaster Center Team says that while the ” tag’s keyword attribute is not the page rank panacea it once was…” webmasters should still take the opportunity to “score keyword credit.”

It’s almost the opposite of a shock to hear that meta keywords carry negligible weight in the major engines. Long gone are the days when you pop open the code of, say, a free credit report site and see: meta name=”keywords” content=”free credit report free credit report free credit report free credit report britney spears britney spears britney spears free credit report free” etc. infinity.

Ah, web nostalgia – I almost choked up a little bit.

Regardless, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out that sort of meta spam is an unsustainable practice. Google didn’t get where it is today by being stupid. Just evil.

Just kidding.

Here’s the thing – meta keywords tags don’t take much time. Nor do they take much thought. Some in the industry feel that if that they do nothing, or next to nothing, you shouldn’t use them because they give your competitors insight into your important keywords. But I think if your competitors are relying on your meta keywords tags to figure out your strategy, they’re hardly competitors. Further, if you’re worried about giving away competitive information, and your competitors are that bush league, and meta keywords do nothing, why not just fill that tag with a zesty word salad (meta name=”keywords” content=”monkey senility, chimp rampage, chihuahua apocalypse, drew barrymore roller derby)? That’ll show ‘em.

Organic optimization is both an act of major revision and a matter of degrees, of deluges and drops in the bucket. Why use meta keywords if they probably don’t matter? If there’s still an “if” attached to “meta keywords matter,” if there’s still a “probably,” and if they do no harm and, importantly, if there’s the potential they’ll pull some weight in the service of your or your client’s site, well, why not?

GD Star Rating
loading...

Socialize This Post

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you leave a comment.