Interview with Mike Grehan, author
of Search Engine Marketing: The
Essential Best Practice Guide.
Next up, we talk
to Master of Search Marketing,
author, and wind-up merchant Mike
Grehan.
A word of warning
to sensitive souls: the following
interview contains references
to cloaking, the Evil Darth Tegtmeier,
cloaking (again), the voluptuous
Jill Whalen, religious allegory
and something called GodRank.
Send your children to bed. Now!
Deep breath. Onward...
Thanks for talking
with us today, Mike. Can you tell
us a little about your background?
Well, I was born at a very early
age. I didn't receive much love
from my parents. I figured they
were trying to tell me something
when they started wrapping my
school lunch in a road map. And
then one day, when they gave me
some money to go to the movies,
I came back home to find they
had moved house.
It was then that I realised I
had to make my own way in life
and make something of myself.
So, I decided to become a search
engine marketer! Of course, I
was only eleven at the time, so
I had to wait more than 25 years
to really be able to fulfil my
new ambition.
To keep myself occupied while
I was waiting for Tim Berners-Lee
to get his finger out and invent
the world wide web, I decided
to go to college and do business
studies. I also joined a band
and became successful at two things:
being the world's worst guitarist
- swiftly followed by being the
world's worst drummer.
Following
my great success at being terrible,
the owner of the
club where we played, promoted
me to DJ, with these immortal
words: "you're absolute crap
in the band, but you've got more
records than anyone else, so you're
the DJ now." This was it,
at last, I'd made my professional
break into show biz!
I tried
to keep up with my studies while
working nights in "pits
and dives". But something
had to give. I decided that working
in nightclubs was exciting, but
degenerative to ones lifestyle.
I'd also found myself mixing with
strangely exotic women (and men
of a similar demeanour). It was
a hard a choice but I decided
I had to give it up - my studies,
of course - in an effort to ease
the pressure I was under.
I eventually made the tiny leap
from sleazy nightclubs into local
radio, where I starred on the
graveyard shift as it was known.
From 2.00am to 6.00am I would
play records and take telephone
calls from strangely exotic people
who had just come home from nightclubs
and were able to speak in many
tongues.
I was eventually given a contract
with a large regional station
for a networked program. This
was a very interesting and exciting
period in my life. If I ever remember
any of it I may write a book about
it. Some time later I was approached
by a regional TV station and asked
to audition, which lead to freelance
TV work. Later, I moved into the
production side of the business.
I started
my own promotions company and
eventually dropped out of "on
air" media work altogether.
I went back to University and
studied marketing like a man possessed,
to make up for lost time. I worked
for both advertising agencies
and PR companies at one time or
another. And eventually, in 1996,
I left the agency I was with and
formed an Internet Marketing company.
This was
not my best business idea. As,
at the time, there were
only about 16 web sites online
and no customers. Fortunately,
I'm a patient chap and was happy
to wait until search engines became
the new online sport. After a
while, I became so adept at Spamming
them, I believe there was a "wanted" poster
for me hanging in the reception
area at Infoseek as well as others.
Very early
on, I realised that being a
search engine enemy was
actually detrimental to all parties,
mainly my own business. Whilst
driving home one evening, I was
forced to pull my car over to
the side by a small silver craft
hovering just above me. A light
shone down on me and I heard a
soft, low voice speaking to me,
repeatedly saying a word that
sounded like "gaggle" or "goggle" or
something like it. And at that
very moment, in a trance-like
shock, my coal-black-hat turned
to snowy-white.
Now, I
spend my days with my clients
Lotus position on small
yoga mats, chanting "best
practice" and burning incense.
More recently, I donned a very
fetching anorak and studied the
work of leading figures in the
industry. During this sabbatical,
I placed my findings in a tome
called "Search Engine Marketing:
The essential best practice guide.
It's been reviewed by many, including
the best selling author of a book
about Origami. He told me that
mine was an extremely useful book.
Of the 352 pages, he made 12 new
lampshades for his house, a smart
new paper hat for himself and
a small Donkey type animal with
three legs for the children. I'm
currently undertaking serious
research into vector support machines
and the probabilistic combination
of content and links, as a solution
to provide enough material for
an extra leg and a tail for the
small Donkey type animal.
Of course, I have my parents
to thank for all of this. If they
hadn't played that hilarious practical
joke on me all those years ago
- I may never have had my vision
and completely missed the career
pinnacle of my life by being in
this blog.
I
can understand how it must be
:) Now, there's
a few search engine books and
about ten million web sites revealing
the "secrets" of seo
(laughs). What makes yours different?
Well, if I can be perfectly frank,
the one thing which vastly differentiates
my book from any other on the
subject, is the fact that it has
a picture of me and my name on
the cover. There isn't another
one like it as far as I know.
But really? Whether it's different
or not is a very subjective matter.
It touches on (as best as I could)
all elements of what we now refer
to as search engine marketing.
As do others. But if there is
a difference to be noted, it's
probably more about the angle
that I approached it from.
Other
books that I've read are based
mainly on anecdotal evidence.
And let's face it Peter, you know
as well as anyone else, there's
lots of BS out there about search
engines and how they work. I've
so frequently been left disappointed
when I've purchased another book
on the subject and dashed to the
section on "how search engines
work" - only to find that
it doesn't actually explain how
they really work. Mostly, as I
say, it's anecdotal stuff which
simply skims the surface. I enjoy
research and I'm very inquisitive
by nature, so when someone says
in a book: you have to do this
- I have to ask why? I can't accept: "dunno,
you just have to" as an answer
because it's so frustrating.
I just
thought to myself: "if
no one can give the kind of answers
I'm looking for, I'll go and find
them myself". I've been fascinated
by the whole subject of information
retrieval on the web for years.
And as the web grows so rapidly
and the task becomes much greater,
so does my interest and research
in the field.
So, I started looking at search
engines from a different angle.
Somebody has to build them and
program them. So, who are these
people? What existing technologies
do they use and what technologies
do they develop themselves? I
just figured that, if I could
just get the fundamentals (not
being a scientist) then I could
answer my own questions. And for
anyone else with a similarly fetching
anorak - answer theirs too.
I started
doing serious research in 1999.
I didn't intend writing
a book at all at that time. But
as I read one scientific paper
after another, the less and less
difficult it became to grasp the
underlying concepts. I started
using a more enlightened knowledge
of the inner workings of search
engines and applied the whole "cause
and effect" process in small
experiments. Time and time again,
I was able to understand why one
thing works, yet another doesn't.
As the whole process of search
engine optimisation became more
and more sophisticated, all the
more I would see documents from
other search engine optimisers
with revelations about what was
changing with search engines,
but with so much second guessing
going on. So I decided to come
out from under the corporate shadows
and publish my own findings. I
was very careful to ensure that
any facts were backed up either
by the research papers I'd read,
or by people actually involved
in the industry. I suppose because
of that and because I had so much
excellent support and factual
input from real industry insiders,
it has more reliable information
than hype or anecdotal material.
As for
there being "secrets" about
how search engines work, it just
makes me laugh when I see that
on web sites. Like, Larry Page
from Google rang this web site
owner, and said: "here's
some secret content for your web
site" [bursts out laughing].
I mean, if any web site did have
a search engine secret, it's only
one twitch of a finger over a
mouse for a search engine to tweak
the algo. And that's that so called
secret down the pan!
Anyway, truth be known, there's
quite enough information available
both in academia and within the
industry to be able to discover
how search engines work if you're
prepared to put in the research
hours. And when you're able to
discuss the key concepts and technology,
you can usually get to speak to
the right people. I'll quote award
winning author Alexis Gutzman
on this. She said in a review,
something like: the search engines
themselves didn't give him the
recipe: but they don't have any
problems at all talking to him
about the ingredients.
My book is also slightly different
to others because I placed a life
changing secret message embedded
in a subliminal code. When you
read the book, you'll find your
whole approach to life changes.
You'll feel younger and more handsome
or beautiful. The opposite sex
will find you irresistible and
certain parts of your anatomy,
either above or below the waste,
will become larger. Your confidence
will be at an all time high and
you will win the lottery. Before
you die, purely through the knowledge
you gain from this book, you will
also win the Nobel prize. And
on your deathbed, with your last
dying breath, you will be able
to reveal the secret of life and
everything in it to your grandchildren.
Apart from that, it's not really
too different to the rest.
What responses
have you had to the book?
It's just been tremendous really.
Although, in all honesty, it hasn't
changed me much at all. Being
proclaimed as the almighty and
most venerable living guru of
search engines happened on the
same day as I ran out of cat food.
So, standing at the checkout in
the supermarket with mere mortals
wasn't really too hard to deal
with. In fact, some of them even
commented on how much I suit a
flowing white robe.
There
are the odd "niggling" things.
Like that man Sullivan, constantly
sneaking up behind me trying to
touch the hem of my robe. Oh,
yes, and there's the voluptuous
Jill Whalen, dressed only in lingerie,
always throwing herself at me.
Plus, the evil Darth Tegtmeier,
he's constantly on the phone inviting
me to come and see him perform
a small, dark-side, search engine
blessing with his dastardly fantomblaster
machine. But I can live with all
that.
Seriously? On the one hand I've
been overwhelmed by the reaction
from industry professionals. On
the other, I've been stunned by
some childish behaviour. It's
unfortunate that you get the odd
one or two people in the industry
who seem to be more interested
in developing their online status
than anything else.
It's a shame that, it sometimes
makes this industry look so twee
and self indulgent when SEO's
begin conferring guru status upon
themselves, or happily accepting
it from some adoring newsletter
reader or something. I mean, if
anyone did deserve such a title,
I guess it would have to be Danny
Sullivan. Although, being the
thoroughly down to earth guy that
he is, he probably wouldn't wear
the mantle too easily.
And the
only reason I suggest that Danny
may be the "chosen
one" [laughs] is based on
something much more important
than his celebrity within the
industry. It's something I mentioned
to him a short while ago. During
the course of my research I studied
dozens and dozens of research
papers written by the scientists
involved in information retrieval
on the web (and also spoke to
many of them). Each of these papers
makes reference (cites) the work
of other researchers in the field
and other sources of information.
You'd be very surprised to see
the number of times that "Sullivan" or "Search
Engine Watch" get mentioned.
I didn't see a single other mention
of these self proclaimed search
engine gurus in any serious scientific
papers. Just Danny Sullivan. That's
it.
When you think about it, in reality,
SEO is hardly rocket science.
To be perfectly honest, if you
want to meet a real search engine
guru, you have to get to someone
like Andrei Broder (Chief Scientist
at Alta Vista) who's largely recognised
as one of the leading authorities
in information retrieval on the
web. Or Monica Henzinger (Head
of research at Google) there's
not a lot you can teach these
guys about search engines. I'm
fortunate enough to get to speak
to the real experts from time-to-time
and believe me: to warrant guru
status, you'd have to be up there
with them, working on the next
generation of search.
To get back to your original
question though, the industry
reaction is one thing - but the
reaction from people who actually
buy the book is so much more important.
For some it's a heavy slog: for
others it's like a breath of fresh
air. I get so much useful feedback
from readers. They appreciate
the amount of research and thank
me for solving some puzzles for
them. And more to the point, waste
no time in correcting me if I've
not been completely accurate.
This is essential input for the
next edition of the book.
It's certainly
well researched. I note you have
close ties with Northumbria University
in Newcastle. Do you find that
your academic associations give
you a different perspective from
those who exist mainly in the
marketing world?
I maintain my links with the
University for two very important
reasons:
1 I get invited by students to
lots of parties.
2 The beer in the student's bar
is half price.
Okay,
there are two things I try and
do with the University
(apart from keep myself in touch
with the very latest market research).
I lecture from time-to-time to
both undergrads and post grads
and try and take the real world
experiences of marketing online
and track it back to the theory
being studied, to prove that there
is a "rhyme and a reason".
It helps to create a kind of bridge
to real world practitioner strategy
for the undergrads. And also provides "hands
on" you can try this tomorrow
advice for the post grads.
Again,
there are many online marketers,
as such, who never
studied marketing in their life.
But there they are wanging on
about some great copywriter who
wrote the million dollar sales
letter or something. I just think
a real sense of proportion is
warranted on both sides, so it's
kind of like trying to separate "fact
from fiction" and link "theory
to practice".
The other
thing with the University, is
the support they offer to local
businesses. Many of them are just
too small to be able to afford
to pull in a consultant like me
(not that I'm that expensive).
The University has a program which
brings together the massive amount
of intelligence and experience
they have in-house, with business
support agencies, commercial organisations
and funding packages to help small
businesses grow…
Peter… Peter… slap,
slap… helooo!… I'm going
to talk about search engines again
now…
Huh...whaa...(rubs
eyes) Oh, right. You also mention
in your book that it's often difficult
to tell fact from fiction. What
would be your advice for the beginner
webmaster? What is the best thing
they can do to promote their site?
First
of all, you need to buy a copy
of my book. And then buy
an ad in the middle of the Super
Bowl…
Okay, straight to the point with
this one. This blog is focused
on search engines. And search
engines are a very good channel
for driving traffic. However,
it's easy to become too focused
and forget that search engines
are only one tool in your online
marketing mix.
Some people make all kinds of
claims about driving zillions
to your web site with search engines.
But the truth of the matter is,
driving traffic is one thing:
conversion to customers and developing
business relationships is another.
I think, sometimes, the desire
to achieve a top ten hit at Google,
for instance, supersedes the actual
goal. This is not about your rank
at a search engine: but the quality
of traffic you can attract to
your web site by any means. So
neither the quantity of traffic
nor the rank you achieve are anywhere
near as important as your overall
business goals. 5,000 visitors
and one sale - or 50 visitors
and ten sales?
There
are many "customer
confidence" type web sites
online with people telling you
how they earn millions a year
purely from online marketing.
And if you are new to online marketing,
you can get carried away by the
many claims. The truth of the
matter here, in so many cases,
is still very closely linked to
what happened during the gold
rush. Sure, many people became
very wealthy. But these were not
the guys scraping at the ground
looking for the gold: these were
the guys who were selling the
shovels.
I recently
read an excellent new book called
Web of Deception,
by Anne P Mintz (thanks to Chris
Sherman for that tip) it's all
about misinformation on the Internet
(and also includes a very credible
take on how search engines really
work). It's incredible when you
read it and see the amount of
absolute lies, nonsense and badly
researched information which just
abounds on the web. So it's no
wonder that fact and fiction seem
to "blur" together on
the web.
One area
which seems to suffer more from
this "blur" effect
is most certainly where search
engines are concerned. For the
novice, SEO has this kind of "mystique" and "technical
voodoo" attached to it. When
in reality, it's a process which
anyone can learn - without having
to attend the same school as Harry
Potter.
Y'know,
a lot of this was really well
covered by Ralph Tegtmeier
in your interview with him Peter.
I have a massive amount of respect
for Ralph. He's an extremely intelligent
guy with his feet planted firmly
on the ground. If you read his
newsletter, what you get is the
unexpurgated truth based on real
experience. He doesn't give a "monkey's
****" about search engines
telling you to "do this,
do that, be good, yada, yada,
yada…" but some people
just don't like to hear him say
it.
Ralph and I frequently work for
clients at the larger end of the
scale, so we tend to come up against
the same technical barriers which
larger corporations create for
themselves when it comes to SEO.
And like me, Ralph is very realistic
about finding the most effective
solutions both for his clients,
the search engines and the end
users.
I was
fascinated by the reaction which
occurred in certain forums
after the interview you did with
him. I have to admit, I rarely
bother with forums, but when I
saw a link about him causing a
controversy of some kind I had
to take a look. I thought maybe
he'd exposed himself in public
or murdered a search engine rep
or something. But what was all
the brew-hah-hah about? Ralph
talking about the use of cloaking
as an effective solution; the
fact that he's developed new technology
to speed up a certain process
and that he takes "ethics" and
search engine pontificating with
a pinch of salt.
All of a sudden, he's the evil
Darth Tegtmeier with a villainous
plot (not that he's ever likely
to lose any sleep over it). There
are many, many SEO's using cloaking
as a method of achieving a solution
to certain technical barriers.
For my book I also interviewed
John Heard, another expert in
the field of cloaking. And if
you read the interview, you'll
find that John uses this particular
method for exactly the same reasons.
So he's evil? No, he's one of
the world's leading SEO's.
I have
a project beginning with one
of Europe's leading media
groups. As such it's all about
TV and streaming media makes up
about 90% of the content. The
intention is to make it a major
entertainment site. At the same
time, this also makes it one of
the most search engine unfriendly
sites you'll ever encounter. Now,
I can say to the marketing director: "what
we need to do is remove that Flash
animation and replace it with
a big, ugly, search engine friendly
h1 tag. Then we'll remove the
video and replace it with a nice
static graphic and an alt tag.
And instead of having that audio
file with this week's number one
hit, we'll replace it with a nice
text transcript of the lyrics…"
There goes that contract.
Or what about we use cloaking?
The surfer keys in the query.
The search engine returns a 100%
relevant result for that query.
The surfer clicks through and
gets a wonderful audio-visual
presentation - just what he was
expecting.
Why would anyone be unhappy about
such a win-win situation?
What's
a search engine likely to say
about this? "The user
is keying in a specific query.
We are serving a relevant result.
The surfer is happily viewing
a very expensive, quality content
site. Yes, we'll have to pull
this one from the database…".
Where's the sense in that?
As for
Ralph's new product, why the
shriek of horror? It's a simple
as this: if, for instance, you
wanted to compete in the very
lucrative world of adult sites,
you'd better have this kind of
tool, or don't bother turning
up at all. This particular arena
is cut-throat and no prisoners
are taken. Okay, it's seedy and
not my own cup of tea. But just
go to WordTracker and switch the
adult filter off, or use the Overture
keyword tool, you'll see the hundreds
of thousands of these types of
adult searches taking place on
all of the search engines. With
such a big audience, there's also
big money. Then go to one of these
sites and ask the webmaster if
he'd like to be a little more
ethical and stick to the search
engine rule book. You'll get a
reply that could only be published
on an adult site. I'm afraid the
adult thing online isn't going
to go away in a hurry. Ralph has
a seriously good technology company.
And there's a demand from a certain
quarter for technology which he
can supply. It's what business
is all about - supply and demand.
And whatever market sector you
target (adult or not) technology
is used and very often abused.
It's not so long ago I couldn't
get moved online for hundreds
of thousands of doorway pages.
What did I do? I cranked up WebPosition
Gold and knocked them out by the
hundred myself so that I could
compete on the same terms. I preach "best
practice: but there are certain
times when you simply have no
alternative other than to fight
fire with fire.
I get
a little bemused about this
whole ethical thing. SEO
in its purest sense is about manipulating
search engine results anyway.
That's why we do it. Our optimised
web pages beat the crap out of
our competitors pages which are
not. And we gladly accept money
for this service from our clients.
You know, both Jill Whalen and
Ralph Tegtmeier are great friends
of mine. But sometimes, we're
bound to come up against each
other on a professional level
chasing the same key phrases.
If Jill's beating me, what do
I do? Give her a call and say: "Jill,
be a sweet thing and throw some
clutter back into that site you're
optimising." Or: "Ralph,
dear friend, you appear to be
cloaking and you're beating me.
Be a good chap and stop it."
This is
marketing. And marketing is
like war. It's about strategy
and tactics to beat the enemy
to gain the greatest market share.
When I saw these people whinging
in forums about what's ethical
and someone suggesting that Ralph "crawled
out from under a stone" it
just made me wonder if they've
ever had to really compete online
on behalf of major clients who
demand winning results. If you
want to talk about ethics, then
join a philanthropic society or
something. And when it comes to
marketing online, it's as simple
as this: if you can't stand the
heat, then stay out of the kitchen.
Sorry
Peter, did I slightly deviate
from the original question… :-)
Only slightly
;) One section of your book deals
with themes. You don't believe
current search engines use themes,
at least not in the way that many
seo's understand them. Can you
talk a little about this?
Oh. That
subject? Yes, I can say a little.
Succinctly: there's
no such thing as themed web sites
which you have to sum up in two
words for search engines! That's
it. Period. Search engines do
NOT return web SITES at the query
interface - they return web PAGES.
In fact, the entire premise of
so called "themed web sites" is
based on nothing more than SEO
propaganda. I've not seen a single
shred of scientific or technical
evidence, either during my research,
or in any book by other SEO's
promoting this theory, which supports
the idea.
When search
engines use the term "theme" they
are talking about classification
and categorisation of web pages
across the entire corpus - NOT
specific web sites. And I explained
in the book how an inverted index
is created by search engines and
how this leads to a "term
weight pair" - but, again,
this applies to the entire corpus
NOT specific web sites.
Seriously,
this is a subject which has
largely been misunderstood.
You've read the book, so you know
it's not so easily simplified.
And personally, I've been misquoted
and accredited with things I haven't
even said on the subject so many
times, I think I'll just "pass" this
time. However, I'm not alone on
this. So I'll hand it over to
Danny Sullivan. Here's a direct
quote from Danny in part-answer
to one of his newsletter reader
questions from the recent edition:
"Crawler-based search engines
rank pages on a page-by-page basis,
not on a "site" basis.
In other words, they don't try
to figure out how many pages of
content you have on different
topics, then perhaps reward a
site with lots of content on a
particular topic or "theme." Instead,
each of your pages will standalone
on the page's particular merits."
And I'll say amen to that!
Amen
indeed. When I was chatting
with Ralph & Brett,
a common thread emerged, which
was essentially "look beyond
the search engines for traffic
generation". What trends
do you see as being the most important
areas for internet marketers over
the next year or so?
I agree entirely with both Ralph
and Brett about not relying wholly
on search engines. As I mentioned
earlier, search engines are one
effective tool for driving traffic
and bringing in sales, but SEM
is not the online marketers panacea.
Email marketing, affiliate marketing
and the often forgotten offline
marketing are all equally as important.
When I
worked in conventional marketing
there was no way I'd
ever say to a client: "We've
decided to spend the entire budget
on PR this year. No personal selling,
no advertising, no direct mail,
no tradeshows, no…"
My job was to look at the best
way to spread the budget over
the most cost effective mix. Of
course, certain aspects of the
marketing mix would reap better
rewards and therefore would gain
more priority. However, the goal
was to create as much awareness
as possible by using every marketing
tool available within the given
budget.
Like Brett and Ralph, I don't
have a crystal ball to gaze into
the online marketing future. But
certainly the major threat that
every online marketer faces, is
that of growing consumer resistance.
Your average surfer has suffered
the barrage of banner ads to which
many have become oblivious. They've
been unmercifully Spammed and
now, in return, unmercifully filter
out more email than they read
(this happens at both server and
client level). And post purchase
dissonance frequently rumbles
loudly on the web because of poor
customer service or failure to
deliver.
Surfers are more sophisticated
now and demand a lot more pre
selling. They need to be a lot
more assured now that the novelty
of shopping online has diminished.
This means that online marketers
will have to work a little harder
on their acquisition and retention
strategies for the future.
With the advent
of paid inclusion, pay per click
etc, do you feel the traditional
SEO has been marginalized? Is
SEO heading more into the realm
of marketing?
I've always
believed that SEO is an integral
component within
the online marketing mix anyway.
And because search engines kind
of developed the most unusual
business model ever, in that they
earn no revenue from their end
users, it was inevitable that
they would look elsewhere. So,
I wasn't surprised when they turned
to the SEO community. I mean,
we'd had a pretty good "free
ride" for a long time.
If I turn
your question around just a
little bit, it's not so
much a case of SEO being "marginalized" because
of the advent of these paid-for
schemes, it's more about accountability.
Whereas previously, I was paid
as a consultant to do a little
bit of "technical voodoo" for
clients and that was it, I'm now
handling online marketing budgets.
And as such I'm accountable for
ROI on media spend (sighs: just
like the old days ;-)
You know, you can spend a lot
of time optimising web pages to
achieve those top ten hits. But
when your competitor decides to
throw ten grand at Overture and
more-or-less stands on your head
for your most important key phrases,
then you have to start thinking
about parity budgeting.
Search engine marketing is still
viewed as a below-the-line spend
by marketing departments and agencies.
But just as I observed when offline
database/relationship marketing
started to show more measurable
results and below-the-line spend
increased as above-the-line decreased,
I can see a similar shift. As
I mentioned earlier, it's about
ROI not rank these days.
Google pretty
much dominates the search space
now. Do you see any serious contenders
on the horizon?
Certainly in terms of awareness
and coverage Google rules. But
although less visible in terms
of branding, Overture is very
much in the same space. I mean,
if you want number one hits across
the board i.e. all the majors
then it's very much the Google/Overture
combination.
As for
another contender for Google's "King of general
purpose search" title, I
don't really see much competition
at all. Sure, you have Teoma and
Wisenut out there using really
neat technology. But they have
a long way to go to achieve the
kind of web-wide awareness which
Google has. And let's not forget,
Google employs 50 PhD's in its
staff. This is some mean R&D
team I can tell you. So you'd
have to be pretty well stacked
up on both the financial and R&D
side to want to go head-to-head.
I think
what's most likely to happen
is that we'll see a lot
more speciality (or niche) engines
begin to spring up. Focused crawling
is still very much a "hot
potato" in SE research terms.
There are a number of advantages
to crawling only the subset of
the web which pertains to specific
topics. In this way, search engines
will be able to target niche audiences
and user groups to provide 100%
topic specific results. Lawcrawler
is a good example (although, ironically
it's powered by Google) and, of
course, Scirus over at AllTheWeb.
I think we're more likely to see
these types of focused search
engines appearing in the commercial
sector as opposed to a series
of contenders for the Google crown.
If you could
build the ultimate search engine,
what would it be? What would it
do that current search engines
don't?
Once again,
ironically, Google is already
working on it. This
is how Larry Page describes it: "It
would be the mind of God. It would
know exactly what you want and
give you back exactly what you
need."
So we'd all best start thinking
about how to improve our GodRank
now!
</end>
Phew.
Thanks a lot, Mike. Riveting.
And you're right - you are funny
;)
Mike's
written a superb, well researched
book on search engines: Search
Engine Marketing.
Next week: It could
be Inktomi. Or that man Sullivan.
|
