The FT reports today that Alibaba, the Chinese business-to-business search giant, has made its first move to acquire a serious foothold in the US following years of sabre rattling, by buying Vendio.com – an e-commerce platform which allows you [...]]]> The FT reports today that Alibaba, the Chinese business-to-business search giant, has made its first move to acquire a serious foothold in the US following years of sabre rattling, by buying Vendio.com – an e-commerce platform which allows you to share your inventory with Ebay, Google, Shopzilla and Amazon. Figures for the acquisition were not released, other than Alibaba declaring that the acquisition was part of its $100 million investment programme.

Whilst Alibaba has done no acquiring in the US, it’s been busy in its domestic region by linking up with Softbank to link its Chinese Taobao platform with Yahoo Japan through a partnership with Softbank. Misleadingly the FT says that Yahoo Japan is ‘owned’ by Softbank and seems to have omitted reference to Yahoo’s co-ownership. The FT also describes Alibaba as a “Yellow Pages” site – but it’s much more of a ‘business dating’ platform.

Alibaba hopes the acquisition will bring increasing numbers of small US businesses to Alibaba when they are looking for suppliers or partners – especially from the Asia-Pacific region.

The FT quotes David Wei, Alibaba Chief Executive as saying, “We continue to look for synergies and investment opportunities to grow our customer base, acquire additional technology and add new applications that will help our customer base grow and prosper”.

The message of the acquisition is quite clear – Alibaba is finally moving in on the US!

No related posts.

Since the 24th November last year, European country governments are required to legislate for better electronic privacy — which includes bringing in much more transparency over the use of the “Cookie”.

The way European Union law develops is designed to work [...]]]> Since the 24th November last year, European country governments are required to legislate for better electronic privacy — which includes bringing in much more transparency over the use of the “Cookie”.

The way European Union law develops is designed to work as an effective compromise between having one consistent law for the whole of Europe and to allow for the specific requirements of individual nations. What this actually means is that it serves to ensure that national governments can debate laws before then largely implementing them in a predominantly similar manner. In fact technically, national governments are required to implement European Directives within 18 months of them being signed into European law.

What this leads to is a situation whereby laws such as the Electronic Communications Directive which was passed by the European Parliament on the 24th of November last year, will be implemented into law by individual nations at different times and with different interpretations.

For international website marketers, this situation poses two problems. Firstly, website functioning — and particularly analytics — depend heavily on the use of cookies. Secondly, different requirements for ‘transparency’ may ultimately be needed in different countries.

What The European Law Says

The European Directive explains the situation thus:

Third parties may wish to store information on the equipment of a user, or gain access to information already stored, for a number of purposes, ranging from the legitimate (such as certain types of cookies) to those involving unwarranted intrusion into the private sphere (such as spyware or viruses). It is therefore of paramount importance that users be provided with clear and comprehensive information when engaging in any activity which could result in such storage or gaining of access. The methods of providing information and offering the right to refuse should be as user-friendly as possible. Exceptions to the obligation to provide information and offer the right to refuse should be limited to those situations where the technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user. Where it is technically possible and effective, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Directive 95/46/EC, the user’s consent to processing may be expressed by using the appropriate settings of a browser or other application.

The European Directive requires national governments to implement a law as described here:

Member States shall ensure that the storing of information, or the gaining of access to information already stored, in the terminal equipment of a subscriber or user is only allowed on condition that the subscriber or user concerned has given his or her consent, having been provided with clear and comprehensive information, in accordance with Directive 95/46/EC, inter alia about the purposes of the processing. This shall not prevent any technical storage or access for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network, or as strictly necessary in order for the provider of an information society service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user to provide the service.

What That Really Means?

So it’s clear that there are certain key issues:

• Europe is concerned the giving easy access to Cookies could allow malicious access for things such as spyware or viruses.
• Users need to be provided with clear and concise information
• How the information is provided should be “User-Friendly”
• An exception exists where the user has requested a service – such as a subscription or paid for service
• The user’s consent may be conveyed through browser settings
• Clear information has to be given and the “user concerned has given his or her consent”

Summarising What We’ve Got

What we’ve arrived at is a set of words which are so wide open to interpretation that in the case of this directive, the issue is not the directive itself — but how that directive is implemented locally. It is entirely possible for governments to say that consent must be given via an “opt-in” or via an “opt-out”. The same conundrum existed over email legislation when that was updated some years ago and in fact the European Parliament considered enforcing the “Opt In” approach in this case too.

How The Implementations Can Vary?

This means that the key question for marketers when examining the treatment in different markets is to look for the opt-in requirement instead of the opt-out approach. Opt-in means that you cannot load cookies on a user’s computer unless they have previously agreed that you may do so or you choose to allow at that point.

Opt-out means that you may continue to use cookies but users must have clear information and have the obvious ability to opt-out.

The UK Implementation Approach

The UK Information Commissioner has provided some guidance to help with the interpretation and application of the coming legislation.

Firstly, the Information Commissioner gives us a real scare story:

Although devices which process personal data give rise to greater privacy and security implications than those which process data from which the individual cannot be identified, the Regulations apply to all uses of such devices, not just those involving the processing of personal data.

The Information Commissioner goes on to say “cookies…. must not be used unless the subscriber or user….is provided with clear and comprehensive information about the purposes of the storage…. and is given the opportunity to refuse the storage of, or access to, that information.”

The guidance document continues by explaining that, whilst there is no clear instructions on what has to be said, the user has to be given the opportunity to refuse the cookie. The following strong words seem to lead us in a clear direction:

The mechanism by which a subscriber or user may exercise their right to refuse continued storage should be prominent, intelligible and readily available to all, not just the most computer literate or technically aware. Where the relevant information is included in a privacy policy, for example, the policy should be clearly signposted at least on those pages where a user may enter a website.

The guidance also says that the site owner is responsible for the cookies of third parties on its site — including for instance advertisers — and those third parties would ALSO be responsible for providing the information.

In the UK, the attitude towards opt in in or out is that there is actually no requirement in the legislation either way (this means the UK is an opt-out example in practice). The guidance does point to a new area of conflict between an employer’s wish to use cookies for a particular facility and an employee’s right to privacy. (I don’t get that one — how can an employee’s right to privacy on their work computer take precedence over the employer’s wish to perform a certain task?).

So, we can conclude that:

• Arguing that the data is anonymous will not be a sufficient defence for collecting the data or not seeking consent
• The user has to be provided with clear and concise information.
• The opportunity to deny consent has to exist
• There needs to be clear signposting on the page about the use of cookies anywhere where the user may “enter a website”.
• Third party cookies are of equal concern
• Cookies need to be deleted when no longer needed

Best Practice Cookie Code for Pan-European Web Marketers

Here’s what I think marketers targeting the whole of Europe should do:

• 1. Assume the worst and that the legislation is going to land in its toughest form somewhere – at the moment this means very strong transparency and declaration but opt-out — including in Germany (We will keep a close eye on this one)
• 2. Provide very clear and concise guidance on the which cookies are used and what they are used for including those from third parties
• 3. Provide the Cookie guidance on every single landing page
• 4. Delete cookies that are not required after a session is complete — and declare any that remain on the user’s computer and for what purpose they remain for
• 5. Rather than providing a “Privacy” policy — include a “badge” perhaps entitled “Cookies Used on This Site” which lists all cookies in use and what their purpose is

Will the Cookie Survive?

Most certainly the Cookie has a future but it’s use will need to be much more open and transparent from now on. Cookie’s in general have been abused by some organisations — including tracking systems which leave a cookie behind and continue feeding data after a user’s visit to the original cookie source site has ended.

It is my view that the “Opt-in” will remain the way that cookies are handled — and that if changes on transparency are made, control taken over third party cookies — then the Cookie will thrive and continue to deliver value in the future.

No related posts.

Russian market-leading search engine Yandex, has opened up access to a Latin-alphabet index it has been compiling for the last two years with most content in the English language. A statement from Yandex explained that the principle objective is [...]]]> Russian market-leading search engine Yandex, has opened up access to a Latin-alphabet index it has been compiling for the last two years with most content in the English language. A statement from Yandex explained that the principle objective is to provide Latin-alphabet results to Russian searchers, “web users in Russia look for, first and foremost, locally relevant information in their own language, with foreign websites being only an extension to local search results. However, it may happen so that the user wants to receive an answer specifically from a foreign website. Yandex can now satisfy this need in only one click.”

According to the Yandex statement they will index content in whatever Latin-alphabet language is searched for by Russian users who search roughly 12-15% of the time using Latin-alphabet searches. They claim they are not indexing the whole web or going into direct global competition with Google. However, as English will definitely lead the way on this – it does mean they will rub up more directly agains their number one Russian threat – Google.ru.

Google has always had the advantage of giving Russian searchers the option of finding content in languages other than Russian which has made them attractive for the more internationally-minded Russians or those seeking technology. Yandex now provides the option to search and find content in Russian or English – and if the best results are in English these can easily be translated back into Russian with Russian results being found at the same time.

At the same time, they’ve also created a Latin-alphabet version of the normally Russian-alphabet search engine at Yandex.com – which means that as of today they have entered the market place in competition with Google as well as giving English-speaking users more awareness of their technology. The battle for pre-eminence in Russia has been hot for years with Yandex maintaining its position at the top of market though with occasional strong approaches – so this can be seen as an aggressive defensive move.

Currently, they have four billion pages indexed in Latin-alphabet languages.

No related posts.

The Financial Times reports today that David Wei, Chief Executive of Alibaba.com, has revealed that George Soros has become one of the organisation’s largest shareholders. Mr. Wei also told the FT that Alibaba intends to buy out Yahoo’s [...]]]> The Financial Times reports today that David Wei, Chief Executive of Alibaba.com, has revealed that George Soros has become one of the organisation’s largest shareholders. Mr. Wei also told the FT that Alibaba intends to buy out Yahoo’s stake in the Alibaba parent company. The Financial Times makes the common mistake of describing Alibaba.com as a ‘Yellow Pages’ type organisation which it is not. Unlike the ‘Yellow Pages’ concept, it is not targeted at consumers. The other key difference is that it is used by both buyers and sellers making it much more akin to a dating site for businesses who need to find partners, agents, distributors, manufacturers or stockists around the world.

Currently Yahoo owns 40 percent of the Alibaba company which also runs Yahoo in China. Alibaba.com has been working hard at its global presence and has aggressively developed its U.K. operation and opened up to India and Turkey.

So what is Alibaba?

In addition to running Yahoo China, Alibaba owns Taobao.com, which is its auction platform similar to eBay. Alibaba.com, which features the slogan “Global trade starts here” beneath its logo, also runs Chinese-language (china.alibaba.com) and Japanese-language (Alibaba.co.jp) sites. Founded in 1999, it now has more than 40 million registered users, all of whom are focused on doing business-to-business (B2B) trades.

No related posts.

Greg Jarboe’s status as a great public speaker was confirmed yesterday when the International Search Summit audience voted Greg as its very first ‘Medallion Speaker Award’. WebCertain, which hosts the Summit, introduced the Medallion Award to give audiences [...]]]> Greg Jarboe’s status as a great public speaker was confirmed yesterday when the International Search Summit audience voted Greg as its very first ‘Medallion Speaker Award’. WebCertain, which hosts the Summit, introduced the Medallion Award to give audiences more influence over the quality of speakers they wish to see. The award is voted on by members of the audience before the close of the summit, rapidly counted and then immediately presented to the speaker at the close of the day.

Greg, who literally ‘wrote the book’ on video optimisation, presented a case study on the Voyage Channel – or Voyage.tv – demonstrating how to get the most from YouTube.com. He explained that “Right now YouTube is an amazingly good deal!” pointing out the cost of advertising on YouTube.com is significantly lower in cost that mainstream Google itself. The recent changes of the Google interface also featured in his presentation with Greg taking that view that these had only helped raise the important of video to the marketer.

Greg is the very first winner of the Medallion Award but as such will feature permanently on the International Search Summit website – to be joined by later speakers who also deliver excellence to the event’s audiences. Personally, I’m delighted Greg was the winner solely because he’s such a nice genuine guy and I’ve personally enjoyed listening to Greg speak for years! Well done Greg!!

Greg Jarboe speaks to the International Search Summit London May 2010

No related posts.

As the final printer deliveries for Thursday’s International Search Summit trundle through the reception below where I’m sitting, flights are boarded in the US and Europe and final polishing of presentations and content is shaping up, we’re looking forward to [...]]]> As the final printer deliveries for Thursday’s International Search Summit trundle through the reception below where I’m sitting, flights are boarded in the US and Europe and final polishing of presentations and content is shaping up, we’re looking forward to probably the most exciting – and innovative – International Search Summit yet.

The International Search Summit began because the major search conferences were not giving lots of time over to specific international search issues – to cover international pay per click and SEO in one session at a major conference is simply not going to give it the airtime it deserves. The reasons the conferences have always taken this view is that their delegates did not seem to be demanding international content. The difficulty with assessing demand for international training and guidance from delegates who bought is that it doesn’t really tell you what those who didn’t buy, thought.

The very first International Search Summit was in May of 2008. Despite the recession, two very successful events were held in 2009 leading to this week’s current ‘innovations’ themed event – the fifth in the London series. An event was also held in Oslo and an event is to take place this year in Berlin alongside www.Localizationworld.com.

Besides covering making an SME brand into a global player, mobile in Europe and video optimisation in multiple languages, this events features a further innovation – Medallion speakers.

Medallion Speakers

The main reason why delegates fly from Paris, New York and Miami to attend the Summit is because of the careful attention which goes into selecting the best speakers for the event. It’s a common complaint of delegates at conferences that they were disappointed with the level or quality of content presented. The summit has won plaudits for its single track, focused subject matter AND the quality of its speakers. But we won’t ever stop looking to drive the quality higher.

At this event for the first time, the evaluation forms from delegates will be collected even before the end of the even. These forms will ask the delegates to choose a ‘Medallion Speaker’ – in other words the speaker who contributed the best value in terms of content for the attendees. At the close of the event, this speaker will be presented with a small award but given the huge thanks of the team for helping to make the event the success it is.

New Speakers

Each International Search Summit features new – but usually highly-experienced speakers – and this event is no exception. The new speakers this time are:-

• Steve Capone – working now at Nokia but hugely experienced in search terms.
• Mark Neal - presents a true Cinderella story of growing a small UK business into a world leader – namely Armagard
• Gillian Muessig – New to ISS – but definitely not new to search – Gillian is co-founder of SEOMOZ.org with son Rand Fishkin. For ISS, she’ll be focusing on India.
  Bruce Daisley – hails from the world’s second largest search engine and it moves – youtube.com.
• Greg Jarboe – probably the most entertaining speaker on the search scene and yet the entertainment is full of insight. Here Greg follows up his recent book on video optimisation.
• Jon Myers – has been around in search as long as… well as long as really. Has worked for several different agencies and speaks at conferences around the world.

Of course, a number of speakers are not new as they have delivered great content in the past and so we’re having them back again! I can’t wait – it’s just so thrilling to get to this point.

Limited Seat Availability

If you’re thinking of booking – note that seat availability is now limited – but at the time of writing there are still seats left. You can book here.

No related posts.

Since November last year it has been possible to use characters that were not formerly part of the Latin character set used for creating web addresses and URLs. For example, the German umlaut – a character with two dots [...]]]> Since November last year it has been possible to use characters that were not formerly part of the Latin character set used for creating web addresses and URLs. For example, the German umlaut – a character with two dots above it such as the “ü” which should normally appear in my name – could not be used in the URL address until the changes in the Autumn. Yesterday, ICANN turned on the newest three domain names and the first to use a script other than Latin – namely Arabic – to provide local script domains for Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arabic Emirates.

The new domains (which you will only see if you have Arabic script enabled on your PC) are:-

• Egypt مصر
• Saudi Arabia السعودية
• United Arab Emirates امارات

These new local domains – or ccTLDs (Country Code Top Level Domains) will prove highly useful for international SEO purposes and once these domains are fully available to buy it is highly recommended that you acquire your brand names, trademarks and country names in these domains to protect and use them in the Middle East. Of course, as these are Arabic which is a right-to-left language – they will actually appear on the left in the browser address bar before the actual site name!

Oddly missing from this launch is the рф Russian domain name for the Russian Federation which was ‘delegated’ ie approved at the same time as the Arabic versions. This domain will no doubt be the very next to go live.

In the first instance, ICANN is processing 21 local domains which span 11 different languages including Chinese, Arabic, Russian, Sinhalese, Tamil and Thai. Initially, domains that are approved must match country or territory names – but ICANN has plans to go much further including launching new generic top level domains which use the new character set. Domainers watch out, the dot com may soon be available in Russian, Chinese and Arabic in a transliterated form.

ICANN believes that these new local script variant domains and URLs will create new ways for end users to find and produce information online, provide more choices to registrants and provide new opportunities for investment and new businesses. ICANN also says that international domain names or IDNs will reach out to wider parts of the globe and be more ‘inclusive’. Some systems and applications will need to be updated in order to work with them.

The BBC also reported this story – but omitted to clarifty that these scripts have been usable since November and that it is just the domain endings which have gone live today.

See also John Yunker’s piece on the first full length non-Latin URL:
http://www.globalbydesign.com/blog/2010/05/06/the-dawn-of-a-new-url/

No related posts.

The Official Google Blog has been restating the policy of Google at handling government interference in its products noting that Google products from search and Blogger to YouTube and Google Docs have been blocked in 25 of the 100 [...]]]> The Official Google Blog has been restating the policy of Google at handling government interference in its products noting that Google products from search and Blogger to YouTube and Google Docs have been blocked in 25 of the 100 countries where Google offers its services.

The post explains that there are differences between how content is treated that is either linked to by Google search or hosted on a platform such as Blogger. Search is apparently the least restricted because Google is not taking responsibility for hosting the content. It also implies that censorship from democratically elected governments is more acceptable than that from undemocratically elected governments.

The post’s author, Rachel Whetstone, the Vice President of Global Communications and Public Affairs is concerned about the impact of censorship in various countries around the world. In restating the Google policy, she writes, “We have a bias in favor of people’s right to free expression. We are driven by a belief that more information means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.”

Stirring stuff indeed and these are indeed difficult waters to navigate, but freedom of expression comes with a certain responsbility. This is especially true when you are the doorway to people’s access to information in many languages and many cultures with many different histories around the globe.

For instance, the post actually gives examples of where Google is willingly censoring content in order to comply with local legislation. These include:

• Child pornography
• Links to certain copyrighted material
• Spam
• Malware
• Sensitive personal information such as credit card numbers

Says Google further, “This is especially true in countries such as China and Vietnam that do not have democratic processes through which citizens can challenge censorship mandates.”

Examples where Google is co-operating with governments to comply with local legislation are included but there is note of “We do this but we’re not happy with it” in the tone of the post because the point is highlighted that this only applies to the local version of Google search – not Google.com.

The examples that are given where censorship is exercised on the local search engine include pro-nazism content which it is illegal to publish in Germany and France (and actually Austria but that’s not mentioned) and for YouTube Google does not allow videos which are insulting to Mustafa Ataturk – the legendary founder of modern Turkey – to be displayed in Turkey.

Google’s policy, however, has holes. Pro-nazi material can be found on Google.com – because that is uncensored – but not on Google.de because that is considered local and is therefore censored. But this doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Content from both is hosted and served typically from outside Germany and is available within Germany which means that if you go to Google.com within Germany you can access pro-nazi material. Equally, Google has the capability and routinely filters the sites it selects to show locally within the ‘web’ search of Google.com. so does this stance really respect local laws – noting that in this example Germany most certainly is a democratic country.

Google itself censors material it defines as ’spam’ – which is difficult to define at the best of times -so is Google’s stance not really a political statement of itself. I fear Google will not be able to sustain this rather ‘holier than thou’ position and its commercial strength – as in China – may suffer in the long run.

No related posts.

It’s already been a few years since Multilingual-Search.com emerged from a Blogger account to become the serious news source it has become – thanks in large part to the regular contributions from people such as Sante Achille, Motoko Hunt, Kristjan [...]]]> It’s already been a few years since Multilingual-Search.com emerged from a Blogger account to become the serious news source it has become – thanks in large part to the regular contributions from people such as Sante Achille, Motoko Hunt, Kristjan Mar Hauksson and Nick Wilsdon. Well now we’re on version 4 – the very latest version with a number of innovations.

We’ve moved reporting to cover a wider range of topics, we’re adding new writers all the time and we’re making it easier for the highly talented authors who write for us, to turn their efforts into enquiries for speaking at events and generating consultancy projects.

If this is your first visit – welcome. If you’re returning – welcome back. In both cases, please wander round the site and check out the latest innovations – then please feed in your comments so we can see what you think! And thanks for stopping by!

No related posts.

Google’s announcement that it is re-directing Chinese users to uncensored Chinese-language results at Google Hong Kong is an historic turning point when one ‘empire’ sees its apparently unassailable position as no longer certain. In China it is hugely important [...]]]> Google’s announcement that it is re-directing Chinese users to uncensored Chinese-language results at Google Hong Kong is an historic turning point when one ‘empire’ sees its apparently unassailable position as no longer certain. In China it is hugely important to maintain ‘face’ and not to embarass another party. Google’s move could either be a convenient way for China to get itself off the political hook – essentially what Google is gambling – however, the Chinese goverment is just a likely to see this as a loss of face and to begin rapidly blocking Google’s Hong Kong results.

The primary Chinese language in Hong Kong is actually Canonese which uses the traditional Chinese alphabet – not the simplified version used by mainland China Mandarin speakers. Note that these are different languages NOT simply different alphabets – though Mandarin is also recognised in Hong Kong as a language. What this means is that running Mandarin results via the Google.com.hk page is clearly a ‘workaround’ and not what you would normally expect to see there.

Politically, you have to sympathise with Google’s predicament – see Google in China – a Timeline – but it leaves a hole in Google’s claims to be global and in its ability to achieve leadership in all markets. Strategically, it also leaves Google with more limited scope for development in Asia – unless of course, the Chinese government decides not to block Google Hong Kong at all.

Google’s inability to come to terms with the Chinese Government means that it may have gifted the world’s largest internet market to a search engine which ranks alongside the Microsoft/Yahoo partnership as its greatest global threat – namely Baidu and potentially at the same time to the Microsoft-Yahoo partnership. According to the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC), by the end of December the number of Chinese internet users had reached some 384 million or 28.9% of the Chinese population and the growth rate during 2009 was 28.9%. In January 2009, Comscore released data showing that China had overtaken the US in size of internet population with China representing 17.8% of the total internet population – that percentage will almost certainly be signficantly higher at the end of 2009. All of these figures combined mean that:

“In the worst case scenario where all of Google China’s users switch, or are forced to switch to Baidu, Google has gifted up to 2.25% of the global search market to Baidu.”

2.25%, which is my estimate of the potential share of the global population affected, isn’t the end of the world. Nonetheless, as the following charts show, it would raise Baidu’s global share from Comscore’s 6.54% to 8.79% and give Baidu second place globally ahead of Yahoo in Comscore’s league table of share of searches globally. Baidu drops back to third place if Microsoft and Yahoo are combined.

How damaging is this for Google?

Whilst the numbers don’t seem to suggest that much of an impact – this development is damaging for Google in a number of ways; firstly, for the first time it has had to admit defeat in a major global market and accept that, for some considerable time, it is not going to achieve the top spot everywhere. That may well have an impact in markets where Google is competing with other local engines to achieve the top position – such as Russia.

No doubt Google will redouble its efforts in Russia with the China debacle behind it investing more time and resources to ensure it doesn’t let this other major global market, which has been stalling its global progress, escape from its clutches. Even though the censorship issue is not at stake in Russia, the events in China may also bring forth further investment in Yandex, the Russian number one, because investment is about confidence and psychology and it will no longer seem inevitable that Google must be number one everywhere.

The second reason is much more practical in that Baidu will pretty much have the Chinese market to itself and will be able to develop in the knowledge that Google has complied with a safety net which the Chinese government have thrown around it, even if that wasn’t the prime motivation. It will be able to focus its attentions on markets other than China – or potentially to other alliances.

The biggest threat of all for Google is that Baidu signs up to an alliance with Microsoft. We’ve heard comments from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer that Microsoft will continue to work in China within Chinese laws and regulations. There are some very good reasons for that including the fact that much of the work for Bing was completed by developers in China – many of whom previously worked for Baidu. There has already been a minor alliance between Microsoft and Baidu whereby Baidu sells advertising on Microsoft sites in China. This alliance is inconsequential – but a broader alliance across more markets could be potentially very attractive to both Microsoft and Baidu.

“An alliance between Baidu and Microsoft’s Bing would pose a considerable threat to Google and is far from inconceivable.”

Why would Google withdraw search from China?

The public rationale for Google taking this step is a moral and political stance. It also plays well to audiences in the US and outside China who can see Google as standing up to the Chinese government and putting freedom of speech first. But there are other factors at play here – you might call them “conveniences”.

Firstly, China consumes considerable resources in both time and personnel. But it doesn’t pay fantastic returns because the prices per click can be compared to Baidu which has higher volumes and sometimes lower cost per click prices. So, whilst Google hasn’t publicly said that that effort simply isn’t worth it in China (since it’s about freedom of speech right!) it may actually be losing money in China. Closing Google China most probably will only help the Google bottom line.

It’s also true that Google has had a pretty chequered history of chasing Baidu with moments of increased share – and then drops in share. It certainly cannot be said that it was close on the heels of the market leader as at no point has that been the case. The chances are the it would have taken years for Google to follow its current path and win. In fact, it couldn’t really win. So the Google executive team may well be taking a calculated gamble that by pulling out of China, they will win greater success in other markets, gain significant public support and appeal and turn themselves into a desirable to the Chinese public who may go to any lengths to gain access to an uncensored source of information.

“Google becomes defender of the free against the Chinese oppressers, no longer Google the evil doer privacy invader.”

How will Baidu react?

Of course, Baidu will work to capture the share given up by Google. It will indeed be a measure of Baidu’s strength to see if it can gain the majority of that share and strengthen its position – if it should fail to do so then will not be good for Baidu going forwards. Furthermore Baidu has aspirations internationally. It has already opened operations in Japan early last year where it has some connections with local player Rakuten and has made noises in the past threatening to move to Europe. Realistically, however, with the growth in the Asian market – it is most likely to develop successfully in Asia based on its strong Chinese base. An alliance with Microsoft, however, could be very attractive to increase its importance rapidly in the western world.

Where does Google not achieve number one spot ?

The markets where Google is currently not first include:

• China
• Korea
• Japan
• Russia
• Czech Republic
• Hong Kong
• Taiwan

Putting this all in perspective

It’s worth noting that Google is not the only western organisation to have had difficulties in China. Amazon has only 8% market share in its field, Ebay has already left the country and Facebook has been blocked there.

What should Google China advertisers do?

Firstly, stay calm since there are always ways to deal with this. WebCertain is currently contacting its affected paid search advertisers to discuss moving their Google China budget to Baidu should the Chinese government block access to Google Hong Kong. Many are not hugely affected as their budgets in China are already largely spent with Baidu in the first instance.

If Baidu isn’t the centrepiece of your strategy, then it makes sense to think about making this change now. Baidu can be targeted using both paid search – with a pay per click programme increasingly similar to Google’s. Equally, Baidu has high volume traffic and, if the far east is in your targeting, then you should consider investing into SEO for Baidu.

If you’re using Google China’s self-service facilities – then you may not be able to make the move to Baidu and these type of facilities are not available yet in a comparable way. You would need to contact an agency in China or to work with a multinational global agency to get you moving.

If you’ve been thinking about moving into China – this shouldn’t make any difference to you unless you’re thinking of launching a search engine there! You just won’t be able to do it directly alongside your Google activity.

No related posts.

Facebook has announced the opening of an office in Hyderabad in southern India to support the roll out of Facebook to the large India-based population. Already Facebook has 8 million users in India. The company is now looking [...]]]> Facebook has announced the opening of an office in Hyderabad in southern India to support the roll out of Facebook to the large India-based population. Already Facebook has 8 million users in India. The company is now looking to recruit online sales and operations teams which are to be formed there.

Don Faul, Director of Global Online Operations said in an official announcement on the Facebook blog, “By having multiple support centers in a variety of time zones, we can provide better round-the-clock, multi-lingual support. The new offices come at a significant time in our international growth. 70% of people using Facebook are outside the US and are accessing the service from more than 70 languages.”

Facebook recently also opened a new office in Austin, Texas and has operations in Palo Alto, Calfornia and Dublin, Ireland.

No related posts.

Bryan Eisenberg certainly thinks that ‘Conversion Optimisation’ is the best thing since sliced bread. In fact he’s just left his company to focus on being a marketing speaker covering this ‘critical’ aspect of marketing and recently demonstrated his thinking [...]]]> Bryan Eisenberg certainly thinks that ‘Conversion Optimisation’ is the best thing since sliced bread. In fact he’s just left his company to focus on being a marketing speaker covering this ‘critical’ aspect of marketing and recently demonstrated his thinking through his excellent Search Engine Strategies keynote “21 Secrets of Top Converting Websites”. But what is ‘conversion optimisation’ and how does this fit in internationally? I’ve gone into some depth on Bryan’s views in this article – because I found them particularly useful myself including making some changes to www.webcertain.com. But I would like to point out that the meaty comments here are all Bryan’s – and the smart ass less useful ones are mine! My number one tip is ‘Buy Bryan’s books!”

Bryan is certainly a data-lover. Unlike those who in a recent survey said that they would rather manage without their partner for a week than their laptop – Bryan would certainly sacrifice his Mac but don’t ever try and take the data away. Not only is data the basis of conversion optimisation it is also the key to getting senior management support – always a challenge for those working in the online marketing space. He revels in being provocative with his audiences at conferences with statements like “You don’t have a traffic problem” at an SEO gig where the principal focus is around traffic – with yes a casual nod towards conversion.

Get aligning those objectives

Bryan points to the relatively low conversion rates on most sites which typically run at 3% or less and yet marketing teams focus on expanding traffic rather than digging into site performance so as to convert more visitors into customers. To justify an investment in starting to test, he suggests calculating the returns that would be made in the bottom line by making a small improvement in conversion rate and to sing Bryan’s own mantra – and the title of one his books – “Always be testing!”

But becoming data driven is not just about dashboards but more along the lines of Demming’s ‘total quality management’ as improving quality will actually reduce expenses. Says Bryan, “All the big brands you can name from Google and Dell to Xerox and IBM have always focused on total quality management – that’s why they’re as big and successful as they are.” Amazon, for instance, didn’t get to become a global brand by selling books, they did it by aligning customers and business objectives for years and by paying attention to detail and trimming the fat. Amazon not only tests things that work, but things they’ve tested many times before just to see if there or further improvements to gain or if their customers behaviour has changed. Dell tested the words ‘learn more’ against ‘help me choose’ with the result that ‘help me choose’ drove more conversions through the site. They’re all doing it because it makes a difference.


Getting a champion is a good idea!

But where do you start especially if you’re not a global player and have more limited resources. With passion, Bryan stresses, “Just test what you can test – start somewhere, anywhere. If you can only test headlines then test headlines.” It’s easier to double your conversion rate than to generate more traffic. The first step is to check how much of your budget is actually invested in testing and whether that really makes sense. It used to be expensive to undertake effective testing on a site but that’s no longer the case. With product’s such as the Google Website Optimiser coming on to the market and offering facilities absolutely for free – there are no longer any good excuses not to get on with it.

Key is not thinking that you have to make a list of all the tests and then run them thinking that you’ve tackled the issue. The secret is not the first or the second test, but building testing into the company processes and making it a way of life. But you do need a champion who is going to live, breathe and own the process or it will be difficult to get things off the ground. Look for the right creative resources, which might possibly be those you have internally, but it’s more probably wise to go and get external designers to work on your testing to get some degree of objectivity.

Who are you trying to persuade?

Perfection is sometimes a barrier to getting people into testing. (Perfection is sometimes also a barrier to SEO or indeed anything!) People often start by trying to make their planned test absolutely perfect rather than just getting out and getting a test in place. Equally “Don’t do slice and dice optimisation,” says Bryan. What he means by this is that you shouldn’t look at all of the individual components of a page taking each element and testing it. You need to look at the whole page and test its components within the context and role they play within the page and ultimately the page design needs to ‘hang together’ dude as a consistent whole. If getting testing started on the main site is really tough, then you can begin by picking some pay per click terms to get things going. But don’t pick the biggest and most important or you might be taking too big a risk with your first experiment.

The secret sauce of the Eisenbergs – Bryan works with his brother Jeffrey – is called ‘Persuasion Architecture’ which Bryan and Jeffrey launched, developed and trademarked some time ago. Put in the simplest of terms, the persuasion architecture approach consists of answering three key questions:

1. Who are we trying to persuade?
2. What action do we want them to take?
3. What action do they want to take?

What type are you?

Notice anything? There is a noticeable conflict set up in the questions themselves which if you’re sharp you’ve already spotted? Does the customer actually want to carry out the same action you want them to! Now I’ve not seen the detail behind the persuasion architecture idea – but I’m guessing that this conflict between what the customer wants – and the marketer – is the basis for the Eisenberg solution. Part of the solution is also that people are different. No they really are – I’ve noticed that.

Bryan refers to personality typing systems – such as Myers-Briggs – to come up with four core personality types which it is wise to accommodate in your marketing planning. (I have to say, as a user of the Myers-Briggs approach for some years, it’s a relief that there are only four types – rather than the 16 in the MB system and for those who’re interested I’m an ENTP). These four personality types are also connected to Bryan’s answer to my questions relating to how the conversion optimisation approach can be applied internationally which I’ll go into in moment.

Working with segments or personnae

The four basic personality types which Bryan describes as having a significant meaning for web marketers are:-

1. Competitive
2. Spontaneous
3. Methodical
4. Humanistic

The names of the different types are pretty much self-explanatory – but in his presentation Bryan proves, with the use of eye-tracking studies from the famous usability guru – Jakob Nielsen – that these different personality types do actually demonstrate distinct behaviours provoding proof of concept. Methodical types needs to become experts themselves, the spontaneous love pretty pictures, humanistics adore ‘about us’ pages and reviews whereas competitives make quick decisions and jump to conclusions.

Knowing these different types and behaviours is significant for people working in online marketing because knowing how people gather information informs how they should be addressed by websites. Typically online these groups are known as personae – though marketers for years have been calling them segments. (Same thing – different name. We can’t have web activities sounding like they were invented before the web can we?)

Thinking about conversion internationally

These personae are manna from heaven for multivariate testers – that’s the people who make many many changes to test a site very quickly – sometimes testing millions of elements at once. Knowing the types means they can see who they match up with different elements of a page – and no, the fact that there are four key types does not mean that you have to re-launch four different versions of your site – thankfully. What it does mean is looking at the site four times to see what messages and impacts will be delivered to the different types of visitor.

As we are just in the midst of making some changes to the WebCertain.com navigation system, I threw this idea at our marketing team and, interestingly, it did make a difference to what content we showed at the top and how we described things. Thanks Bryan. (These changes launch in a couple of weeks).

Offline, I asked Bryan how he saw these personnae relating to conversion optimisation à l’internationale. Bryan’s view is that the same personnae apply worldwide but they may well differ between markets and industries so you have to do your research. In fact, he points out that the Myers-Briggs types already accommodate these differences in that it is already known that the types vary by nationality and culture. What this means is that a water pump manufacturer may actually find that the personnae are pretty similar worldwide (more typical of business-to-business than business-to-consumer). They are less likely to have ’spontaneous’ web visitors than ‘methodicals’. A fashion retailer targeting consumers will likely spot many more differences.

Persuasion is not an event

Bryan’s presentations are full of great examples. In one stunning case, he shows a graphic which was tested resulting in a very small change which – he says – generated over $25 million of extra business for client. (I couldn’t help wondering at this point how and how much Bryan had actually charged his client but didn’t dare ask. Percentage share?) Both macro and mico actions are important. You not only need to understand the micro actions – such as why aren’t they clicking my jolly button – but also to look at the macro elements which is more to do with connecting the marketing messages with site journeys and processes. So, for instance, if insurance company Geico, runs a compaign targeted at ‘competitives’ where they are able to fill in the minimum of details quickly, don’t follow that up with a contact form with lots of additional mandatory fields.

Above all persuasion is a process not an event. Always ask yourself on every page why your customers should want to buy from you. One of Bryan’s books is called “Waiting For Your Cat to Bark” – so I was not particularly surprised to hear web-user-customers described as bloodhounds. There are two reasons why Bryan uses this analogy. One is that web users are exceptionally goal oriented – this is something which has been shown by study after study which I’ve personally consumed. But on top of that, usability folks like to talk about ‘information scent’ a lot – which fits the bloodhound well. Information scent was first understood by the Xerox team at the PARC or the Palo Alto Research Center.

“Watch out” page load speed is coming

55% of all people leave by the second click and 17% by the third click. With conversion rates typically running at no more than two to three per cent it stands to reason that action is needed. Says Bryan pointing at the audience in a rather ‘The Apprentice you’re fired’ manner, “If a keyword is relevant, the keyword doesn’t fail to convert you do.” So now you know.

Usability testing doesn’t necessarily mean long set-up cycles and expense either. By getting five testers from an organisation such as www.usertesting.com to run through your site trying to meet certain set – you can gain more information than you can from all of your web analytics data for a month. Now that’s some claim! These tools are also very powerful and easy to use.

As we all know, Google has laid out its stall for 2010 with very clear messages that page load times will be more important for both SEO and pay per click. They are not saying exactly what this will mean in practice but the “watch out” message is coming across loud and clear. Naturally Bryan is all in favour of this approach and users really DO NOT like slow loading pages wherever they are. He recommends looking at images on your site as this is a relatively easy fix and yet can consume lots of download time.

Landing pages have an anatomy?

You can do a speed test on your site at www.websiteoptimization.com – the speed tool is here. You need to bear in mind that interaction, a desirable for web marketers, means that users need to see responses in under one second.

Bryan recommends using smush.it – which is now a tool within the Yahoo developer network – to reduce the images. It quickly provides a reduced size image with a link to the file already appropriately ’smushed’ ie reduced to an acceptable web size.

Go figure – landing pages have their own anatomy. Is it serious doctor? Bryan explains that you can pretty much predict the common elements of pages and identify the main sections. There’s usually a logo, a headline, an offer, some copy and calls to action. (Actually the calls to action are usually missing or below the fold in my experience).

Page components and their features

But once you know the anatomy you can start to structure the way you’re going to test including looking at whether the page components play their role well – or are they just freeloaders? Ask yourself these questions:

• Is it relevant?
• Is the quality good?
• Where is it on the page?
• What’s it next to?
• What stands out?

The features of the page components you are testing should look at:

• Buttons
• Wording
• Shape
• Size
• Style
• Icon
• Color
• Legibility
• Location

Think about building confidence

Buttons are the easiest to test – and can make significant differences. And as for forms – just keep on testing them – that’s what all the big boys do and with good reason. Customer needs change, the competition such as forms and other competing websites improve and we should never forget that users have a choice. One of the things that influences their choice is the website’s functionality and it’s ease of use.

When testing forms the things to consider are the size’s of parts of the form including buttons and fields, the field’s and what they do, the field labels, benefits shown on the form page (yes there should be some) and confidence building materials on the page such as testimonials or client comments!

Every detail in a page matters and it is particularly important to ‘build confidence’ in the page using third party contributions, user-generated content, testimonials and resources to answer specific questions. Oh and don’t forget to look professional! It’s best if every page wears a suit and tie! Most especially give assurances directly at the point of action.

Looking at things from different angles

When Bryan says ’speak the right language’ he really means use the language with which your customer has empathy in terms of tone, formality, technical level and so on. But he wouldn’t disagree with me at all when I say that when working internationally it’s really not a good idea to skimp on the content quality or expect the user to put up with reading only partial content in their own language and then having to go to a English language form. Whoops.

Pictures of the product matter. Wow does Bryan really have to say that surely that’s obvious – er no it isn’t in fact. The quality of that picture counts but does it answer the potential buyer’s questions and anyway what are those questions is the general picture pitfall. it might be, for instance, different angles of the product if, say, it was a boot. Or you might get better sales if you have pictures of all the different colours you sell that attractive polo shirt in.

“Test, test, test”

Sorry Flash fans, Bryan isn’t a member of your club. He reckons that changing that animated flash banner to a static one with bullets can actually reduce the abandonment rate. You should also avoid using we-we too much in the content of your website – the Eisenbergs have once built a tool which pulses electricity through your chair if you’ve overdone it. (Sorry Bryan – I have a problem with this one because I use ‘we’ all the time in my copywriting but as the voice of the client as in “We need to get our act together on international SEO. That’s a challenge for many but now you’re in the right place.” Never forget to show off the character of your brand – though you might find it easier to work with third parties to give you clear objectivity on this one.

The key point of everything Bryan says is “test, test, test” – it’s the only way to get close to your customers’ needs – and that includes those in other countries. You have to adopt the testing mentality if you’re ambitious and want to be the next Amazon. I’d accept the next Amazonette – but still.

No related posts.

Whenever the topic of ‘international SEO’ is discussed – one of the very first subjects people want to learn and talk about is which domains to use and how to structure a website at the very top level. In [...]]]> Whenever the topic of ‘international SEO’ is discussed – one of the very first subjects people want to learn and talk about is which domains to use and how to structure a website at the very top level. In other words, whether to use local domains (ccTLDs), global domains especially the dot com OR sub-domains. Whilst SES London is without doubt the most international of the Search Engine Strategies’ conferences globally thanks to the relatively easy access to London for the whole of Europe, inevitably the conference has so much ground to cover, one session on global SEO cannot possibly go into detail.

The question about domains also crops up in other sessions and yesterday’s first day at SES London was no exception. The debate spilled over into the Industry Specific panel which I moderated immediately after presenting on the Global SEO panel. The whole point of this debate is related to ‘Geo-targeting’

What Is Geo-targeting?

What we mean by geo-targeting is making sure that, for example, MyFrenchSite appears:

• 1. In the ‘Web’ results even if a French searcher goes to Google.com but after Google has filtered the results for the French market to present more relevant local results
• 2. In the ‘Pages francophones’ radio button which means that Google has detected that the pages are published in the French language – regardless of which country they might be targeted at
• 3. In the ‘Pages : France’ radio button which means that Google believes that those pages are dedicated to the French geography – whether or not they are actually physically present there

Why Does Geo-Targeting Matter?

There are three main reasons why we worry about Geo-targeting:

• 1. To target the right pages at the right audience.
• 2. To give the French pages the best chance of ranking in the country to which they relate and in the various radio buttons
• 3. To reduce the likelihood of duplication causing a problem for my site.

Making sure the right audience sees the right pages could be significant for a marketer if, for instance, they sell different products or products at different prices to the Austrians and the Germans. A duplication problem – potentially caused by not taking care over the geo-targeting issue – would likely mean that the Austrians would see only German pages.

As far as the radio buttons is concerned, most people should now be able to examine in their analytics how much traffic they get from the different Google radio buttons. We’ve certainly been seeing this data for at least two years and the conclusion that there can be significant volumes of traffic going through searches with the radio buttons set. In the Global SEO panel, I showed a slide with 15% going into the language button and 10% the country. These figures are purely typical figures as it varies significantly from sector to sector and – even – from keyword to keyword.

So What Are Our Options?

1. Use a dot com or other top level domain and set the geographic location in Webmaster Central
2. Use a dot com or other top level domain and host locally
3. Use a local country domain

In the Industry Specific session both Dave Naylor and Rob Kerry put an additional spanner in the works by saying that Google no longer takes account of the IP address and therefore local hosting non longer has any value. I think that Dave and Rob are thinking about this thread on the use of IP addresses on the Google support forums which was also referred to by SEOMOZ recently.

All Google are saying here is that if there is a Webmaster Central setting or a local domain, then they will ignore the location of the IP address. If these signals are not present, then they will indeed still use the IP address location to help them decide where to ‘bucket’ the site.

Basically, this is a decision-making tree in which Google takes a hierarchical look at different signals:

1. Is Webmaster Central geo set?> Yes>> Look no further – ignore IP addresses – ignore geographic location of links.
2. Is Webmaster Central geo set?> No>> – Is this a dot com? >> Yes >> Check IP address for location – Check geographic indicator of links
3. This is a local domain>> Look no further – ignore IP addresses – Ignore location of links

The above is intended as a guide to make this confusing area a little clearer as this area is still more complex than shown above. For one thing when working with a dot com you then need to decide between sub-domains or folders upon which you plan to set Webmaster Centrals geo-targeting option.

My advice is quite clearly this; If you can use local domains – do. Only sectors which find it difficult to obtain local links at all (the adult zones) should opt from choice for a dot com. You cannot set a Webmaster Central geo for a local domain – but then you don’t need to because it is a very strong signal on its own. And just to throw a further spanner into the works, I happen to believe that local hosting even for local domains also helps.

Why Choose Local Domains?

1. Clear Geo-targeted Signal

You actually need to go and buy a country code domain or ccTLD and register with a local authority. As such, the local domain has always represented the best controlled and strictest identifier of a specific geography. There are some exceptions of course, but these are mostly to do with certain domains, such as .tv (the tiny island state of Tuvalu) having found that their particular geography had a gold mine domain name it could use to generate revenue.

2. Cost of Maintaining Content v Cost of SEO

When corporations calculate the cost of making the change, they tend to give less financial value to the ongoing cost of SEO and of compensating for not having the relevant local domain. This could mean additional local hosting costs or even substantial link building to overcome the inherent disadvantages of the dot com.

3. Better Conversions Rates -People Buy Locally

Some SEOs may not see conversion factors as the most important in recommending which steps a client should take. However, I firmly believe users read URLs in the search engine results and that it has a direct impact on how many of them click on links.

4. Easier To Obtain Local Links

Having a local domain also helps in your link building programs. Other sites in the same country are much more likely to link to you if you have a local domain. But it’s especially true that they’ll be more interested in receiving links from you if you’re local—after all, they need local links too. Many local directories will only accept local domain names in any case.

5. Power-Up Internal Link Structures

Links between sites of the same dot com are less valuable, in my view, than links between truly international versions using local domains. So a site which splits its dot com into many countries has an opportunity to reap some benefits from the many different domains it now controls—subject to the normal caveats such as having quality content and offering a good experience to the user.

6. More Stability in Rankings

I can’t prove this one to you, but after more than a decade of experience I’m convinced that local domain sites tend to be more stable in results than dot coms which move up and down when search engine algorithms change.

Set Up An Effective Geo-Selector

The geo-selector—the method by which countries and languages are chosen—plays a key role in sharing link values around the site. Dot coms have an advantage here,but only because using local domains shows up the poor structure of the geo-selector. This is one of the reasons why many jump to the conclusion that dot coms are better even for international sites.

In my long experience, I can confidently say local domains are winners every time.

No related posts.

It is interesting to note that, according to Google, there are monthly 12,100 searches for the phrase “Website Translation” and only 1,000 for “International SEO”. Of course, there are other phrases of importance such as “multilingual SEO” but that’s [...]]]> It is interesting to note that, according to Google, there are monthly 12,100 searches for the phrase “Website Translation” and only 1,000 for “International SEO”. Of course, there are other phrases of importance such as “multilingual SEO” but that’s even small and actually there are a great many more varieties of website translation phrase than international SEO.

By my reckoning, that roughly means that only 8% of people who translate their website bother at any point to either consider SEO or to buy a service for it. Is that possible? Although it’s a pretty crude calculation, I’d say that figure is no exaggeration. Far more people translate than employ any kind of SEO – which is much more the cream on the cake.

Oh No It Isn’t…

Translation and the localisation industry is a much older industry than SEO with professional standards, university courses and strict regulation. Personally, I’ve lost more sleepless night over language exams than I’ve ever done over SEO or search marketing tests. The Google Adwords Professional scheme being the only thing that has really tested (more frustrating than testing actually…).

But that doesn’t mean that localisation professionals shouldn’t start to get more interested in SEO. In the case of large corporations, they are often spending the bulk of the company’s investment in content and international SEO processes should be thought about as part of the whole localisation project. Going further, decision making surrounding which content to localise in the first place – assuming that it is not ALL web-based content – should be conditioned by keyword research to determine which content it is in the company’s interests to translate.

There are two key steps to consider even before putting out an RFP:

Step One: Where to start? Research!

The place to start is at the very beginning – to quote a famous musical film. That’s the research element. If it’s the beginning of a roll-out of a new project this might be investigating the best markets to enter. More likely, there’s already some knowledge and some experience and its more important to consider which products to focus on and how. In either of these situations keyword research plays a signficant role.

Step Two: Process Planning

Unfortunately, this step is often skipped or not recognised. Most assume that SEO is a separate process to be tagged on the end – but in reality it is most important to plan for the search engine promotion of the content of a site right at the outset and to integrate the steps into the project itself by planning the necessary changes to processes.

No related posts.

Everyone in the online world depends on having good data in some way or other. Until ComScore rolled out qSearch in 150 countries, there was very little comparable data available to compare activities in different countries. Frequently, people [...]]]> Everyone in the online world depends on having good data in some way or other. Until ComScore rolled out qSearch in 150 countries, there was very little comparable data available to compare activities in different countries. Frequently, people would ask me what I thought of Hitwise and mostly I had to reply that I had very little to do with it (difficult if most of your work is not in English to consider an English-only tool). Now Experian is changing that by launching Hitwise in France. So that means we will know what’s going on in France right – or “Now You Know” to coin a well known phrase.

Well it’s not really quite like that. Note that in the introduction above I’m talking about ‘compare’ as opposed to measure. What the Hitwise move will do is to give us a different basis for comparing activity in France. It does not mean that we have either not been able to measure things before OR that there is no data available on French websites as the Xiti tool from AT Internet has been around for a long time. Whilst AT Internet does have operations outside France – France is its home base.

There is also the famous Baromètre which measures the shares of French, German, Spanish and UK search engines. Currently, this is showing Google advancing against all-comers – though when you are Google and you have 94.2% in Germany, 92.8% in Spain, 89.2% in France and 90.8% in the UK – are you really worried about Bing which performs best in France with 3.6%. Time will only tell.

Experian launches Hitwise Internet measurement services for France

No related posts.

Chinese war guru, Sun Tzu, who wrote the “Art of War” would have been shaking his head in dismay at the launch of Google Buzz earlier this week. Whilst Wall Street was rubbing its hands in glee at the [...]]]> Chinese war guru, Sun Tzu, who wrote the “Art of War” would have been shaking his head in dismay at the launch of Google Buzz earlier this week. Whilst Wall Street was rubbing its hands in glee at the prospect of a ComScore announcement showing that Bing had gained market share, Google was launching ‘Buzz’ – but not exactly in a fully polished and finished state. If Google hoped to upstage the Bing advance – they did it with a certain apparent lack of preparation. As Sun Tzu says, “He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.”

Here are the data results:

ComScore’s US January data was released on Tuesday with the following results:

• Google – dropped from 65.7% in December to 65.4% in January
• Yahoo – dropped from 17.3% in December to 17% in January
• Bing – increased from 10.7% in December to 11.3% in January
• Ask – increased from 3.7% in December to 3.8% in January
• AOL – dropped from 2.6% in December to 2.5% in January
• BingHoo (Combined Bing/Yahoo figures) increased from 28% in December to 28.3% in January

Hitwise’s Data was released on Wednesday with the following results:

• Google – dropped from 72.2% in December to 71.5% in January
• Yahoo – dropped from 14.8% in December to 14.6% in January
• Bing – increased from 8.9% in December to 9.4% in January
• Ask – increased from 2.5% in December to 2.6% in January
• BingHoo (Combined Bing/Yahoo figures) – increased from 23.7% in December to 24% in January

Whilst it is odd that two such august bodies as Hitwise and ComScore can come with figures that are so different – with Hitwise giving Google by far the biggest lead – what is reassuring is that both sets of statistics position the engines in roughly the same positions thereby validating each other. Both confirm a .3% advance for the Microsoft/Yahoo partnership.

Meanwhile, Google launched it’s Google Buzz product just as the Hitwise Experian and ComScore figures for January were permeating the press and blogosphere showing an increase for Bing – and also for Bing-Yahoo combined. Coincidence? Actually, it probably was a coincidence – but the Google Buzz product nonetheless seems to have been a little rushed to market with many features and facilities just not quite complete. Seems a shame that the name ‘Buzz’ was chosen as that wasn’t really how to launch a product which needs -ahem- buzz.

Meanwhile, whilst the figures are not that different to the run rate last year, with the exception of the Yahoo decline, they do demonstrate that Bing has not reached a plateau and has not been knocked out of the contest. Many commentators point out that Microsoft is spending large advertising budgets to promote Bing. But then others say advertising can’t shift search share and – anyway – Google just advertised in the middle of the Superbowl. (That’s an American sporting event, by the way – nothing to do with cooking).

Sun Tzu also said, “I have heard of military operations that were clumsy but swift, but I have never seen one that was skillful and lasted a long time!” In other words, sometimes it’s better to be a little clumsy and get their first which is perhaps what Google is trying to do. But wait, almost all of the features of Google Buzz already exist in either Yahoo or Bing products? And Facebook and Twitter are doing very nicely thank you.

Maybe Google has a strategy of launching as many things as possible as quickly as possible even at the risk of being a little unprepared on the basis that eventually the enemy will be worn down. Meanwhile, Bing’s strategy seems much more enigmatic, not saying a lot but quietly making a few improvements, straightening out a few alliances and generally preparing for battle and playing the long game.

You have the feeling that it is actually Bing at the moment who is following Sun Tsu’s other advice, “He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.” Bing it seems is choosing not to fight – yet.

Key Sources of Further Information

Google’s Buzz Fails to Unite Opinions

Bing Increased Share of U.S. Search Market in January

Yahoo talks tough about its search business

Bing Gains in January – WSJ

Google Buzz: The Good, Bad, & Ugly Reactions

Google Buzz: Google Takes On Twitter, Facebook & Even Foursquare

January Search Results In! Bing Keeps Gaining Share, Everyone Else Loses

No related posts.

Next week is the Search Engine Strategies London conference and expo at the Business Design Centre in Islington, which I’ll be participating in for roughly the fifth or sixth time – in fact I can’t quite remember which one was [...]]]> Next week is the Search Engine Strategies London conference and expo at the Business Design Centre in Islington, which I’ll be participating in for roughly the fifth or sixth time – in fact I can’t quite remember which one was the first I attended or even the first I spoke at.

Attending conferences is something of an acquired art. You can tell those who’ve had plenty of practice because they remain most relaxed, avoid the ever imminent threat of hangover and don’t try to do too much. My very first SEO conference, I ducked and dived between sessions to gain as much as I could from the event, networked as hard as I could and spent the next few weeks recuperating.

How many times have I been asked “Which sessions would you recommend I go to?” Today I believe the best response is to point people at speakers. There are three reasons why you should choose to go and watch a particular speaker:

• Outstanding, talented or very informative speakers
• Speaker noone’s ever heard of – including me – to find out if they’re worth seeing
• Speaker you’ve never heard of but you’re recommended to go and see

And by the way, don’t go because of what the bio says – often the worst bios disguise some great speakers!

So what this all really means is that speaker recommendations are truly key to having a successful conference. As someone fortunate enough to count many of the speakers amongst my friends and associates – and who has attended at least one such conference every month for the last few years – it seemed appropriate for me to share with you my recommendations and comments. So here are my personal thoughts in random order – this list is NOT all the speakers worth seeing as that would be just too tough to do (If I’ve missed you out guys – I guess the best recourse is to grab me in the bar!):

Bryan Eisenberg: Bryan is not only one of the nicest guys on the circuit, boy is his preparation for conferences impressive. I was lucky to choose to go and see the presentation he will be keynoting in London when it was run-through at SES Chicago. His presentation on “21 Secrets of Top Converting Websites” – is so slick and englightening not only did I stop taking notes in Chicago so I could listen to every word, I might just go and watch this again! Only weakness – Bryan uses Macs… www.bryaneisenberg.com

Jim Sterne: Mr eMetrics par excellence, just like Bryan, Jim is a consumate speaker, preparer and very nice guy. Not only has he written six books, but he’s also the founding president and current chairman of the Web Analytics Association. He once tried to explain to me why Americans didn’t get international search marketing – fortunately things have changed dramatically on that score in the last few years. www.targeting.com

Dave Naylor: Funny this but Dave – also known as DaveN – lives just a few miles away from me and yet I first met Dave in Stockholm and see him more often in the US than I do in the UK. Whatever Dave says is worth listening to – even though he might throw you a few curve balls – or challenging comments that you really have to follow up on later, but his knowledge of SEO is without question. And his humerous presentation of it all,
is worth watching even if you’re already an expert! www.bronco.co.uk

Rand Fishkin: The SEO industry’s true celebrity – my first meeting with Rand was at SES New York when the yellow sneakers – Rand’s trademark – were still at the peak of their pulling power. Rand is just a great communicator who would be dangerous if he went into politics. Oh and he knows a thing or two about search marketing – and white boards. www.seomoz.org

Matt Bailey: Matt’s been around the circuit quite a number of years and is latterly best known – by me anyway – for the excellence of his training presentations. Clear, concise, interesting and yet dealing with complex subjects in a digestible way. www.sitelogicmarketing.com

Brian Clifton: Ex-head of Google Analytics Europe, Brian could be said to know how to measure web things. For those of us who were there, it will be difficult to erase the mental image of Brian being crowned ‘Head of the Vikings’ at an SEO conference evening when he beat representatives from Ask, Yahoo and Microsoft to the title (representing Google of course). Now he returned to a more search engine independent position. www.advanced-web-metrics.com

Bill and Motoko Hunt: Since Bill and I both generally specalise in a similar field (international search marketing), I have lost count of the number of panels I have jointly done with Bill – or for that matter with Motoko his Japanese-search-marketing-specialist wife. Bill has in-dept technical knowledge on international search and SEO – so if international is important to you make sure you catch Bill or Motoko’s panels. back-azimuth.com AJPR.com

Dixon Jones: Dixon has spoken at many of our International Search Summit events and we’ve shared a platform many times. Sadly, Dixon’s ‘white hat’ seems to have disappeared from his conference kit right now. I wonder if that’s because he’s now gone ‘grey’ since his work with MajesticSEO began? Seriously, Dixon has a lot to say on the subject of links. www.receptional.com www.majesticseo.com

John Marshall: Remember ClickTracks? John was behind that and although he was already then based in California – where he now still lives – he’s a Brit who has’nt lost any of his Britishness and sense of humour – even though he’s recently officially become an American citizen. Nowadays, training and certification is John’s bag through his current business MarketMotive. www.marketmotive.com

Shari Thurow: Shari leads the field in search usability – and she’s highly recognised as a speaker in the usability field. But there are many other facets to Shari which not everyone spots. Listen to her very sharp comedic timing when she’s speaking because if you’re not keeping up, by the time the penny drops it could be too late. Shari is also a regular speaker at the International Search Summit. www.search-usability.com

Greg Jarboe: I can only be rude about Greg. I have to find some way to wreak revenge for him dressing me (and many others) in a blue Santa Clause hat whilst seated next to the fireplace in the Chicago Hilton bar during December’s SES Chicago. But he’s forgiven because Greg has a unique speaking ability to make sometimes tough subjects – like your online reputation – remain interesting whilst delivering meaningful thought-provoking content. www.seo-pr.com

Sante Achille: Thankfully having recently survived the Acquila Italian earthquake, Sante is an SEO who’s really grasped the nettle with blogs to promote a business – and multilingually too. He is, of course, a trusted contributor to Multilingual-Search.com and the International Search Summits. blog.achille.name

Mikkel deMib Svendsen: Danish-guru Mikkel – still remembered for wearing red suits to speak – has been around the industry longer than the industry has been around. What he knows, he can’t deliver in a panel or site clinic because there isn’t time – but grab it anyway. I once moderated a panel with Mikkel and Shari – and became the jam in the sandwich. www.demib.com

Peter Maxmin: Peter presented at our last International Search Summit – and his presentation gives some very useful insights from a search engine’s perspective particularly looking at what users want to get out of search. Very useful stuff for search marketers. Bing.co.uk

Mike Grehan: The first thing that ever struck me about Mike was the voice – I thought he should be on radio – then I discovered he had been. Something of an Icon – and now appropriately heading the team at Search Engine Strategies/ Clickz – Mike has extremely valuable insights relating to the search industry. In particular, Mike is very good at understanding and presenting ‘information retrieval’ which is how search engines see things and relating it to ’search marketing’ which of course is what the SEO-world tends to call it. He almost certainly has the best personal network of people there is in the industry. www.searchenginestrategies.com

Kristjan Mar Hauksson: Kristjan hails from Iceland where his school had special barriers to keep the polar bears out. And if you can run a business in Iceland with no banks – you can run one anywhere. These days speaking more on reputation management – Kristjan’s personality is such that he could speak on anything – you’d still want to listen. www.nordicemarketing.com

Anne Kennedy: Anne Kennedy should really be living at Portland on the south coast of England – but someone made a mistake and so now she’s hopping from Portland east coast US to Portland west coast. Or rather it would be better for us Brits is she lived in the UK – Anne is a great speaker and regularly attends the International Search Summits – but she’s also a fantastic moderator. Presently her focus is on optimising ‘digital assets’ and I’m sure we’d all like to be confident that our digital assets are properly optimised – right? Very useful tips – joking aside… Joblr.com

Mel Carson: Mel is the glue of the UK’s search marketing industry who makes sure we’re all connected and doing the right things. Who knows, one day he might be running conferences. Right now, he’s doing an excellent job of ensuring good relations between Microsoft’s Bing and the search marketing industry and they, and we, are richer for having him. bing.co.uk

Matt McGowan: Matt is the chief at Search Engine Strategies from a business point of view. Both a listener and a thinker – he’s keeps closely in touch with the industry even despite his apparently relaxed exterior. www.searchenginestrategies.com

Mr and Mrs Myers: Bill and Motoko Hunt aren’t the only search couple – but Jon and Lisa Myers are the only ones, that I know, who met through search. Both are great presenters and personalities. On one occasion by sheer chance, I ended up sat next to Lisa and Rob Kerry on an 11-hour flight to a conference in Vegas. My luck – their misfortune! www.jonmyers.co.uk www.vervesearch.com

Others I would have liked to have had space to mention include Bas van den Beld, Ralph Tegtmeier, Rob Walk, Richard Zwicky, Jamie Smith, Marcelo Sant’Iago, Kevin Ryan, Ciaran Norris – I’ll try and cover these and other speakers in blogging from the event. If you think I’ve missed someone or want to add more detail – please feel free to comment!

No related posts.

Hurrah, the UK economy is out of recession. Boo, the UK economy is recovering so weakly from the global recession that it may be some time before things truly start to get better. Conclusion? Many experts say [...]]]> Hurrah, the UK economy is out of recession. Boo, the UK economy is recovering so weakly from the global recession that it may be some time before things truly start to get better. Conclusion? Many experts say that Britain – and the US – really have to do better in export terms in order for the recovery to gain strength. No surprise there – but one step the UK and US economies could take, bearing in mind that they are both supporters of the digital world, is to support the world of online marketing to help generate more exports.

Of course, governmental organisations both sides of the Atlantic are working hard to promote exports – I’ve personally spoken to and advised many of them. However, some support – and promotion of – international SEO is required with some urgency. I, therefore, felt a letter to Gordon Brown and Barack Obama would be just the ticket to highlight the need. Here’s my letter:

Dear Barack and Gordon,

The global economic crisis – the worst since the second world war – places us all in exceptional times calling for exceptional steps. Both of you have said so in recent days. Clearly, growth in the US and UK economies is now, more than ever, linked to success in export markets. Both nations are great exporters – but sometimes the way that we, the British and the Americans, communicate with our potential customers in other markets can be rather ‘clumsy’. Let’s be honest, both nations are not particularly gifted at working in languages other than English.

Both of you are also well aware of the impact of digital marketing on present day business life – Barack you have used this tool very effectively to promote yourself during the presidential election. You are also aware of the growth of the use of the internet in corners of the world in the so-called BRIC economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China – all of them economies which are performing relatively well despite the global economy.

Global Internet Economy Grows

The success of search engines such as Google, Yahoo, Bing, Yandex and Baidu is enabling internet-connected people to look well beyond the borders of their own nations to buy products and services or to compare other nations products and services and then to develop their own and compete. This easy access to the global village means there is an imperative to move forwards quickly with the development of the British and American approach to globalisation because the competition is actually growing every day.

Given that this threat is also an opportunity – there is no real option. British and American goods and services have to be marketed online and we have to act now to deliver the necessary economic growth. It is not acceptable for Governments to say, “If you’re having a hard time at home, you’d better export.” Although both governments do have very professional export support organisations, they cannot be expected to change the way they do things without either neglecting a service they already deliver today or falling behind the pace of other nations.

It Is ‘English’ That Puts Us At Risk

The English language is the US and UK’s big advantage in that everyone translates their website into English so if you’re English-speaking you can navigate around much of the internet-world and source products and services all over. In other words, English-speakers make good BUYERS. But that’s the rub! “If you want me to buy, speak my language!”. The big benefit of the English-language puts the UK and US at risk when it comes to export and to reaching the wider global market.

SEO or search engine optimisation – is a very effective and relatively low cost way for businesses to reach out to customers and, by localising and adapting websites effectively, this can enable businesses of every size from the smallest to the very largest to expand their export markets. Both the American and UK Governments should invest some of their export and trade subsidies specifically into ‘international seo’ or website localisation. This action would inevitably promote products and services very quickly.

Avoid The Risk-Averse Reaction

Promoting international SEO and website localisation would also help to counteract the risk averse reaction which potential new exporters have towards looking for new markets. Businesses in difficult tend to revert to their comfort zone and take fewer risks. This can be commercial suicide if your ‘comfort zone’ happens to be a part of the economy which is not doing well. It would also be relatively simple for government bodies to monitor the outcomes potentially even looking at international traffic generated to the websites.

I do need to declare a personal interest: my company delivers international SEO services and I would stand to gain from this. Nonetheless, my view that adopting a more aggressive national stance to use web site marketing and international SEO still stands. Britain and America need to expand their markets overseas in the most dynamic way possible. This is it.

regards, Andy

No related posts.

When Google said it was adding “real time” search to its platform, most saw this as a logical addition which made sense. Few recognised the pandora’s box which was about to open enabling ‘reputation management’ to move centrestage giving [...]]]> When Google said it was adding “real time” search to its platform, most saw this as a logical addition which made sense. Few recognised the pandora’s box which was about to open enabling ‘reputation management’ to move centrestage giving reputation managers everywhere a business filip which fully justified the investment in brand, reputation and image.

Traditionally, web search results pages have actually changed relatively slowly. Then universal search came along, now real search has made that speed almost instant. When corporate marketers realise that “tweets” criticising their brand name can actually appear above their normal first position rank in the web results, we can expect them to want to react and to take some sort of action.

Of course, “real time search”, like other developments before it such as “universal search” has not yet been rolled out to languages other than English – thankfully. You have to expect that it will change its format significantly before the rest of the world receives it which is a good thing.

The big issue is that real time is currently presenting results which I’m guessing people are not actually searching for on Google. For once, you could argue that rather than not filtering spam, Google is actually creating spam links by fetching link results which have little to to with the original intention of the user.

If it stays like this, then a lot of clever people will be rushing offer reputation management solutions to their clients which aim to prevent their competitors and non-fans from littering their brand related pages with comments and utterings that are uncomplimentary.

No related posts.

Because of what I do – specialising in international and multilingual search that is – for years people have been explaining to me the importance of the ’semantic web’ and that I should be getting involved. Many thought it [...]]]> Because of what I do – specialising in international and multilingual search that is – for years people have been explaining to me the importance of the ’semantic web’ and that I should be getting involved. Many thought it had something to do with linguistics (including me). Essentially I saw ’semantic web’ as something to do with contextual meaning and have struggled to get my head around the idea of computers and algorithms figuring out abstract meaning by ‘understanding’ semantically what was meant by the words on the page.

So for instance, a page about ‘villas’ – could either be villas for sale, to rent, to visit, a guidebook about villas or even just an address list. So for me, semantic web techniques would need to figure out those differences by being really really clever.

That’s right Andy – you’re actually spot on – except for the figuring out part. The bit that’s been confusing me is that we’re not going to let search engines figure it out – well we’re not going to leave to them to guess would be a more correct statement – we’re going to tell them what the meaning of the page is by adding to the coding. Simple as that.

Congratulations to Sean Golliher, Jamie Taylor, Martin Hepp, Jay Myers and Nick Cox for putting together one of the most illuminating panels I’ve seen at SES or any conference for some considerable time. Well planned, well prepared, gripping to the end despite the relatively dry and potentially dull subject. The panel was anything but dull.

As I explained to Sean Golliher after the session, a lot of the discussion during the panel was about the use of vocabularies that describe data to enable machines to better use and position the data for retrieval at query time. But the semantic web industry needs to put its own act in order because it has been using confusing languages or vocabulary itself. What are RDFa, Microformats or Semantic web for instance. The concept is actually simple; the industry has undersold itself to potential users by using too many vocabularies and confusing terms and making it sound like you only had a small chance of understanding what it was all about unless you had a PHD and lived in academia.

According to Sean, this will be corrected by the adoption of the term HTML5. I’m not sure about that because that’s yet another way of describing the same thing. Our of all the descriptions and terms used in the session the one that turned my light on was “rich meta data”. Yes metatags are coming back and are going to be even more interesting than they were before.

Yahoo already supports a lot of the different ‘vocabularies’ of the rich meta data to present events, movies, products and many other categories. Google and Bing are both followers on this topic. The concept is one of labelling. The idea is that each element that needs to be found on the web will have labels that are chosen from a popular vocabulary – such as GoodRelations, Martin Hepp’s creation. And by labelling with rich meta data what that content is, the search engines will be better able to exploit it.

The vocabularies are open source – and in theory, according Nick Cox – search engines will work with all varieties. My takeaway was that that won’t in fact be the case. I see search engine’s choosing the popular vocabularies – such as GoodRelations – so there will be winners and users. However, it would be theoretically possible for a new ‘vocabularly’ to come along and gain sufficient traction to achieve the popularity.

What does this mean for SEO? We all need to start adding ‘rich meta data’ to describe what we are showing on our web pages. Events need to be ‘tagged’ as events, products need to be ‘tagged’ as products and so on. Then the search engines will now what to do. BestBuy.com is reporting a 30% improvement in organic visitors to its site as a result of introducing rich meta data.

Another takeaway? There is a BIG job for SEOs to do in terms of helping clients achieve this in order to help the search engines. If they achieve this, maybe the search engines will give SEOs more credit!

No related posts.