Search

GoDaddy.co Super Bowl XLV TV Commercial Fumble

One of the biggest Super Bowl XLV TV commercial fumbles in terms of search engine marketing, was GoDaddy’s ad for GoDaddy.co featuring Joan Rivers and Jillian Michaels. It took several minutes for the URL to even appear in Google search results. This delay was probably due in part to the JavaScript redirect employed. Once indexed, the URL provided no meta description and as a result appeared without a snippet. Snippets in search results help users and increase click through rates. To add insult to injury, when Godaddy.co finally appeared in search results it did so directly under a competitor’s ad with no GoDaddy ad in sight.

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmark
  • StumbleUpon

 

Google Webmaster Tools Expose Analytics Lies

Over the holidays, Google rolled out a pretty major update to Webmaster Tools. This latest update provides much more detail in terms of data and reporting. So much in fact, that some folks seem confused now about the difference between Google Webmaster Tools and Google Analytics. The big difference for SEO is that Google Webmaster Tools shows Google’s own data for URLs in Google SERPs and doesn’t track web pages like Google Analytics. In addition to the key difference in reporting, Google Webmaster Tools requires no installation. While it’s difficult to say for sure, this update should force folks to abandon the ignorance is bliss mentality when it comes to analytics reporting once and for all.

BUT before diving in, here is a little background…

In 2005, with a little help from a Googler named Vanessa Fox, Google launched Google Sitemaps. This program has since, evolved into what we know as Google Webmaster Central. About the same time, Google bought Urchin and shortly after made Google Analytics free to everyone. Back then small to medium sized sites that couldn’t afford enterprise analytics relied primarily on ranking reports to measure search visibility.

Ranking reports are created with software that emulates users and sends automated queries to search engines. The software then records data about positioning within organic search results by specific keywords and URLs. Ranking reports don’t provide bounce rates but, they do provide an important metrics for measuring SEO ROI directly from Google SERPs. That being said, automated queries from ranking software are expensive for search engines to process and as a result they are a direct violation of search engine guidelines.

In 2010 Google introduced personalization features in organic search engine results. These personalized results are based on the user’s history, previous query, IP address and other factors determined by Google. Over the past two years, Google’s personalized search results have rendered ranking reporting software nearly useless.

Enter Analytics… Without accurate ranking reports, analytics may seem like a decent alternative tool for measuring SEO ROI by URL but, is that really the case? If analytics were enough why did Google recently update Google Webmaster Tools? These are a couple of the questions that I hope to answer.

To start off, let’s establish a few laws of the land…

Google Webmaster Tools Update Case Study: Redirects

Experiment: To compare 301 and 302 reporting accuracy between Google Analytics and Google Webmaster Tools

Hypothesis: Google Analytics incorrectly attribute traffic when 301 and/or 302 redirects are present.

Background: Google ranks pages by URL, for that reason accurate reporting by specific URL is critical. In order for Google Analytics to record activity a page must load and Google Analytics JavaScript must execute. Google Analytics reports based on a page and not URL. While most “pages” have URLs not all URLs result in page views. This is the case when 301 and/or 302 server side redirected URLs appear in search results.

Procedure: For this comparison, I created apples.html and allowed it to be indexed by Google. I then created oranges.html and included noindex meta to prevent indexing until the appropriate time. After ranking in Google’s SERPs, apples.html was 301 redirected to oranges.html and results recorded.

Result:
According to Google Analytics, oranges.html is driving traffic from Google SERPs via “apples” related keywords. Google Webmaster Tools on the other hand, reports each URL individually by keyword and remarks the 301 redirect.

Conclusion: Google Analytics reports oranges.html is indexed by Google and ranks in Google SERPs for apples.html related keywords. However reporting that data to clients would be a lie. Oranges.html hasn’t been crawled by Google and isn’t actually indexed in Google SERPs. Secondly, until Google crawls and indexes the URL oranges.html it is impossible to determine how or if it will rank in Google search results pages. In addition, this data becomes part of the historical record for both URLs and is calculated into bounce rates for URLs not shown in SERPs.

(Google’s Caffeine has improve the situation for 301 redirects as time between discovery and indexing are reduced.)

Google Webmaster Tools Update Case Study: Complex redirects

Experiment: To compare differences in tracking via multiple redirects from SERPs ending on off-site pages.

Hypothesis: Multiple redirects ending off-site are invisible to Google Analytics because there is no page load.

Background: Google ranks pages by URL, for that reason accurate reporting by URL is critical. In order for Google Analytics to record activity a page must load and Google Analytics JavaScript must execute. While most “pages” have URLs not all URLs render pages. In most cases 301 issues are resolved by engines over time, however 302 issues will remain. The same is the case for multiple redirects ending off-site.

(For those who aren’t aware, this is one way spammers try and trick Google into “crediting” their site with hundreds or thousands and sometimes even hundreds of thousands of content pages that actually belong to someone else.)

Procedure: To test how Google Analytics handles multiple redirects, I created page1.html which 302 redirects to page2.html which 301 redirects to another-domain.com. Google indexes the content from another-domain.com but SERPs show it as residing at the URL page2.html.

Result: Despite being ranked in SERPs, Google Analytics has no data for these URLs. Google Webmaster Tools reports the first two URLs and remarks redirects.

Conclusion: Google Webmaster Tools recognizes the existence of the URLs in question while Google Analytics doesn’t at all and that is a major problem. For SEO reporting these URLs are critical, the content is real and it’s impacting users as well as Google.

Google Webmaster Tools Update Case Study: Installation

Experiment: To compare tracking without Google Analytics tracking code installed.

Hypothesis: Google Analytics won’t track if tracking code is not installed properly on each page within site architectures supporting analytics.

Background: In order for Google Analytics to record data it must be implemented correctly in each page and be able to communicate with Google. Legacy pages without the Google Analytics tracking code often rank in SERPs but, go unnoticed because they’re invisible to analytics. In addition to this issue there are various other situations where untracked content appears in Google’s index. Even when implemented properly, analytics tools are often prevented from reporting due to architectural problems.

Procedure: To test how Google Analytics works without proper installation, I setup an account but DID NOT implement the Google Analytics tracking code snippet into pages.

Result: Google Analytics reports that their has been no traffic and that the site had no pages but, Google Webmaster Tools reports as usual impressions by keyword, by URL, CTR and other.

Conclusion: In order to function properly Google Analytics must be implemented in each and every page and function properly in addition to being supported by the site architecture. Google Analytics requires extensive implementation in many cases which is an extra obstacle for SEO. Google Webmaster Tools data is direct from Google, requires no implementation and verification is easy.

Google Webmaster Tools Update Case Study: Site Reliability

Experiment: To see how Google Analytics tracks pages when a website goes offline.

Hypothesis: Google Analytics will not track site outages.

Background: In order for Google Analytics to record data it must be properly implemented, supported by the site’s architecute and be able to communicate back and forth with Google.

Procedure: To test how Google Analytics reports when a site goes offline, I turned off a website with Google Analytics installed.

Result: Google Analytics reports no visitors and/or other metrics but suggests nothing about the real cause. Google Webmaster Tools – reports errors suggesting the site was down.

Conclusion: Google Analytics does not report site outages or outage error URLs whereas Google Webmaster Tools does. For SEO, site uptime is critical.

Final thoughts…

As illustrated above, analytics will report keywords for URLs that aren’t indexed and won’t report keywords for URLs that are indexed in SERPs. Analytics is unaware of redirected URLs even those indexed by Google and seen by users worldwide. Analytics can’t tell the difference between a brief lack of visitors and periods of site downtime, it’s possible for analytics tracking code to fire without pages loading and pages loading without firing tracking code. Analytics doesn’t know framed content is indexed, or about legacy pages without tracking, alternative text versions of Flash pages, how long pages take to load, and on, and on, and on….

In fairness, the tool is doing what it is designed to do, folks using it just don’t understand the limitations. Often times, they aren’t aware data is fragmented and/or missing or that site architecture impact reporting ability. Checking Google to see if SERPs jive with reports never occurs for some reason.

I’ve been kvetching about these issues for years, to anyone and everyone who would listen. If you can’t tell, few things F R U S T R A T E me more.

The case studies above represent just a few ways in which analytics data is skewed due to bad and/or missing data. Believe it or not, a substantial amount of analytics data is bogus. According to one Google Analytics Enterprise partner, 44% of pages with analtyics have analytics errors. On average analytics only tracks about 75% of traffic. Analytics is a weird beast, when something goes wrong nothing happens in analytics and sometimes it happens on invisible pages. :)

Bad data attacks like a virus from various sources polluting reporting exponentially, silently, undetected and over time. Sadly, very few folks including most “analytics experts” have the experience or expertise to track down issues like these by hand. Until now there has been no tool to report analytics not reporting. The recent Google Webmaster Tools update empowers webmasters by providing them with the best data available. This update exposes analytics issues. It also places the burden of proving data measurement accuracy back on the folks responsible for it.

Oh yeah, HAPPY NEW YEAR!

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmark
  • StumbleUpon

 

Matt Cutts – Pubcon Notes

Matt Cutts provided some interesting details about where the industry is headed, last week at PubCon.

During the “Interactive Site Review” session, Matt suggested investigating the history of each domain name you own or plan to purchase. He suggested avoiding domains with a shady history and dumping domains that appear to have been burned in the past. To investigate the history of a domain, Matt suggests Archive.org. Matt said, blocking Archive.org via robots.txt is a great indication of spam when already suspected.

Matt mentioned speed several times. During the “Interactive Site Review” Matt said that webmasters need to pay more attention to speed. He pointed out that landing page load time factors into AdWords Quality Score and said speed will be a big trend in 2010. During Matt’s “State of the Index” presentation, he pointed out Google’s tools for measuring page speed and even mentioned webpagetest.org a third party tool. According to Matt, Google is considering factoring page load speed into rankings. Matt said, that Larry Page wants pages to flip for users on the internet. He illustrated this point with Google Reader’s reduction of pages from 2mb to 185kb. Nothing official yet but, something to keep an eye on for sure!

During Q&A for “The Search Engine Smackdown” session Matt explained Caffeine as being like a car with a new engine but not an algorithm change. Matt said, Caffeine will help Google index in seconds and that it should be active within a few weeks on one data center. That said, Caffeine won’t roll out fully until after the holidays. Matt pointed out that Google is built for load balancing and for that reason isolating individual IPs for Caffeine testing access is difficult. Matt also mentioned that AJAX SERPs and Caffeine aren’t related but that Google will continue testing AJAX SERPs.

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmark
  • StumbleUpon

 

PubCon Notes

In case you missed it, I was in Las Vegas last week for PubCon 2009. It was my first PubCon and as you can imagine, lots of fun! As far as presentations, every presentation was great but I do have a few favorites. Here they are in order of appearance…

- One of my favorite presentations at PubCon was Rob Snell’s “Ecommerce and Shopping Cart Optimization.” Rob always impresses me with his creativity and common sense approach to increasing conversions with things like original content creation. Rob stressed liberating manufacturer content in addition to creating original product descriptions and content. Maybe it’s a “southern thing” but is for certain, Rob is no “Dummy” when it comes to ideas for developing great content to increase ROI.

- Another great presentation was Ted Ulle’s “SEO Design & Organic Site Structure.” Ted’s FRANKENSITE analogy was really great! He focused on the importance of keeping things simple and setting goals early. Ted offered some other really great advice about documenting decisions, graphic design being placed lower down the priority list and why “code geeks” shouldn’t write copy. Splitting a cab with Ted was also a big thrill, it’s not every day I get to ride with celebrities.

- Vanessa Fox’s “Multivariate Testing and Conversion Tweaking” presentation was really interesting. In addition to providing recent data about the average number of keywords per query, Vanessa dove into the topic of personas and the role they play in conversions. According to Vanessa, focusing only on ranking reports can cause you to miss important information. That said, I’ve already pre-ordered Vanessa’s new book and strongly suggest you do too.

- As always, Matt Cutts was truly entertaining during the “Interactive Site Review: Organic Focus” session at PubCon. (Tip, if your site is obviously spamming don’t sign it up for review! ;) ) I know Barry has been giving Matt a hard time about not attending conferences lately but, Matt really went above and beyond even shaving a spammy head or two at PubCon 2009 :) .

- Greg Hartnett, Michael McDonald, Barry Schwartz, Lee Odden and Loren Baker teamed up for “Search Bloggers: What’s Hot and Trending?”. This session was a jam packed PowerPoint free dialogue between the best in the industry.

- Saving the best for last, my favorite session was “Super Session : Search Engines and Webmasters.” Shawn from Microsoft was up first and talked about Bing’s recent changes. He demonstrated Bing’s hover preview feature and talked about the new and improved MSNBOT 2.0b According to Shawn, Steve Blamer expects to win search and acquire 51% market share with Bing. After Shawn, Matt Cutts presented Google’s “State of the Index.” Matt talked a lot about the importance of site speed and Google’s new social search experiment. He suggests digging deeper into Google Webmaster Tools as well as subscribing to the blog and YouTube channel.

PubCon was a great conference and I strongly suggest it to anyone interested in interactive marketing. Thanks again to Neil Marshall and the PubCon staff, Barry Schwartz and Search Discovery Inc..

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmark
  • StumbleUpon

 

SEO Analytics Measurement

It’s becoming more and more clear that ranking reports are no longer reliable. Users are noticing personalized SERPs more and more and they’re catching on to obvious inaccuracies generated by traditional ranking report software. These inaccuracies are caused by differences in query IP, query data, account status, web history, personalized settings, social graph and/or other. As a result, there is a growing shift away from rank report software to analytics for accurate SEO measurement.

Prior to personalized search results, SEO relied heavily on ranking reports in order to measure SEO campaign performance. SEOs create “ranking reports” with software that submits automated queries directly to search engines, a.k.a. “scrapes search engine results.” Despite the fact that automated queries are against Google Webmaster Guidelines, waste energy and cost Google millions of dollars each year to process, scraping search engine results is still a popular practice. Obviously it’s in the engines best interest to take steps to prevent these queries.

Analytics software on the other hand is different, it works independently of search engines. Analytics relies heavily on code embedded within pages as well as human interpretation of data. Until recently, analytics software has been used only to “tell a story,” but not for the precise measurement SEO requires. Site analysis focuses on trending and establishing a “comfort level” with data determined to be “good enough” by the analytics specialist. Analytics platforms are designed for anyone to use, specialist and non-specialist alike. In many cases, analytics specialist themselves have little analytics experience, expertise, knowledge about how search engines work or an understanding of searcher intent. How can we expect anything different, when WAA itself still doesn’t teach things like transactional queries?

“To optimize scent trails, make sure that when the intent is transparent, the scent trail on any chosen term matches that intent. It doesn’t matter if the trail starts with PPC (pay-per-click) or organic search. Prospects usually hope to find one of two things: the answer they seek or a link that takes them to the answer.”

- The Web Analytics Association “Knowledge Required for Certification” (also available in non-www version)

Analytics tracking code is usually implemented by URL without consideration for user path, intent, source or origination. In most cases the implementation is performed by someone other than the analytics specialist interpreting the data. According to some estimates as many as 45% of pages implemented with Google Analytics contain errors. Conversions from organic SERPs are the most difficult to track back to the original referrer. To compound that problem, site issues often prevent even flawless analytics implementations from reporting. Analytics failures are costly, often go unnoticed and undetected because NOTHING is in place to report when analytics doesn’t report.

Quick examples & thoughts:
- Even if Avinash himself, implements Omniture and Google Analytics tracking code on every page of your site, users entering from SERPs via 301 or 302 redirect won’t be attributed as “Organic.” According to Google, “If your site uses redirects, the redirecting page becomes the landing page’s referrer. For example, if a user searches for a specific keyword, such as ‘used books’ on Google, there will not be any referring data showing that this keyword was searched on Google. Instead, the referral will be shown as the redirecting page.”

- High traffic major converters or blank pages that send users to a competitor? Either way, nobody will ever know because these pages lack analytics tracking code. URL naming conventions for most sites follow a specific pattern. Use the site operator to quickly spot check for URLs that seem out of the ordinary to be certain they include analytics tracking code implementation and aren’t redirected. It’s pretty common to find legacy pages from older versions of sites indexed.

SEO Analytics

- If these folks are quick evaluators, analytics tracking code might not execute before a new page loads and this SEO conversion might be credited somewhere else. Analytics won’t measure landing page load time even though it’s a highly important metric for users. Flash or otherwise, pages like these always have issues when it comes to tracking organic conversions.

SEO Analytics

- If your site goes down chances are you’ll never know because analytics reporting goes down as well. Using a website monitoring service is always a good idea, just to be sure that conversions really are down and not your entire site.

Takeaways, until SEO expectations are more clear to the analytics community, SEOs should insist on performing SEO analytics audits as usual. When hiring analytics specialists, look for applicants who are willing to address websites from the user perspective and outside of analytics. Folks willing to question data accuracy and those able to identify analytics obstacles are highly desired. Key being, SEO is as concerned with what analytics is tracking as it is about what analytics should be tracking.

  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmark
  • StumbleUpon