Google Search Top 10 Results SEO Impactors

Google Top 10
For completeness, a timely general review of how much Google’s ‘on-screen’ presentation of its Top 10 search results has changed over the last couple of years: how it effects clients/users/customers and companies who are engaged in, advise on, and claim to ‘know’ about SEO/PPC.

In the beginning …. Google’s mission was “to organise the world’s info” and to that end they just did it and presented their (free/organic) Top 10 list of search results for any given search keyphrase on a simple, ‘uncluttered’ white background - many loved them for that.  In terms of ‘on-page’ display/presentation, dependent on individual screen settings, it was typical to see most of the Top 10 results above the fold (ATF) on-screen in those days.  Then came the ‘claim-jumpers’ … as the ‘infant’ SEO industry formed and jockeyed to try to grab those ‘uncluttered’ Top 10 spots with various White Hat and/or Black Hat techniques: many were content at that but just as many were ‘miffed’ because their website didn’t feature in the Top 10.

Google itself introduced the first little bit of on-page ’clutter’ with the introduction of its (paid for) Adwords programme. But even then ’on-page’ demarcation lines were pretty well drawn: paid for/sponsored results on the far right of the page … free/organic results on the left.   Then the first seeds of confusion were sown as Google decided to promote up to three of the paid for/sponsored results to the top of the page … immediately just above free/organic results and the free/organic results were pushed further down the page: many people didn’t even notice, the Adwords supporters were content but many in the SEO community were ‘miffed’.

Then came major ‘clutter’ to the on-page real estate with the introduction of Google Local (now called Google Places) where Google added free local listings (allied to their Google Maps product) that were strategically placed immediately below their three top of the page Ads, but just above free/organic results and further seeds of confusion were sown as the free/organic results were pushed further down the page to the point that ATF, free/organic results would be rare.

Subsequently, Google repositioned their sponsored adds away from the ’right-hand-side’ and moved them significantly to the ‘left’ so as to ‘butt-up’ almost next to the free/organic results.  Google also added an option to Adwords users to ‘enhance’ their sponsored links by adding Site Links to their Ads  … the nett effect of which is to push the free/organic results even further down the page, where even the No. 1 ‘organic’ result would be below the fold (BTF).

Google Suggest?
Another Google search enhancement that had predictable impact, particularly on the SEO community, has been Google Suggest … that, in effect, pre-empted many searchers, carrying out individual searching at all, as they let themselves be influenced by ’suggest’.

In the meanwhile, Google introduced blended/universal search results …. and ‘personalised’ search results …. including images, locations, business listings, videos, news.

And, of course, Google wasn’t alone in driving change in search: the new Social Media innovations like Twitter, FaceBook, YouTube et al, with dynamic ‘real-time’ updates took centre stage and Google had to respond.  Along the way … it was becoming more of a challenge for the SEO community to know what was going on, as there was no longer a ’single’ view as to exactly what results were being displayed to their core audience.

More recently, in April/May 2010, there was Google’s roll-out of its Caffeine index update and soon afterwards its complete overhaul of its Home Page ‘look-and-feel’ with ’usability’ improvements that they claim are a natural progression to provide a much richer end user experience – you may or may not agree with that statement!  Users can select from the ’pick-n-mix’ menu of presentational styles (some of which are listed below) that suits their individual preferences … but all in all, compared to the ‘uncluttered’ point from where we started, some may take the view that it’s an awful lot of  ’clutter’.

  • The Web, Pages from the UK
  • Any time, Latest, Past 24 hours, Past week, Past month, Past year, Custom range…
  • Standard view, Related searches, Wonder wheel, Timeline
  • Standard results, Sites with images, Fewer shopping sites, More shopping sites, Page Previews, Transalated Search

Google Real EstateFor whose benefit was all this being done? For Google’s of course! Google’s Q2/2010 revenues of $6.82bn for the quarter tells its own tale. The sure-fire winner is Google’s Adwords programme and those involved in PPC which now pretty well dominates the ATF ‘on-page’ real estate, but not much sunlight there for the SEO community.

But reflecting on all the foregoing, is all this ‘clutter’ signalling the end for the SEO community? We don’t think so. It’s a ‘game-changer’ for sure … and presents a ’different’ set of challenges, that’s all. There’s a slew of evidence (source: The Info-Tech Group) that even in these ‘different’ times, by undertaking SEO you are 6 times more likely to increase the ’stickiness’ of your website and by achieving high ‘organic’ rankings on key search terms, you bring a lot of value to your brand. In a survey of 95 IT companies, The Info-Tech Group found that 100% of companies that pursued a very high amount of SEO saw their brand gain value.

Although undoubtedly ‘different’ in these days of Social Media et al., the business model for ’search’ is still pretty much the same as ever: get the right online marketing mix of PPC and SEO and you’ll do well. Win by doing!

Comments

11 Responses to “Google Search Top 10 Results SEO Impactors”

  1. Paul Seal on July 26th, 2010 12:14 am

    Pretty nice post, enjoyed browsing your posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed!

  2. SEOptimiser on July 31st, 2010 10:51 am

    As if to support the conclusion of the above article, namely, that SEO is still worthwhile: there’s a timely recent quote attributed to Jeremy Sussman, a Google Local Product Manager in the Google Places Help thread, he said:

    “I can assure you that the last thing we (Google) want is for the business who hires the best SEO to win a better slot. But, the SEOs are, unfortunately, pretty good at what they do, and so sometimes they out-smart us.”

    So there you have it … acknowledgement from Google-lips that (some) SEOs are (still) pretty good at what they do. Make sure that you take the trouble to find one!

  3. Ellery Jacobs on August 2nd, 2010 8:38 pm

    Good dispatch and this post helped me alot in my college assignement. Say thank you you seeking your information.

  4. Fred Gwynne on August 16th, 2010 10:20 am

    Everything is looking great. Thanks for the information!

  5. Cliff Peat on August 21st, 2010 4:18 am

    I couldn’t remember the name “easiserv” but I remembered you used to come up at the top of a Google search on Web Designers Northampton – and you still do!!

    In my book that makes anything you write on SEO worth reading as you have evidently “cracked it” yourselves.

    Cliff

  6. Admin on August 22nd, 2010 8:40 pm

    Hi Cliff – yep, it’s a while now since we met-up with you and Brian, but we’re still fighting the good (SEO) fight. Chapeau to you for the post!

  7. zoe buringer on August 24th, 2010 12:14 pm

    I value what you guys are usually up too. This kind of clever work and reporting! Keep up the great posts guys I’ ve added you to my blogroll, Cheers.

  8. Den Bruuker on August 27th, 2010 11:46 pm

    I found you entry interesting do I’ ve add a Trackback to it on our blog

  9. Ed Bosenhagen on September 9th, 2010 4:27 pm

    I cannot thank you enough for the blog article.Thanks Again. Will read on…

  10. seoptimiser on September 10th, 2010 9:00 pm

    And now we’ve got Google Instant and Google Brand Stacking / Domain Stacking to deal with too …! Is there no end to this?

  11. Stuart Ross on October 30th, 2010 9:09 pm

    And now the whole shebang is thrown into the air with the introduction of Google’s ‘Places Search’. Probably the single most significant change to ‘organic’ search since ‘Florida’.

Leave a Reply