RKG Logo 434-978-4300

It is nice to chat with NYT’s Bob Tedeschi about online marketing. Nicer still when it ends up in print. And even nicer when it happens on your birthday! smiley

Assorted additional thoughts on Google’s Search-Within-The-Site (SWTS):

  • From the usability perspective, SWTS is a big help for smaller sites with weak on-site search.
  • For medium to large sites, Google’s SWTS usually provides poorer serps than the retailer’s own. Compare piggybank at Amazon versus piggybank on Amazon via Google (hat-tip Jim at TechCrunch, comment 31). new york times alan rimm-kaufman
  • Why? Because smart retailers put considerable effort into on-site search, tuning results for relevance, inventory, margin, what have you. Google SWTS is general, and so isn’t tuned. SWTS is also stale (by hours or days) with respect to SKU inventory.
  • From the PPC angle, the dollars and clicks involved when retailer “Y” steals a click from a user searching-within-the-site for retailer “X” is small, and likely offset by the reverse scenario. As relates to paid search, SWTS is a tempest in a teapot.
  • Prediction: this issue will blow over quickly as Google will let site owners opt-out of SWTS via Webmaster Central.
  • Once Google permits SWTS opt-out, small retailers can stay in, large retailers can leave, and everyone ends up better than before. All good.
  • Mysterious: Tedeschi quotes an unnamed Google spokesperson who indicates that site owners who opt-out of SWTS “may not be able to reverse their decision.” That is really strange — what marketing or IT constraint would make this decision irreversible?
  • I’d suggest the intensity of advertisers’ negative responses to SWTS is more an indication of growing unease with Mountain View’s dominance, rather than on the importance of SWTS.
  • John Battelle writing about universal search last week made a great point, relevant here too: “Google’s brand promise - to be neutral, to be above monetary interest - is in conflict with, well, the rest of Google’s brand promise, to be a superstar stock, to grow faster than any company in the history of the world.”
  • We at RKG often discuss the role of brand in PPC. There’s a different brand angle here, a broader, more subtle, somewhat ominous angle. SWTS highlights how the growing power of search engines reduces the influence of brands. Your website is your brand online. Natural search runs your brand through a shredder. Experiencing a site page-wise on a search engine results page is a situation where the parts are far less than the whole.

Link: Google To Vegetarians: Eat The Damn Hamburger

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.


Related Posts

Comments

  1. M.Marshall, March 25, 2008:

    > Prediction: this issue will blow over quickly as Google will let site owners opt-out of SWTS via Webmaster Central.
    Can’t wait for this! Do you have approximate predictions when this will at last happen?

  2. Alan Rimm-Kaufman, March 25, 2008:

    Wild guess based on zero data: w/in 30 days.

  3. George Michie, March 25, 2008:

    In the category of internal disagreements…:-)

    This might be a big deal if there is no opt out.

    For well-established brands, often 50% of their PPC sales come after clicks on brand ads. If half of the likely buyers are subjected to a tasty alternative that leads to a bunch of non-brand ads from the same company and its competitors the potential for spending PPC $ on what should have been cheap brand ads or organic links is real. The potential for skewing non-brand PPC results by pouring in hot-to-buy brand traffic into non-brand ad results and encourage over-bidding is also real.

Your Comment

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2008/03/24/google-search-within-site/trackback/

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Nancy Kast: I am writing about your billing and online services. I have been receiving calls saying my bill is not paid. My husband pays all our...
  • Marc Adelman: George, Thanks for sharing this data. From an online buzz perspective, Bing is making a big splash. Everyone is talking about it....
  • George Michie: Hi Dennis, I’m not a lawyer, so take anything I say on this with a grain of salt (and please don’t sue us if we’re...
  • survey online: unfortunatelly i have to say that Google tools are the easiest survey web
  • Dennis Yu: Alan, We’ve had several C&D’s sent to us for seemingly innocuous issues. One of our casual dining clients bid on a...
  • George Michie: Hi Vivek, Haven’t had time to put together a full update, but I did take a look at the numbers. No material gains in market...
  • Karridy: You should checkout ClickPath’s call to KW tracking.
  • Vivek: George, really enjoying reading about the analysis you guys do. Was wondering if you have an update on this given a couple more weeks have...
  • Vicki Swaim: Dear Mr.Ullman, I hope you can help me with my problem. I ordered a TV stand the end of April that was advertised as a close out item....
  • Luke: It’s a shame we live in such a litigious society. Why should we have to set up an association? Surely we can prevent senseless...
  • George Michie: Josh, we have had shots fired over our bow and our client’s in the past. Usually responsible companies are reasonable about...
  • Ryan: Ok, George, I’m sufficiently scared… Thanks… :-) Incidentally, are there any trademark resources (other than Google...
  • Josh: We have run into trademark issues for several clients, although it has so far been a matter of trying to make “fair use” of a...
  • Mike: THANK YOU! I love you man!! :)
  • Matthew: Francis, We’ve likewise seen the “A-List” phenomenon in the past. Perhaps with Bing.com, there won’t be anymore of...

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 871
  • Words: 392,916
  • Comments: 2,079

Administration