Is Google Making Life Harder For Aggregators?
-
Theres been a bunch of updates recently which have hurt aggregators:
-
Reducing the number of search results to 7 for branded search queries
-
The DMCA update which penalises those with trademark related takedown requests against them.
-
At least 2 'domain diversity' updates, the most recent last week, which seeks to reduce the ability of sites to dominate SERPS e.g. a site which may have 2 search results on page 1 now may have 1.
Plus Its commonly believed that Google favours big brands over smaller brands e.g. Marriott over examplehotelaggregator.com.
Is this a deliberate ploy against aggregators in favour of brands i.e. does Google believe a brand site is a better search result than an aggregator?
A brand site returned above an aggregator for a branded term may be seen by Google as a better fit, a better search result that should be higher. But is that true? Consumers like to see unbiased reviews and lowest prices and that isnt always available at the brand site.
Thoughts please.
-
-
If Google tried to avoid aggregators & removed 2 domain results from serps, so what will be in the results then?
-
For something a long those lines Google mixes in shopping results to try and bring the best results. But for a hotel kind of search I would much rather get the hotel itself.
-
- Reducing the number of search results to 7 for branded search queries
If a searcher typs in a branded query then there is a higher probability that his is looking for the brand and not Joe Aggregator.
- The DMCA update which penalises those with trademark related takedown requests against them.
This is good. Yes!!
- At least 2 'domain diversity' updates, the most recent last week, which seeks to reduce the ability of sites to dominate SERPS e.g. a site which may have 2 search results on page 1 now may have 1.
Enjoy this. This is actually working against the big brand.
Plus Its commonly believed that Google favours big brands over smaller brands e.g. Marriott over examplehotelaggregator.com.
Sure... most people want something trusted. They know Marriott. I you want examplehotelaggregator.com to rank then work on your brand.
Is this a deliberate ploy against aggregators in favour of brands
Only the aggregators are thinking that it is. The brands are not thinking that way and the average searcher is not thinking that way.
does Google believe a brand site is a better search result than an aggregator?
Yes.
-
This. The aggregator's big win could be fulfilling their role in the form of a media publisher and community hub, serving as a nexus for honest and objective opinions. Aggregators are a form of retailer except that the customer purchase is information exchange. When they abandon this opportunity and instead supply subjective info that doesn't put the consumer first, well, this is what makes the organic results such a polluted mess.
-
"When you do a search would you rather get the official companies or a site with a news feed or aggregation ran by a 3rd party source?"
- As I say in many cases the branded site isnt going to be your first port of call. E.g. Who buys their Wilson tennis racket from Wilson.com when you can get the same product may times cheaper elsewhere (random example, im not picking on Wilson!) and with honest reviews e.g. 'the strings on this racket are poor'?
-
I would say so. Google has been taking a lot of actions to bring back better quality results. When you do a search would you rather get the official companies or a site with a news feed or aggregation ran by a 3rd party source?
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How Google could quickly fix the whole Links problem...
A Thursday morning brainstorm that hopefully an important Google manager will see... Google could quickly end all the problems of link buying, spammy links, and negative SEO with one easy step: Only count the 100 best follow links to any domain. Ignore all the nofollows and everything beyond the 100 best. They can choose what "best" means. Suddenly links would be all about quality. Quantity would not matter. Fiverr links, comment links, and all the other mass-produced spam links would literally be ignored. Unless that's all a domain had, and then they would surely be stomped by any domain with 100 decent natural links. Would it be an improvement over today's situation?
Industry News | | GregB1230 -
Google number one search result looks drastically different in firefox compared to chrome
I just noticed this today that some websites and brands look like this on firefox only, and others while still being number one result for their brand name, do not appear like this at all. also, this does not happen over chrome at all. both images provided for comparison are using the same google apps account logged in. It would be nice if someone could shed some light on as to why this happens sporadically and what does it take to be distinguished like this for your own brand if you own the identical domain.com or whatever. Zz7ZkX5.png lpuwheo.png
Industry News | | Raydon0 -
What do people think of Google discouraging guest blogging
Google is recommending that websites nofollow any links from press releases or guest blogging. Do people think this is really the new standard and sites could get penalized for guest blogging with follow links? Is anyone changing their strategy after hearing this announcement? Where does this leave people who work in difficult niches (such as gambling)?
Industry News | | theLotter1 -
How do i get a description in my google local listing
My site is listed in the serps at number one but where google used to list the name of my site with the meta description below it, now Google lists my site title with my address to the right side and below it says Google+page instead of listing my meta description which had my key search phrase in it and also a call to action to see my video on my site. My click through was much better with the meta description below it and the call to action. is there any way i can get the description back under my title in the serps? Maybe by deleting my Google + page? Thanks in advance, Ron
Industry News | | Ron100 -
Google Trends - what did you do?
So is it me or did Google make some crazy changes - The "trends" are no longer anchored to appropriate articles etc... Why do you think they would remove something so useful to us? http://www.google.com/trends/ - check it out for yourself. tumblr_m5jh04D65G1ry8grko1_1280.png
Industry News | | Chenzo0 -
Google+ profiles and Rel Author. Extensive question
A bit of a mammoth question for discussion here: With the launch of Google+ and profiles, coupled with the ability to link/verify authorship using rel=me to google+ profile - A few questions with respect to the long term use and impact. As an individual - I can have a Google+ Profile, and add links to author pages where I am featured. If rel=me is used back to my G+ profile - google can recognise me as the writer - no problem with that. However - if I write for a variety of different sites, and produce a variety of different content - site owners could arguably become reluctant to link back or accredit me with the rel=me tag on the account I might be writing for a competitor for example, or other content in a totally different vertical that is irrelevant. Additionally - if i write for a company as an employee, and the rel=me tag is linked to my G+ profile - my profile (I would assume) is gaining strength from the fact that my work is cited through the link (even if no link juice is passed - my profile link is going to appear in the search results on a query that matches something I have written, and hence possibly drain some "company traffic" to my profile). If I were to then leave the employment of that company - and begin writing for a direct competitor - is my profile still benefiting from the old company content I have written? Given that google is not allowing pseudonyms or ghost writer profiles - where do we stand with respect to outsourced content? For example: The company has news written for them by a news supplier - (each writer has a name obviously) - but they don't have or don't want to create a G+ profile for me to link to. Is it a case of wait for google to come up with the company profiles? or, use a ghost name and run the gauntlet on G+? Lastly, and I suppose the bottom line - as a website owner/company director/SEO; Is adding rel=me links to all your writers profiles (given that some might only write 1 or 2 articles, and staff will inevitably come and go) an overall positive for SEO? or, a SERP nightmare if a writer moves on to another company? In essence are site owners just improving the writers profile rather than gaining very much?
Industry News | | IPINGlobal541 -
Google Panda 2.5 Update?
On Sunday 18th Sept I noticed a huge drop in our rankings for keywords that we were doing extremely well. Majority of the keyword SERP positions for our main targetted keywords were #1 and #2. These have all drop the bottom part of first page. Other new keywords we were targetting had climbed very well (some hovering just below top 10 and some in top 10 of Google UK SERP. These have all completely dropped off. Although analysing the site thouroughly (both on-page and link profile) it doesnt appear to have any issue significant enough to cause a penalty. From Monday 20th Sept (everybody back to work) the threads here http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=76830633df82fd8e&hl=en&start=5760 and http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4364389.htm seem to be buzzing over unexpected SERP drops and increases. By that I assume Panda 2.5 or at least some form of update taken/taking place? If anybody know of the reent heavy fluctuations which seem to have started in the weeken or have experienced unexpected positions increaes/drops, I would be very interested to hear/read from you. Cheers, Mo Raja
Industry News | | MoRaja0 -
How to achieve the highest global and local relevance in google?
Let's say I have a company that has its main business in Europe for thefollowing languages: English German Portugese French Italian And let's say some other markets (e.g. the Portugese one in south america) is also important. The question now is how should we structure the Domain if we want onlyone top level domain (www.company.com)? a) By using subdomains to target users with Google Webmaster Tools for the relevant country: portugal.company.com/pt (same content) brasil.company.com/pt (same content) germany.company.com/de england.company.com/en etc. or b) by using virtual folders www.company.com/pt www.company.com/de www.company.com/en
Industry News | | imsi
etc. or c) something completely different I do not know about? What do you reckon is best? I appreciate all suggestions!0