Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Vincent Granville on October 5, 2008 at 12:40pm

Anyone interested in testing this theory? You'd need to use a domain name with real, relevant content, with 50+ pages of content, e.g. one product description per page. It would not work with bluedatamining.com because it has no content -- the domain name is actually available. It's a good domain for this type of test though, because it contains "datamining", which should boost keyword relevancy.

Permalink Reply by Lazar Primack on December 31, 2009 at 11:18pm

Amazing - I searched for "bluedatamining" and the first 2 results are from this discussion. I guess it's been over a year since the post - so their database had time to find this discussion. (I know it's slightly off topic, but amazing just the same)

Permalink Reply by Vincent Granville on October 6, 2008 at 1:51am

I don't think you need to simulate some realistic CTR. Organic links on Google are straight links (no redirect), so Google has no way to know whether you click on a link or not (this applies to organic results only, not to paid results).

Permalink Reply by Alexander Lazarin on July 27, 2009 at 12:55am

BTW Google has started using redirects

Permalink Reply by Chana Hercenberg on July 26, 2009 at 6:05pm

There are many other flaws currently in the Google algorithm that leave it open for misuse. The one you mentioned has a simple solution. For one, they have developed a fraud detection system for "Paid" clicks that is already in place. Google can definitely track the external links being clicked on. It's just a matter of developing the right infrastructure in the process.

You will notice many websites that arise on the top results of Google that are not very high quality, but are "optimized" for the search engines. I've done some very intense level studies of the top ranking websites, what makes them on top, have done testing to gauge the results in the search engines, and have a very good understanding of how they rank many of the different factors.

They still definitely have the best quality search engine out there for the moment, even with these flaws, but instead of hiring mostly engineers, and people with specific school/work credentials, they would benefit greatly from hiring inventive people who are good at thinking of creative solutions to problems, understanding the customer, and have a background as a marketing professional. A person like this can drive the innovative process with an integrated understanding of how to improve search from beyond either an academic or engineering perspective.

It seems to be a growing trend that many large companies lose out on creative talent today by focusing too much on things like degrees in certain area, or certain types of work experience. And I'm sure it's harder as a large company to do it differently, but talent is talent wherever it comes from. J.K. Rowling had nothing on her resume before writing Harry Potter. Many creative people are like that. I had no idea what paid ads were before my first job in that area, and within 3 months the company that "took a risk on me with that" made a LOT of money from my work (nearly 300% increase in ROI), whereas their sales had been stagnating for years before.

They definitely have very talented people there, and have very high level innovation there, but they are still missing a vitally important segment and vantage point, which leaves them in a potentially weak position.

I, for one, would love to help them or any other search engine resolve these issues. I've done a lot of studying and creative thinking about how to resolve these processes, and I would love to share my ideas as part of a creative process to help improve it.