Does Google realy treat dynamic pages the same as static ones?

Google's current webmaster guidelines currently state that:

"If you decide to use dynamic pages (i.e., the URL contains a "?" character), be aware that not every search engine spider crawls dynamic pages as well as static pages. It helps to keep the parameters short and their number few."

So OK, I understand that not all search engines can spider dynamic pages but want to make sure that Google does as this is my focus.

So lets address some of the issues with dynamic pages and see if Google really does spider these and apply page rank in the same way.

1. Firstly how many is a few parameters? I have heard two things 2 to 3 parameters and 1 to 2 parameters. Back in 2005 Matt Cutts is quoted as saying:

"..you are safe if the number of variables in your URL is one or two, unless one of those two variables is named id (or something else resembling a session ID), in which case all bets are off. "

In 2006 he was quoted as saying:

"You definitely CAN use too many parameters, so I would opt for 2 or 3 at the most, if you have any choice whatsoever."

So judging by the fact that Google is yet to define exactly how many parameters you should have in your URL then I would conclude that in order to be safe 2 should be the maximum number (Their is still a little vagueness about the 3rd parameter!)

2. In the first quote above Matt Cutts also mentions "all bets are off" in relation to URL's that resemble session ID's. So should you be worried if your URL's still contain something like this? Well until October last year Google had the following line in it's webmaster guidelines:

"Don't use "&id=" as a parameter in your URLs, as we don't include these pages in our index."
However this was removed in October and Google released an official statement in it's blog:
"‘[Google now indexes] URLs that contain that parameter. So if your site uses a dynamic structure that generates it, don’t worry about rewriting it — we’ll accept it just fine as is.
Keep in mind, however, that dynamic URLs with a large number of parameters may be problematic for search engine crawlers in general, so rewriting dynamic URLs into user-friendly versions is always a good practice when that option is available to you.
If you can, keeping the number of URL parameters to one or two may make it more likely that search engines will crawl your dynamic URL's.”

So what does this all mean for your dynamic website?

Firstly make sure that your pages only use up to a maximum of 2 parameters. Any more than that and they may not be spidered. Also if you use too many you may have problems with search engine spiders getting caught in a loop and falling down. As a result they may not return to the site to spider it again and this could have an impact of rankings.

Secondly if you have got "ID=" in your URL's already these pages still may be suffering from when Google didn't index them. As such you may see no page rank at present as these pages may be treated as brand new ones in the index so you should now see these pages appearing in the index and attaining page rank. A such you should not opt for a URL re-write based solely on this point.

So overall should you re-write your URL's if you do have dynamic pages?

Officially the only reason your should do this is if you have more than 2 parameters in your url. This can be a massive job and the most important thing to note is that if your pages have 1 or 2 parameters and have been spidered by Google it is best to let them be. You could simply damage their rankings if you go re-writing your site pages.

However possibly for a brand new site that has dynamic URL's their is still a case to say it can be worth re-writing your URL's to be search engine friendly. This is because although they are now spidered and indexed they still may be treated in slightly different ways to static pages.

In July last year Matt Cutt's released the following video

In it he says "We do treat static and dynamic pages in a similar way for ranking. Pagerank flows to dynamic URL's in the same way they flow to static URL's. So, if you've got New York Times, linking to a dynamic URL, you will still get the Pagerank benefit, and will still flow the Pagerank Benefit. There are other Search Engine's who in the past have said they will go one-level deep from static URL's, so we are not going to crawl from dynamic URL's, but we will crawl from static URL's to a dynamic URL. The short answer is, Pagerank still flows between static and dynamic. The example you (the person asking the question) give actually has 5 parameters, and one of them is a Product ID with like 2725. You definitely CAN use too many parameters, so I would opt for 2 or 3 at the most, if you have any choice whatsoever. Try to avoid long numbers, because we can think that those are session ID's. Any extra parameters that you can get rid of are always a good idea and remember that Google is not the only Search Engine out there, so if you have the ability, to basically say I'm going to use a little bit of mod_rewrite and make it look like a static URL, that can often be a very good way to tackle the problem. So, experiment! If you don't see any URL's that have the same structure, or the same number of parameters as you are thinking about doing; it's probably better if you can cut back on the number of parameters or shorten them somehow or try to use mod_rewrite"

They key thing i have picked up on from this quote is the word "similar". This to me suggests that Google does treat dynamic pages in a slightly different way to static ones. There is also a school of thought that suggests Google trusts Dynamic pages less than static ones even though larger sites inevitably rely more and more on dynamic pages and URL's. In the quote above Matt Cutts is almost suggesting hiding the fact that your pages are dynamic from Google to see if this improves rankings.

Ultimately search engines will get better and better at spidering dynamic sites, however there are still quite a few grey areas which may mean you might want to opt for a safe option if launching a new site and re-write URL's to appear static.

Does the hype to brace web 2.0 neglect the basics of good web design?

There have been many articles of late discussing Jacob Neilson’s thoughts on Web 2.0. Neilson has stated that the hype of Web 2.0 is making web firms neglect the basics of good design believing Web 2.0 is in danger of becoming “glossy, but useless”. The good practices Neilson advocates so highly include making a site “easy to use, having good search tools, the use of text free of jargon, usability testing and the consideration of design even before the first line of code is written.”

Neilson is a well known name in web design and is often referred to as a usability ‘guru’ making his commentary on any web issue quite highly considered. Neilson’s statement is an interesting one which has naturally attracted many comments of support as well as argument.

On one hand, making your site usable, intuitive and user friendly is essential to website success. Usability goes hand in hand with search engine optimisation. There is no point in your website gaining exposure on the search engines if the traffic it brings cannot easily navigate around the site and complete the desired action. Website visitors live very much by the ‘time is precious’ rule so if information is not easily accessible, they will not convert for you and are unlikely to return.

On the other hand, Web 2.0 has been a huge movement in websites design and many think that Web 2.0 goes above and beyond many design methods when it comes to interactivity. Web 2.0 is expanding the way people participate and interact online making it impossible to ignore Web 2.0 and concentrate purely on design basics.

So, where are we left now then?

I think it all depends on the site.

If your site depends on social participation from users, like digg.com, flickr.com and Youtube, then a Web 2.0 site is essential as the structure of the site relies on collaborative participation to be successful. However I think that Neilson is also right - for websites other than social networking sites. You absolutely need to ensure your website is usable, focussed and well written in order for your visitors have a good user experience as well as guiding them to carry out the desired action on your site.

What I do find interesting is that Neilson’s basics of good design are based fundamentally on human behaviour. Web 2.0 sites, without question, generate different user behaviour than more ‘conventionally designed’ sites. Does this mean that there may be scope for definitive usability guidelines for Web 2.0 websites? (I feel Neilson may not get involved.)


Articles:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6653119.stm
http://www.usabilitynews.com/news/article3903.asp

Why you shouldn’t be focussing on Search Engine Rankings as a measurement of success

Right from the beginnings of the SEO movement, the measurement of a successful campaign was the position a site achieved for certain search terms. An SEO campaign was only deemed successful if a site achieved a top 30 listing for a number of selected search terms. SEO companies even offered payment programs where they got paid for each ranking.

These days those that still focus on rankings achieved as an end goal are missing a big trick. Here are the reasons why:

• A top ranking on the search engines does not guarantee an increase in qualified traffic to the site. The term being ranked for might have a very low number of searches, or may not be focussed enough to the products and services offered on the site.
  

• With the number of companies realising the potential of high visibility on the search engines, it is getting harder and harder to achieve rankings in the more competitive industries. If success measurement focuses on rankings for a small number of highly popular and competitive keywords a campaign may be deemed unsuccessful even though a site has achieved a large number of rankings for more niche phrases that are collectively driving increased numbers of qualified visitors to the site.
  

• A successful online marketing campaign is not just about increasing visibility on the major search engines (although of course that is a major part). These days there are so many other ways a site can increase its visibility online such as Blogs, Forums, Online PR and Social Networking. Utilising these methods correctly can result in just as much qualified traffic being driven to the site as a few top rankings could achieve.
  

• Achieving rankings on the search engines for relevant search terms is only half the battle and certainly shouldn’t be the end goal. What the increased number of visitors then do on your site is just as important. There is no point in driving high numbers of qualified visitors to your site if none of them convert to a sale or enquiry for you. There are too many sites out there receiving wasted visitors through lack of good design. Your site must be optimised for both the search engines and your site users. The two are definitely NOT mutually exclusive. Designing a good site for users will often result in a search engine friendly site.
  

• Rankings watching can be a futile and very stressful past time. Search engine indexes are in constant flux and rankings could come and go on a regular basis. Having a heart attack every time this happens is not going to do you any favours. Keep looking at the bigger picture. As long as the numbers of relevant traffic to your site is on the increase and those visitors are converting, whether you are on the 1st or 2nd page on Google for “widgets” is not worth worrying over.

Don’t get me wrong here, of course gaining a range of high rankings for relevant terms will have a large impact on the success of your site as a whole, its just not the only thing you should be measuring and isn’t even the most important. Here is what you should be measuring:

• Is the number of visitors to your site on the increase?
  
• Are those visitors coming from qualified sources (other relevant sites, blogs, relevant search engine results)
  
• Is the number of relevant links to your site on the increase?
  
• What are your visitors doing once they get to your site?
  
• Are the visitors to your site converting?
  
• What is your ROI?
  

You’ll find if you concentrate on all of these areas and leave the rankings watching to your competitors, your sanity will be saved and you will be working on the success of your site for your business as a whole.

SEO for smaller websites

We have updated our guide on how to get a smaller website a strong visibility on the major search engines. Just follow our tips and with a bit of hard work and a lot of patience any site can compete with the big boys in the search results. Its all about quality not size!!!!!

Download the report now or see our Information Library for more useful information.

Who Actually Reads Blogs?

Probably not who you'd guess - they're wealthier and most likely balding for a start

Most of us probably imagine the typical blog reader as some trendy student type, stabbing at the keyboard over a pan of cold beans and lager. A recent survey conducted by Blogads, has discovered the opposite. The demographic are older, wiser, richer, discerning, well informed and decision makers.

Out of the 17,159 blog visitors that took part in the May 2006 survey, 40 percent of them earn around $90,000 or equivalent, 61% were over 30 years old, exactly 37% being 41 to 60 with under 10 percent being in their teens and earlier twenties and 75% of them were male. It also showed that most of them read blogs because they had news they could not find else where and for a better more Honest perspective. 17% of them are bloggers themselves, and the reason they blogged was to Keep track of their thoughts, let off steam or Formulate ideas.

(unfortunately only 15% used blogs to smite enemies which I think has huge potential) 1.7% of those questioned were CEO’s, 4.95% were Judges, 8.87% were retired and only 5% are students and most of them read National Geographic or Liberal Political journals.

Why are Blogs fundamental to intellectual property?

A recent study by Columbia University shows that the News we read is being adapted from blog posts. The report, using data sourced from 1,202 journalists both US and European based, shows that 51% of journalists use blogs regularly and this number is growing rapidly. 70% of them are reported to use Blogs for work-related tasks, daily, i.e.: researching and referencing facts, finding sources and uncovering breaking news.

Blogs can also be used as a soap box for employers and manufacturers. Companies receiving bad press for example, can harness the speed of the blogosphere and answer allegations, spread viral apologies and deter propaganda in seconds.

How blogs differ from Other Editorial Content

• Anonymous creation (the identity of a blog poster can forever be a pseudonym
  
• No Use by date (The lifespan of a Blog post is infinite unlike a other digital news forms)
  
• Real time updates (Changes are immediate)


• Positively Interactive (Blogs are a open line of communication, a forum for ideas and discussions)

For Sourced Content (Why are Blogs fundamental and How blogs differ) go to: http://www.levick.com/

“The Horrors of not managing online buzz”

Kryptonite in the BlogosphereHow ten days of internet ranting crippled a company.It took just 10 days for Kryptonite locks to become the poster child for how not to handle the online buzz. In response to a video showing how the Kryptonite Evolution 2000 U-Lock could be opened with a bic pen and with a flood of complaints on forums by bike-owning enthusiasts demanding the Locks withdrawal. Krytonite responded with a statement that can be best described at ‘dismissive’ as well as publicly ignoring the problem. Whilst working in the background to try and resolve the issue, the New York Times got hold of the story and released the headline “The Pen Is Mightier than the Lock”. Exchanges for the faultily locks were offered 10 days after the video release, by that time Kryptonite’s reputation was sullied and the company had lost around $10 million. Source http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/17/nyregion/17lock.html?ex=1178942400&en=2767e0c7fd12541d&ei=5070

Electronic Arts the mighty EMPLOYMENT MONSTER

Electronic arts learned a hard lesson when a blogger called “EA Spouse” blogged about the awful working conditions her husband suffered in the employment of Electronic arts. Even though the comments were posted on a relatively insignificant blog, they were rapidly picked up and the press quickly stepped in. The outcome was that Electronic arts recently had to settle a 15 million dollar lawsuit brought against them by employees. http://ea-spouse.livejournal.com/
For Sourced Content: (Krytonite and E.A Spouse stories) http://www.levick.com/

BUSINESS BLOGS are Doing it for themselves

Information gathered from the Fortune 500 Business Blogging Wiki shows that Only 22 of the 500 largest U.S. companies operates public blogs. That amounts to a measly 4.4%. Here are 3 of those I rather liked.

McDonalds Corporation blog – Open for Discussion was launched on the 20th of March 2006, Created by I'm Bob Langert, Vice President for Corporate Social Responsibility, it offers an open forum for employees to chat and ask questions about promotional issues, ideas etc. McDonalds say “it’s a way of showing what happens behind the scenes and listening to what people want”. It’s got PR of 5, Loads of recent posts and topical discussions and has been tagged 1,179 by del.icio.us http://csr.blogs.mcdonalds.com/

General Motors – Fast lane blog was launched on the 7th of January 2005 and I must sing it’s praises even though I don’t like cars particularly, this blog is exactly what a blog should be, a way of the consumers to interact with the BIG WIGS at GM. It’s honest, forthright and not afraid to welcome criticism. It’s basic in its general aesthetic but it has a neat little bread crumb trail to guide you out of the lengthy comments pages, as most posts has around 30 or more comments and its fresh content has been tagged over 300 times by del.icio.us. http://fastlane.gmblogs.com/

My Favourite was Southwest Airlines - Nuts about Southwest. They quite plainly want people to get involved, the user help page stating “Our goal with this blog is to give our readers the opportunity to take a look inside Southwest Airlines and to interact with us. This is as much your blog as it is ours”. It was launched on the 22nd of April 2006 and its just fun, nice big friendly images, peanuts scattered all over the background and the entries are written in a warm forthcoming way. It has PR of 6, has snatched up over 80 tags from del.icio.us and has over 7,000 Yahoo links. http://www.blogsouthwest.com/

Lastly: (a moan) I had high hopes for Nike Basketball Blog when I first saw it, the slick design, high res photos of basket ball players, downloadable Nike goodies; it was as statuesque as Nike herself. But after a few minutes it becomes whelming, and you release that it’s just another nicely constructed advert for Nike. It also doesn’t allow comments, which kind of defeats the whole object of a blog. http://blog.nikebasketball.com/

Google "Grey" Page Rank Bar

The most visible change to the Google Tool Bar happened recently when the Page Rank Bar suddenly turned grey for some website pages. There has been constant speculation since in the forums and many SEO blogs as to what this means. This is not the first time Google has used grey in the Page Rank display. It was previously thought that this meant the site was either penalised or possibly suffering under penalty. This time round, the grey bar could mean new pages, however, the jury is out until we know more. One thing is certain, however, Google will continue refining its search algorithium.

Top 5 DO NOTs of running a PPC campaign

As I am sure you will all appreciate, there is no strict formula to running a PPC campaign. However, there are a number of Do's and Do Not's which certainly increase the likelihood of a campaign's overall success. These Do and Do Not's occur both on the part of the client and search agency.

No 1.
Do not perform constant checks of your ads on the search engines. These searches will accrue a significant amount of impressions and no clicks (as you will have no intention of clicking on the ad to incur a cost). This in turn will lower your CTR (Click Through Rate) as the engine will assume that the ad is less relevant than competition as it is not being clicked on as often. This will then lower your quality score and in time you will notice a gradual increase in the keyword's CPC (Cost Per Click). A simple way of overcoming this is searching on The Google Ad Preview Tool http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=+&adtest=on This is a preview of the search results only and will no accrue any clicks or costs.

No 2.
Do not have just one ad copy running in a group in Google. Google has the functionality of auto-optimising ad copy, showing the creative with the highest CTR most often. This is only possible if more than one ad copy is added into each group. When each ad copy is new, each will be served equally initially. Once Google has enough data of each ad copy's CTR they will begin to rank the ads accordingly. This is most effectively utilised when ad copy with very different messaging is added to a group.

No 3.
Do not create all ad copy with generic messaging. The likelihood of someone clicking on an ad is dependent on how relevant they deem the ad text to be to their query. Therefore a more targeted ad will be far more likely to be clicked on. Within the same notion, utilising the tools of targeting (Geographic, Demographic etc) and the different keyword match types (Broad, Phrase and Exact) is a brilliant way to ensure highly targeted traffic. This will reduce overall click volume, but should increase conversion rates.

No 4.
Do not have too many keywords in your campaign. Having a lot of very low volume, low CTR and low conversion keywords in your campaign can degrade the campaign's overall performance by lowering the overall CTR. This could then mean that you will potentially be spending more than you could be for certain search terms. In order to reduce the possibility of this occurrence, regular keyword reports should be produced for all campaigns. These keyword reports should then be analysed and low performing keywords should firstly be optimised and if there is no sign of improvement - these keywords should be removed.

No 5.
Do not direct all destination URLs to the homepage. Deep linked pages historically perform far better due to their heightened relevancy to the search term. When choosing a destination URL for a specific keyword, or keyword group it is best to link to a page which is as far as possible down the conversion cycle. For example, if the conversion goal is to generate a signup, the optimum destination URL would be the signup page itself.

Join the Ask revolution...or maybe not!

With all the recent furor surrounding Google’s purchase of Doubleclick (and the rumours flying around that they are on the verge of snapping up just about every media and technology company going!), I was interested to see a rather timely Ask poster campaign in a local student pub toilet last week (I was there to watch my brothers band, honest!).

The feeling among those in the know (and trust me, the average person on the street does not know...or probably care!) is that Google's continued domination of the search market, and their movements into radio and tv advertising should be a major concern; quite simply they are becoming too powerful in their pursuit of 'organising the worlds information'.

However, as I point out above, how many of the 75 or so per cent of people in the UK who cite Google as their number one are actually aware of this dominance and their continued diversification into new areas of advertising? Well, Ask are currently targeting those most up for revolutionary thought and change, the student population, with a rather clever poster campaign.

It centres around 'an underground revolution', aimed at getting users to adopt the 'other' search engine. Unfortunately, for Ask, the 'other' search engine in most people's eyes would be Yahoo, but that's another story.

Back to the poster...I am asked to visit a website...at this stage I still have no idea where the poster will take me. So I am somewhat suprised when I arrive at an Ask branded site welcoming me as a 'person of courage' and inviting to join an underground movement of revolutionaries keen to test the water with a different search experience.

However, am I missing a point here. The page allows you to search on Yahoo, Google and MSN, Asks three biggest rivals! Why?? If you want me to try a different search experience, and for me it would be exactly that (I rarely, if ever use Ask), dont offer me the chance to go back to my familar search haunts! This just seems a little bizarre to me. If somebody at Ask can fill me in the thinking here, I'd love to hear from you!

I applaud the Ask campaign for its ingenuity; it is quite clever in its targeting and message. However, how many are really going to take notice and how many really care. Us search marketers who spend our lives keeping abreast of this most dynamic of industries are in the know; but we are a minority. I have asked my friends what they think about Google's dominance and diversification and they look at me like I have gone mad - they really dont care too much. Its therefore going to take a lot more than a few posters in the local student pub to get the message across. Oh, and it might help if the results provided by Ask were better than those of its competitors!

UK Supplemental Results

A post at the Search Engine Roundtable Forum has detailed how you can see which pages of any UK site are found in the supplemental results on Google.

Just do a search on www.google.co.uk for site:www.yourcompany.co.uk and then click to view UK results. All of the results are those pages of the site that are found within the supplemental results.

Useful to know but I am not sure if it is actually supposed to work in this way. However until it is changed it is a quick way to find out which pages of your site are in this index

iGoogle.....perhaps you might like to too

Google posted on their official blog yesterday the launch of the new igoogle. In a nutshell they have renamed the personalised home page that has been available for a while and added a few new features.

Once you have a Google account, you can use it to sign in and create your own personalised home page. There are literally hundreds of feeds and gadgets that you can choose from and add easily ranging from news feeds, quote of the day, Jamie Oliver recipes to sticky note pads and calculators.

Hey you could even add our Froggblog feed to your home page!!!!

In addition to this you can have a number of tabs with different types of feeds. Perhaps you might want weather and news on your home page and then have a tab for work related feeds, or fun stuff for your lunch hour?

Not the mention the fact you can make it pretty by choosing from a number of themes.

Here is an example:

Now we think this is quite a cool tool. Of course there are the ongoing concerns of the Google Big Brother Syndrome. If you don't want Google knowing what you are searching for just don't activate the search history option for Google to provide you with personalised search results based on past searches.

The latest tool they have introduced is the ability to create your own gadgets, upload to your own home page and share with friends and family.

http://www.google.com/ig/gmchoices?source=bppd

This means anyone can create a gadget without any knowledge of web development. This is certainly taking social media to the masses and could also provide a way for small businesses to create cool tools relating to their business that could help to spread the word about them online.

Put your own mini blog on other peoples computers, give them a count down to a big sale you are having, or feed pictures of your latest products. The possibilities are endless.

Confusion over web analytics

On the 18th April the BBC posted an article on how methods of gauging site success by measuring page views and using cookie tracking could be providing inaccurate figures.

The general gist of the article was that if you are using a cookie based analytics tool then the number of unique visitors you think your site might be getting could actually be way off the mark. This is because there are an increasing percentage of people who regularly delete cookies from their computer. So when they return to a site they are counted again as a new unique visitor.

This means that the number of people who you think are coming to your site is over estimated.

If this is the case then as the vast majority of recent web analytics tools use cookies based traffic then the majority of people are getting inaccurate figures.

But what can you do about it? Should we all go back to log file analysis that was claimed to be just as inaccurate in other ways, didn’t track in real time, took up a huge amount of space on servers?

Until web analytics companies come up with a new and even better way of tracking then certainly SME’s that don’t have the budget for large complex web statistics packages will have to put up with these reports of inaccuracies.

To be honest, the benefits and tracking options that tools such as Google Analytics offer to the SME for free far outweigh any reports of slight inaccuracies.

The same article from the BBC stated that using the number of page views as a measurement of success could also be giving a false impression of the success of a site. This is indeed true if you have a site that doesn’t require the view of many pages to convert a visitor to sale or enquiry. In some cases if people are entering your site through a highly niche product or service page, they might only need to view this page to gain enough information to make a decision to call the company up and order over the phone. Therefore an average of 1 page view per visit might be very successful for this site.

On the other side of the coin, a site with an average of 20 page views per visit might appear to be successful as it has such a high page count. However this might just mean that people are getting lost on the site. Always remember its quality of page and not quantity of pages that will result in a higher conversion rate for your site.

It has been mentioned that time spent on site is a better indicator of site success, however as with page views this can be ambiguous. A very clear, simple site with a high conversion rate might need visitors to spend little time on the site. Likewise a large and complicated site, or a site with video and audio content might have people spending a large amount of time on the site without converting at all.

So where does all this ambiguity leave the average SME? Well as long as you have a good understanding of how your site works, the amount of page views needed for a conversion and the rough amount of time it should take someone to follow the conversion funnel from start to finish, you should be able to use your web analytics to full effect.

Make sure before you do any analysis that you ask at least one or two people who haven’t seen your site before to carry out a set of tasks on the site, such as finding a product, conducting a search, or completing the sales process.

Armed with the amount of pages these testers took to do this, and how long it took them you can apply that to your web stats. If the number of pages that most people view is far higher, then your site is perhaps not working in the way you want it to.

Obviously the larger selection of people you can use to do this testing the better, but with the usual SME time and budget constraints this is not always possible.

One key point I would like to make is that what ever you decide to track on your site, and how you want to view success, MAKE SURE you track it in exactly the same way over time. It is impossible to gauge success if you are taking different measurements from month to month.

Good luck, it really is key you understand how people are using your site and get to grips with web analytics.