We’re often told that the web is increasingly mobile, and that it is imperative for businesses to adapt their marketing strategies to be ‘mobile-first’ in order to capitalize on this shift in internet behavior. But just how mobile is the web in 2017, and what does this mean for search? Leading SEO and content performance platform BrightEdge today released a new report which sheds light on this question, and on the steadily widening gap between mobile and desktop search. I spoke to Erik Newton, VP of Customer Marketing and Head of SEO at BrightEdge, about the report’s findings, Google’s mobile-first index tests, and how SEOs can adapt their strategy to account for the increasing divergence between desktop and mobile. Majority mobile: 57% of web traffic is now mobile & tablet devicesIn one of the key findings of the research, BrightEdge reports that 57% of web traffic now originates from mobile and tablet devices – meaning that close to 6 out of every 10 consumers are using a mobile device. Businesses who still aren’t optimizing for mobile, therefore, are ignoring a decisive majority of potential customers. Even more noteworthy is the finding that the same query on the same search engine generates a different rank on mobile and desktop 79% of the time. Among the top 20 ranked results, the gap is less pronounced, with 47% of queries differing between devices – but this still means that close to half of rankings differ. And 35% – more than a third – of the time, the first page that ranked for any given domain was different between mobile and desktop SERPs. In a press release about the research, BrightEdge commented that these figures indicate a “significant shift to a new mobile-first index”. I asked Erik Newton whether this means that BrightEdge believes Google’s mobile-first index is already being rolled out. Most SEOs believe we are still awaiting the official launch of the new index, but is BrightEdge seeing otherwise? “We are seeing a divergence of rank and content between the two devices, and we have seen the data move in both directions over the last few months,” says Newton. “We believe that Google is testing and calibrating, as they have with other major shifts, to prepare for the separate mobile index.” This fits with Google’s usual M.O. around big algorithm updates, but it also means that whatever strategies SEOs are planning to deploy when the mobile-first index finally rolls around, now might be the time to start testing them. And for those who are still biding their time, they may already be losing out. How are businesses really doing on mobile?In the marketing industry, we’ve been talking for what feels like years, with increasing urgency, about the need for our campaigns and our web presences to be mobile-friendly. Or mobile-responsive. Or mobile-first. But how are businesses really doing with this? Are marketers doing enough, even in 2017, to optimize for mobile? “For most of the businesses that grew up on desktop, we see them using a desktop frame of reference,” observes Erik Newton. “We see evidence of this tendency in web design, page performance, analytics, and keyword tracking. “We believe that Google gives the market signals to move forward and toward mobile faster. This is one of those times to push harder on mobile. “Some of the newer companies, however, are mobile-first and even mobile-only. They are more likely to be app-based, and have always had majority mobile share.” As we’ve seen from the figures cited in the previous section, using desktop as a frame of reference is increasingly short-sighted given the widening gap between desktop and mobile rankings. But how, then, should marketers plan their search strategy to cater to an increasing disparity between the two? Should they go so far as to split their SEO efforts and cater to each separately? Or is there a way to kill two birds with one stone? “The research report has some specific recommendations,” says Newton.
It can be difficult for brands who have traditionally catered to desktop users and who are still seeing success from a desktop-focused strategy to break away from this mindset and take a gamble on mobile. However, the figures are convincing. What’s most evident is that it isn’t enough for SEOs and marketers to wait around for the launch of Google’s mobile-first index: it’s already being tested, and when combined with the growing proportion of mobile web traffic, brands who wait to develop a mobile-first strategy are increasingly likely to miss out. Rebecca Sentance is the Deputy Editor at ClickZ and Search Engine Watch. Want to stay on top of the latest search trends?Get top insights and news from our search experts. Related readingHave you been wondering how to start owning Google’s featured snippets for your brand? The first, and most important, step in earning featured snippets is understanding how to identify “snippable” opportunities. Here are five ways to identify those opportunities. Over the years, Google has greatly increased the extent to which it tailors results to the user, with the aim of improving accuracy and relevance. While this can be helpful and convenient, many users find it disturbing - or unhelpful to their efforts in getting their site found by a wider audience. Here, we look at how, as a user, you can escape Google's filter bubble - and as an SEO, how you can penetrate it. Google Chrome has taken a dominant position as the world’s favorite desktop browser, and it can be customized using tens of thousands of downloadable browser extensions. Among these are hundreds of SEO-themed extensions which can assist SEOs in every part of their work. Here are our 15 favorites. As the internet has become a more important part of our daily lives, our online experience has evolved and we prefer much more visual content. But visual content, and its associated massive file sizes, slows down websites. Here's why SEOs shouldn't overlook this as an issue, and what can be done about it. Reference source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2gu9gOF
0 Comments
Each year, Google rolls out several new features ahead of the holidays for retail advertisers. This year’s updates have started coming out. The company introduced a new metric and new reporting for Shopping campaign advertisers — only in the new AdWords interface. The new metric, called absolute top impression share, reports how often Shopping ads and Local Inventory ads appear in the first spot on mobile and desktop. Google says that during Q4 last year, the first Shopping ad on mobile saw up to three times more engagement than the other spots. On the Products page, a new diagnostics report lets advertisers dig deeper into product status issues in AdWords.
These features can be added to the list of features exclusive to the new AdWords interface — what Google calls the new AdWords experience — that’s rolling out to advertisers through this year. About The AuthorAs Third Door Media's paid media reporter, Ginny Marvin writes about paid online marketing topics including paid search, paid social, display and retargeting for Search Engine Land and Marketing Land. With more than 15 years of marketing experience, Ginny has held both in-house and agency management positions. She provides search marketing and demand generation advice for ecommerce companies and can be found on Twitter as @ginnymarvin. See more source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2gtm0Fo The more places your business information appears online, the more prominent your business appears to Google. It makes sense. If the search engine algorithms see that your business is mentioned on hundreds of websites, compared to competition that is only listed on a few dozen, this can make you seem like a more popular business, and give you a boost in the rankings. Not All Citations Are Created EqualSo what makes a citation great for a local business? There is huge variation in the value of different citations. A mention of your business’ name, address, and phone number on whitehouse.gov is worth far more than a mention of your business on some spammy web directory that was created solely for low quality link building. Since citations vary in their value, we’ve broken down our top recommended citation and data sources into different classifications by rank of importance, they are: Core Search Engines, Primary Sources, Tier 1, Tier 2 , Tier 3, and Tier 4. Below is a description of each category and some examples for businesses in the USA: Core Search Engines
Primary Data Sources
Tier 1 Generic
Hyper-Local & Niche
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 4
There are many factors that determine citation quality. For further advice on sorting the gold from the sand, take a look at this post on determining citation quality. Citation ConsistencyIf you’ve read any introductory posts about local SEO, you’ve likely heard about how important citation consistency is. Making sure your listings have the correct name, address, and phone number on the most important sites in the local search ecosystem IS important. You want to make sure that you have one, and only one, accurate and complete listing on each of the most important sites. With that said, some people worry about citation consistency more than they need to. When it comes to your local rankings and the impact incorrect citations can have, you really need to perfect your citation profile on the Core Search Engines, Primary Data Sources, and Tier 1 sites. This means making sure that you have searched for all NAP variations, all duplicates have been removed, all inconsistent citations have been updated, and you have one and only one, perfectly accurate and complete citation on each of these data sources and websites. Your next priority would be to audit and cleanup your listings on the Tier 2 sites. There is value in getting these listings sorted as well. If you want to keep going into the Tier 3 and Tier 4, enjoy yourself. It’s not going to hurt, but it’s also not going to make or break your SEO. A few incorrect listings on some of these less important sites are no big deal. Another important element to remember is that Google and other Search Engines are intelligent enough to normalize business data for variations/abbreviations, so if it’s not identical to the letter or format, you don’t need to stress about it. Oh, and if you’d rather not do all this work yourself, we would love to help you with citation audit and cleanup. How to Build Citations for Local BusinessesBuilding citations is a time consuming process – it’s important to invest the time to do it right, or outsource the work to a trust and credible service provider. Tips for building citations:
Get started by gathering all of your business information, feel free to use our Citation Info and Tracking Spreadsheet, to stay organized and have all your information in one location. For even more tips, see Phil Rozek’s post on Citation Building Best Practices. It’s a bit dated (2013) but most of these tips are still applicable. Reference source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2iJIsed Which brands dominate the US flights market in search? A new report by Pi Datametrics has analyzed the entire US flights market to discover the most organically valuable search themes and players with the greatest share of voice across the market. The search data was collected from across Google US with a view to identifying the search terms with the most commercial opportunity over the last four years, and trended to reveal demand peaks and declines across the travel industry. ‘International’ flights: Trended search themes | May 2016 – May 2017 Image source: Pi Datametrics Market Intelligence So what does the data show, and what can marketers learn from it about the state of the flights market? The difference between organic value and search volumeTrended search volume data is a strong indication of research and demand phases, but to determine when a search is most likely to actually convert, Pi has applied their proprietary Organic Value Score. Search volume alone doesn’t always indicate value. Pi’s Organic Value Score averages out all of the metrics critical to conversion – including adword data – to reflect the true value of individual search terms, and their overarching search themes. Looking at the search volume graph (above) in isolation, ‘Latin America & Caribbean’ appears to be the one of the most important search themes to focus strategy on within the ‘International flights’ market. But, if we overlay commercial value, the data tells a slightly different story. ‘Latin America & Caribbean’ devalues significantly, while ‘Europe & Middle East’ retains its competitive edge. Share of voice: Top sites across the entire ‘Flights’ marketDate: 7th June 2017 | Top 20 sites Image source: Pi Datametrics Market Intelligence Using a datapool of the most valuable ‘International’ and ‘Domestic’ search terms, Pi generated a vast snapshot of the entire US ‘Flights’ market (12,286 sites), to reveal the players dominating the industry. Kayak own the US ‘Flights’ marketKayak perform best both internationally and domestically, closely followed by Tripadvisor – which has recently transformed into an integrated review / booking site. Here are just a few key insights:
Image source: Pi Datametrics Market Intelligence Which airline groups own the entire ‘Flights’ category?
When combined, Expedia Inc and Priceline Group own nearly 60% of the entire US ‘Flights’ market. This is astronomical, and has created an ‘illusion of choice’ across the digital travel landscape.
These revenue statistics just prove the success of their digital duopoly. What can marketers and SEOs in the travel industry learn from the data about the most valuable search terms? Knowing their most valuable content gives businesses the foresight to dictate strategy. From Pi’s trend chart, we can see that Europe and Middle Eastern flights have the highest Organic Value across the US ‘International flights’ market. Aggregators, airlines and integrated booking sites can use this data to plan marketing activity around the most valuable flights. Why is the online flights market so heavily dominated by just two companies?Priceline group and Expedia own significant search real estate, and dominate the flights industry. We can’t know exactly how these groups achieve their success, but we can presume that each brand prioritizes search throughout the business. What’s more, these groups have an array of interrelated digital assets, which provide greater opportunity for comprehensive link infrastructures. This would only serve to boost their presence across the search landscape. Based on the data, we can also see that online travel agencies, aggregators and booking sites decisively outrank airlines themselves in almost all cases. So why is this? Based on their business offering, aggregators and OTAs offer a variety of content covering all areas of the flights market. As direct providers, airlines may have less opportunity to match this offering, which could in turn impede market share. The full report can be downloaded from the Pi Datametrics website. Louise Linehan is Brand and Content Manager at Pi Datametrics Want to stay on top of the latest search trends?Get top insights and news from our search experts. Related readingThe remote workforce is growing exponentially, and corporate global companies and first year startups alike are turning to remote teams to get the job done. The question, however, is how do you manage your remote team as effectively as your in-office team? With mobile search now accounting for 60% of total search volume and 20% of searches coming from voice, it is easy to say the last few years have really escalated things in the search realm. And given all the changes in the search landscape, it is more important than ever to understand how your brand’s strategy aligns. Since the early 2010s, visual search has been offering users a novel alternative to keyword-based search results. But what commercial opportunities does it offer brands today? Google recently announced that it will be expanding its hate-speech policy for publishers that use the company’s ad network. How does this affect SEO companies, and what can we do to make sure we and our clients stay on the right side of the policy? Reference source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2etfXQq
Barry Schwartz
Barry Schwartz is Search Engine Land's News Editor and owns RustyBrick, a NY based web consulting firm. He also runs Search Engine Roundtable, a popular search blog on very advanced SEM topics. Barry can be followed on social media at @rustybrick, +BarrySchwartz and Facebook. For more background information on Barry, see his full bio and disclosures, click over here. Source link : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2wm7GUV Targeting local organic results for areas you serve outside of your current location requires creating well thought out and planned city landing pages. If you invest time and energy into building an awesome, informative, and relevant page, then you have the chance to earn solid traffic and drive leads without having to open a physical location in these cities. The city page strategy is nothing new, however, it is often overlooked, or is executed poorly by some businesses (and consultants), which can lead to underwhelming results. In light of this we’ve decided to put together a list of ways to help you improve and create awesome city pages. What you need to know about city pages A city page is similar to any other location landing page, except that they don’t have a physical business address in the desired ranking city. But, both of these types of landing pages require the same basic principles and elements. City pages are ideal for:
Elements For Making an Exceptional City PageOn-Page BasicsIf you are targeting another city for local organic results then you will need the following onsite elements at bare minimum: Proper Title Tags Example: Top Keywords + City | Your Business Name Meta Description Page Name & URL Structure If you’re going with the City Name + Keyword, be sure to use only one keyword that best represents what your business does. Don’t go crazy and spam the URL. Local SEO Benefits – http://www.CompanyName..com/decatur-cosmetic-dentist *Personally, if I were creating 15+ city pages then I would err on the side of caution and keep the page name and URL simple by using just the target city. This, however; is my own preferences for having simple and clean URLs. My Preference – http://www.CompanyName..com/decatur Use Headings Internal Links For instance, if you are showcasing your services and completed projects on your page, it makes perfect sense to include a link to any existing projects page that goes into greater details about the work completed in that city. If you have any blog content that is specific to that city which is helpful to visitors, then you would want to link to that too. Link to any service pages that go into further depth about the services or products you are offering in that city. Also keep in mind that linking from within the content of appropriate pages on your site is generally more valuable than linking from your navigation or footer (although, linking from your navigation is still usually a good idea). This is a no! Don’t do it: Origin soruce : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2iLjoU8 Google Analytics (GA) has done more than any other platform to bring the practice of data analytics to the center of organizations. By offering a free-to-use, intuitive solution to businesses of any size, it has offered the promise of full transparency into customer behavior. Moreover, as part of the broader marketing analytics movement, it has helped shape the language we use daily. Our handy guide explains some of the most frequently heard, but at time confusing, terms GA has brought into everyday parlance in the marketing world. Pitch decks and strategy sessions abound with references to “data-driven decisions” nowadays, which is a healthy trend for businesses overall. Beyond the buzzword status this phrase has attained, it is true that businesses that integrate analytics into the decision-making process simply get better results. Google reports that business leaders are more than twice as likely to act on insights taken from analytics: As Google continues to improve its offering, with Optimize and Data Studio available to everyone, and an ever more impressive list of paid products via the Analytics 360 suite, marketers need to understand the data in front of them. Unfortunately, there are some common misunderstandings of how Google collects, configures, processes, and reports data. The below are some of the commonly misunderstood metrics and features within the core Google Analytics interface. By avoiding these pitfalls, you will enable better decisions based on data you can trust. Bounce rateWhat is it?Bounce rate is a simple, useful metric that is triggered when a user has a single-page session on a website. That is to say, they entered on one URL and left the site from the same URL, without interacting with that page or visiting any others on the site. It is calculated as a percentage, by dividing the aggregate number of single-page sessions by the total number of entries to that page. Bounce rate can also be shown on a site-wide level to give an overview of how well content is performing. As such, it makes for a handy heuristic when we want to glean some quick insights into whether our customers like a page or not. The assumption is that a high bounce rate is reflective of a poorly performing page, as its contents have evidently not encouraged a reader to explore the site further. Why is it misunderstood?Bounce rate is at times both misunderstood and misinterpreted. A ‘bounce’ occurs when a user views one page on a site and a single request is sent to the Analytics server. Therefore, we can say that Google uses the quantity of engagement hits to classify a bounced session. One request = bounced; more than one request to the server = not bounced. This can be problematic, given that any interaction will preclude that session from counting as a bounce. Some pages contain auto-play videos, for example. If the start of a video is tracked as an event, this will trigger an engagement hit. Even if the user exits the page immediately, they will still not be counted as a bounced visit. Equally, a user may visit the page, find the exact information they wanted (a phone number or address, for example), and then carry out their next engagement with the brand offline. Their session could be timed out (this happens by default after 30 minutes on GA and then restarts), before they engage further with the site. In either example, this will be counted as a bounced visit. That has an impact on the Average Time on Page calculations, of course. A bounced visit has a duration of zero, as Google calculates this based on the time between visiting one page and the next – meaning that single-page visits, and the last page in any given session, will have zero Time on Page. Advances in user-based tracking (as opposed to cookie-based) and integration with offline data sources provide cause for optimism; but for now, most businesses using GA will see a bounce rate metric that is not wholly accurate. All of this should start to reveal why and how bounce rate can be misinterpreted. First of all, a high bounce rate not always a problem. Often, users find what they want by viewing one page and this could actually be a sign of a high-performing page. This occurs when people want very specific information, but can also occur when they visit a site to read a blog post. Moreover, a very low bounce rate does not necessarily mean a page is performing well. It may suggest that users have to dig deeper to get the information they want, or that they quickly skim the page and move on to other content. With the growing impact of RankBrain, SEOs will understandably view bounce rate as a potential ranking factor. However, it has to be placed in a much wider context before we can assume it has a positive or negative impact on rankings. How can marketers avoid this?Marketers should never view bounce rate as a measure of page quality in isolation. There really is no such thing as a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ bounce rate in a universal sense, but when combined with other metrics we can get a clearer sense of whether a page is doing its job well. Tools like Scroll Depth are great for this, as they allow us to see in more detail how a consumer has interacted with our content. We can also make use of Google Tag Manager to adapt the parameters for bounce rate and state, for example, that any user that spends longer than 30 seconds on the page should be discounted as a bounce. This is useful for publishers who tend to receive a lot of traffic from people who read one post and then go elsewhere. This is commonly known as ‘adjusted bounce rate’ and it helps marketers get a more accurate view of content interactions. Glenn Gabe wrote a tutorial for Search Engine Watch on how to implement this: How to implement Adjusted Bounce Rate (ABR) via Google Tag Manager. Bounce rate can be a very useful metric, but it needs a bit of tweaking for each site before it is truly fit for purpose. Channel groupingsWhat is it?Channels are sources of traffic and they reflect the ways that users find your website. As a result, this is one of the first areas marketers will check in their GA dashboard to evaluate the performance of their different activities. There are many ways that people can find websites, so we tend to group these channels together to provide a simpler overview of traffic. Google provides default channel groupings out of the box, which will typically look as follows: You can find this by navigating this path: Admin > Channel Settings > Channel Grouping. Anything that sits outside of these sources will fall into the disconcertingly vague ‘(Other)’ bucket. From Google’s perspective, this is a reasonably accurate portrayal of the state of affairs for most websites. However, this is applied with broad brush strokes out of necessity and it shapes how marketers interpret very valuable data. Why is it misunderstood?Default channel groupings are often misunderstood in the sense that they are taken as the best solution without conducting further investigation. Vague classifications like ‘Social’ and ‘Referral’ ignore the varying purposes of the media that fall under these umbrellas. In the case of the former, we would at the very least want to split out our paid and organic social media efforts and treat them separately. We want channel groupings to provide a general overview, but perhaps it needn’t be quite so general. Leaving these groupings as they are has a significant impact, particularly when it comes to the eternal riddle of channel attribution. If we want to understand which channels have contributed to conversions, we need to have our channels correctly defined as a basic starting point. How can marketers avoid this?Make use of custom channel groupings that accurately reflect your marketing activities and the experience your consumers will have with your brand online. It is often helpful to group campaigns by their purpose; prospecting and remarketing, for example. Custom channel groupings are a great option because they alter the display of data, rather than how it is filtered. You can modify the default channel groupings if you feel confident about the changes you plan to make, but this will permanently affect how data is processed in your account. Always add a new view to test these updates before committing them to your main account dashboard. For most, custom channel groupings will be more than sufficient. Through the use of regular expressions (known commonly as regex), marketers can set up new rules. Regex is not a particularly complex language to learn and follows a clear logic, but it does take a little bit of getting used to. You can find a great introductory guide to regex expressions here. These rules will allow you to create new channels or alter the pre-defined groupings Google provides. Your new channel groupings will be applied to historical data, so you can easily assess the difference they make. These alterations will prove especially invaluable when you compare attribution models within GA. Custom SegmentsWhat are they? The array of segmentation options available is undoubtedly one of Google Analytics’ most powerful advantages. Customer segments allow us to view very specific behavioral patterns across demographics, territories and devices, among many others. We can also import segments created by other users, so there is a truly vast selection of options at our disposal. By clicking on ‘+ New Segment’ within your GA reports, you will be taken to the Segment Builder interface: Google provides a very handy preview tool that shows us what percentage of our audience is included under the terms we are in the process of defining. This will always begin at 100% and decrease as our rules start to hone in on particular metrics and/or dimensions: This is where it starts to get tricky, as the segment builder can start to produce unexpected results. A seemingly sound set of rules can return a preview of 0% of total users, much to the marketer’s chagrin. Why are they misunderstood?The underlying logic in how Google processes and interprets data can be complex, even inconsistent at times. When we set up a set of rules, they will be treated sequentially. A session will need to pass the first condition in order to reach the second round, and so on. We therefore need to consider very carefully how we want our experiments to run if we want them to be sound. To take a working example, if I want to see how many sessions have included a visit to my homepage and to my blog, I can set up an advanced condition to cover this. I filter by sessions and include a condition for Page exactly matching the blog URL and Page exactly matching the homepage: This creates what seems like a valid segment in the preview. Logically, I should be able to take this up one level to see what proportion of users meet these conditions. Within the GA hierarchy, users are a superset of sessions, which are in turn a superset of hits. However, this is not how things play out in reality. Just by switching the filter from ‘Sessions’ to ‘Users’, the segment is rendered invalid: Why does this occur? Google uses a different logic to calculate each, which can of course be quite confusing. In the former example, Google’s logic allowed room for interpretation, so the AND condition loosely meant that a session could include visits to each page at different times. As such, some sessions meet the requisite conditions. In the latter example, the AND rule means that a user must meet both conditions simultaneously to be included. This is impossible, as they cannot be on two pages at once. We can still arrive at the same results, but we cannot do so using the AND condition. By removing the second condition and adding a new filter in its place, we can see the same results for Users that we received for Sessions: In other words, we need to be very specific about what exactly we mean if we want accurate results from segments created for users, but not quite so explicit with sessions. It is better to err on the safe side overall, as the logic employed for Users was rolled out more recently and it is here to stay. The complexity is multiplied when a segment contains filters for users and for sessions, so it is essential to maintain some consistency in how you set these up. How can marketers avoid this?By understanding the hierarchy of User – Session – Hit, we can start to unpick Google’s inner workings. If we can grasp this idea, it is possible to debug custom segments that don’t work as expected. The same idea applies to metrics and dimensions too, where some pairings logically cannot be met within the same segment. Google provides a very comprehensive view of which pairings will and will not work together which is worth checking out. Although it does involve quite a bit of trial and error at first, custom segments are worth the effort and remain one of the most powerful tools at the analyst’s disposal. Clark Boyd is a freelance digital marketing consultant and a contributor to Search Engine Watch. Want to stay on top of the latest search trends?Get top insights and news from our search experts. Related readingAdvertising has always been about emotions. Emotions lead to actions and, as such, influencing emotions is the most effective route to influencing actions. In a slew of recent posts on their Analytics blog, Google has announced a number of important updates for its Data Studio tool. So what is Google Data Studio, why has Google focused so much attention on improving it, and what benefits does it provide for marketers? Faced with a constant deluge of information and brand messaging, it has become a necessity for companies to be in front of customers’ eyes more than ever before, thanks to perpetual connectivity. What's the real impact of machine learning on SEO? This has been one of the biggest debates within SEO over the last year. Reference source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2wlJWjB About a week ago, Scott Hendison reported that the Google My Business insights tools were not reporting accurately with the photos section of your listings. Google Insights within Google My Business shows analytics around your Google My Business local listings in Google Search and Google Maps. A week ago, the data for reports around the photos you have in your listings stopped appearing and seemed to have completely paused. Then, on August 28, the data started to fill back up again, but there was a there was a gap between August 16 and August 20. A Google spokesperson last night confirmed with Search Engine Land that they have finally identified the issue and have resolved the data issue. All data should now be fully restored and visible to Google My Business owners. Here is how the report looked a week ago, compared to a few days ago, compared to today: About The AuthorSource link : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2xQaLtU Get Pumped! Weve Added New Reputation Builder Features Platform Updates & Expanded Our Plans8/31/2017 Get excited , now you can reach your customers beyond email and access more features through the Reputation Builder. Delivering more value to your business, and increasing your ability to get additional customer feedback and reviews. Introducing SMS Feedback RequestsTake your customer communication to a new level with the ability to send SMS Text Message feedback requests. In a time when we live on our smartphones, an opportunity to connect with customers via mobile is a win. In fact many businesses and customers respond better to SMS versus email. Open rates for SMS feedback requests are over 90%, whereas email ranges between 40-50%. Incorporating SMS Text messages into your campaigns can help increase the amount of quality feedback and online reviews on Google, Facebook, and industry reviews site. How it Works
New Plans For SMS Text MessagingWith the added functionality of sending plain text messages or text messages with an image, and the latest upgrades to the platform, we have created 3 new plans. You choose how you want to use Reputation Builder and the number of customers you want to engage with each month. All plans offer the ability to add more customers every month to your account and location(s), with options on how to reach them. How to Upgrade To change your basic plan to one of our new plans that include SMS Text Message Feedback, all you have to do is:
Additional Sweet Platform FeaturesSurvey Says…Learn more about your customers with our Survey Questions feature. In addition to asking your customers whether they are likely to recommend your business, you can now incorporate up to 4 extra questions in your requests, and dive deeper into your customer’s experience. Find out how customers feel about your pricing, overall service, quality, and more. Limiting the number of questions to 4, allows for simple and quick responses and an email that isn’t going to overwhelm your customers. The survey feature follows the same format as the Net Promoter Score question, in that they are on a 0-10 rating scale. This keeps email formats streamlined and consistent both for you and your customers. When adding survey questions to your requests you can edit:
Add Custom Tags to Your Feedback & Create New Testimonial WidgetsYou can now apply custom tags to each feedback response you receive from your customers. Use the tags to group together testimonials and then embed them on any page on your site. All of the testimonials are marked-up in schema. To give you an idea how this works, let’s say you own an HVAC company located in New York and your two top service areas are Brooklyn and Queens. You can tag your direct feedback from customers located in “Brooklyn” and “Queens” by creating custom tags for each. Then you can create a custom Testimonial Widget for each tag. The widget will group together all of the feedback you received from clients in that area and you can display these on each page on your site. This feature is not only perfect for organizing your testimonials to reflect each specific service or product, but the widgets use of schema markup can help generate those golden review stars in organic search results in Google. Review stars in SERP’s help increase searcher click-through rates and help your result standout! Here are instructions on how to implement tagging into your current campaigns. Add Mobile Phone to Kiosk ModeFor users that enable Kiosk mode to get customer feedback and reviews, you now have the ability to collect a customer’s mobile phone number and can send feedback requests via SMS. Job ID on Feedback PageGet even more organized and incorporate a Job ID into your feedback page, so that you can capture specific information in your feedback requests. Respond as an Account UserNow users can respond to customer feedback, both private and public, as themselves and not only as the business owner. Previously when you logged into your user account, you were only able to respond as the account business owner. The option to respond as the owner is still there all you have to do is check the box to reply as the own. Let Customers Copy Their FeedbackNow when customers leave positive feedback and are redirected to your Positive Feedback Thank You Page, their response will show up at the top with a Copy button next to it, they can copy their response and use it to leave an online review on Google, Facebook, or any other site. All you have to do is add the [copy-paste-block] to your Positive Feedback Thank You page using the visual template editor. Add Your Customer’s Feedback to Your Thank You EmailYou can also incorporate your customer’s feedback into your Positive Feedback Thank You email by going into the visual template editor for the thank you email and selecting the [customer feedback] tag from the tags drop-down. Hide Your Address and Phone Number on Your Feedback PageFor service area businesses that do not want to show their address and phone number on the feedback page, you can now remove that. New Review SitesWe’ve added the following additional review sites:
Upgraded ReportsOur reports have been redesigned with a focus on visuals, charting, increased data, and the ability to customize your views. We have:
Expect MoreWe have more updates, tweaks, and features coming your way, so stay tuned. If you have any questions regarding our new plans or features, please contact our fantastic support team. Read more source : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2vvrPbY At the abstract level, if many people believe in something then it will grow. The opposite is also true. And in a limitless, virtual world, you can not see what is not there. The Yahoo DirectoryBefore I got into search, the Yahoo! Directory was so important to the field of search there were entire sessions at SES conferences on how to get listed & people would even recommend using #1AAA-widgets.com styled domains to alphaspam listings to the top of the category. The alphaspam technique was a carry over from yellow page directories - many of which have went through bankruptcy as attention & advertising shifted to the web. Go to visit the Yahoo! Directory today and you get either a server error, a security certificate warning, or a redirect to aabacosmallbusiness.com. Poof. It's gone. Before the Yahoo! Directory disappeared their quality standards were vastly diminished. As a webmaster who likes to test things, I tried submitting sites of various size and quality to different places. Some sites which would get rejected by some $10 directories were approved in the Yahoo! Directory. The Yahoo! Directory also had a somewhat weird setting where if you canceled a directory listing in the middle of the term they would often keep it listed for many years to come - for free. After many SEOs became fearful of links the directory saw vastly reduced rates of submissions & many existing listings canceled their subscriptions, thus leaving it as a service without much of a business model. DMOZAt one point Google's webmaster guidelines recommended submitting to DMOZ and the Yahoo! Directory, but that recommendation led to many lesser directories sprouting up & every few years Google would play a whack-a-mole game and strip PageRank or stop indexing many of them. Many have presumed DMOZ was on its last legs many times over the past decade. But on their 18th birthday they did a spiffy new redesign. Different sections of the site use different color coding and the design looks rather fresh and inviting. Take a look. However improved the design is, it is unlikely to reverse this ranking trend. Lacking EngagementWhy did those rankings decline though? Was it because the sites suck? Or was it because the criteria to rank changed? If the sites were good for many years it is hard to believe the quality of the sites all declined drastically in parallel. What happened is as engagement metrics started getting folded in, sites that only point you to other sites become an unneeded step in the conversion funnel, in much the same way that Google scrubbed affiliates from the AdWords ecosystem as unneeded duplication. What is wrong with the user experience of a general web directory? There isn't any single factor, but a combination of them...
If a directory mostly links to lower quality sites Google can choose to either not index it or not trust links from it. And even if a directory generally links to trustworthy sites, Google doesn't need to rank it to extract most the value from it. The trend of lower traffic to the top tier general directory sites has happened across the board. Many years ago Google's remote rater guidelines cited Joeant as a trustworthy directory. Their traffic chart looks like this. And the same sort of trend is true for BOTW, Business.com, GoGuides.org, etc. There is basically nothing a general web directory can do to rank well in Google on a sustainable basis, at least not in the English language. Even if you list every school in the city of Winnipeg that page can't rank if it isn't indexed & even if it is indexed it won't rank well if your site has a Panda-related ranking issue. There are a couple other issues with such a comprehensive page:
Knock On EffectsIn addition to those web directories getting fewer paid submissions, most are likely seeing a rise in link removal requests. Google's "fear first" approach to relevancy has even led them to listing DMOZ as an unnatural link source in warning emails to webmasters. What's more, many people who use automated link clean up tools take the declining traffic charts & low rankings of the sites as proof that the links lack value or quality. That means anyone who gets hit by a penalty & ends up in warning messages not only ends up with less traffic while penalized, but they also get extra busy work to do while trying to fix whatever the core problem is. And in many cases fixing the core problem is simply unfeasible without a business model change. When general web directories are defunded it not only causes many of them to go away, but it also means other related sites and services disappear.
Now perhaps general web directories no longer really add much value to the web & they are largely unneeded. But there are other things which are disappearing in parallel which were certainly differentiated & valuable, though perhaps not profitable enough to maintain the "relevancy" footprint to compete in a brand-first search ecosystem. Depth vs BreadthUnless you are the default search engine (Google) or the default social network everyone is on (Facebook), you can't be all things to all people. If you want to be differentiated in a way that turns you into a destination you can't compete on a similar feature set because it is unlikely you will be able to pay as much for traffic-driven partnerships as the biggest players can. Can niche directories or vertical directories still rank well? Sure, why not. Sites like Yelp & TripAdvisor have succeeded in part by adding interactive elements which turned them into sought after destinations. Part of becoming a destination is intentionally going out of their way to *NOT* be neutral platforms. Consider how many times Yelp has been sued by businesses which claimed the sales team did or was going to manipulate the displayed reviews if the business did not buy ads. Users tend to trust those platforms precisely because other users may leave negative reviews & that (usually) offers something better than a neutral and objective editorial tone. And that user demand for those reviews, of course, is why Google stole reviews from those sorts of sites to try to prop up the Google local places pages. It was a point of differentiation which was strong enough that people wanted it over Google. So Google tried to neutralize the advantage. BlogsThe above section is about general directories, but the same concept applies to almost any type of website. Consider blogs. A decade ago feed readers were commonplace, bloggers often cross-linked & bloggers largely drove the conversation which bubbled up through mainstream media. Google Reader killed off RSS feed readers by creating a fast, free & ad-free competitor. Then Google abruptly shut down Google Reader. Not only do whimsical blogs like Least Helpful or Cute Overload arbitrarily shut down, but people like Chris Pirillo who know tech well suggest blogging is (at least economically) dead. Many of the people who are quitting are not the dumb, the lazy, and the undifferentiated. Rather many are the wise trend-aware players who are highly differentiated yet find it impossible to make the numbers work:
In the current market Google can conduct a public relations campaign on a topic like payday loans, have their PR go viral & then if you mention "oh yeah, so Google is funding the creation of doorway pages to promote payday loans" it goes absolutely nowhere, even if you do it DURING THE NEWS CYCLE. So much of what exists is fake that anything new is evaluated from the perception of suspicion. While the real (and important) news stories go nowhere & the PR distortions spread virally, the individual blogger ends up feeling a bit soulless if they try to make ends meet:
If you can't get your own site to grow enough to matter then maybe it makes sense to contribute to someone else's to get your name out there. I recently received this unsolicited email:
That person was not actually a member of that site's team, but they had found a way to get their content published on it. In part because that sort of stuff exists, Google tries to minimize the ability for reputation to flow across sites. The large platforms are so smug, so arrogant, they actually state the following sort of crap in interviews:
Sure you can bust your ass to build up Facebook, but when their business model changes (bye social gaming companies, hello live streaming video) best of luck trying to follow them. And if you starve during the 7 lean years in between when your business model is once again well aligned with Facebook you can't go back in time to give yourself a meal to un-starve. Content FarmsEhow.com has removed *MILLIONS* of pages of content since getting hit by Panda. And yet their ranking chart looks like this What is crazy is the above chart actually understates the actual declines, because the shift of search to mobile & increasing prevalence of ads in the search results means estimates of organic search traffic may be overstated significantly compared to a few years prior. A half-decade ago a bootstrapped eHow competitor named ArticlesBase got some buzz in TechCrunch because they were making about $500,000 a month on about 20 million monthly unique visitors. That business was recently listed on Flippa. They are getting about a half-million unique monthly visitors (off 95%) and about $2,000 a month in revenues (off about 99.6%). The negative karma with that site (in terms of ability to rank) is so bad that the site owner suggested on Flippa to publish any new content from new authors onto different websites: "its not going to get to 0 as most of the traffic is not google today, but we would suggest to push out the fresh daily incoming content to new sites - thats where the growth is." Now a person could say "eHow deserves to die" and maybe they are right. BUT one could easily counter that point by noting...
The wrappers around the content & masthead logos change, but by and large the people and strategies don't change anywhere near as quickly. Web Portals & News SitesAs the mainstream media gets more desperate, they are more willing to partner with the likes of Demand Media to get any revenue they can. You see the reality of this desperation in the stock charts for newspaper companies. Or how about this chart for Yahoo.com. It doesn't look particularly bad, especially if you consider that Yahoo has shut down many of their vertical sites. Underlying flat search traffic charts misses declining publisher CPMs and the click traffic mix shift away from organic toward paid search channels as search traffic shifts to mobile devices & Google relentlessly increases the size of the search ads. Yahoo may still rank #3 for keyword x, but if that #3 ranking is below the fold on both mobile and desktop devices they might need to rank #1 to get as much traffic as #3 got a couple years ago. Yahoo! was once the leading search portal & now they are worth about 1/5th of LinkedIn (after backing out their equity stakes in Alibaba and Yahoo! Japan). The chart is roughly flat, but the company is up for a fire sale because organic search result displacement & the value of traffic has declined quicker than Yahoo! can fire employees & none of their Hail Mary passes worked.
The same line of thinking was used to justify the Tumblr acquisition, which has went nowhere fast - just like their 50+ other acquisitions. Yahoo! shut down many verticals, fired many workers, sold off some real estate & is exploring selling their patents. Chewing Up the Value ChainSmaller devices that are harder to use means the gateways have to try to add more features to maintain relevance. As they add features, publishers get displaced:
And if converting on mobile is hard or inconvenient, many people will shift to the defaults they know & trust, thus choosing to buy on Amazon rather than a smaller ecommerce website. One of my friends who was in ecommerce for many years stated this ultimately ended up becoming the problem with his business. People would email him back and forth about the product, related questions, and basically go all the way through the sales process with getting him to answer every concern & recommend each additional related product needed, then at the end they would ask him to price match Amazon & if he couldn't they would then buy from Amazon. If he had more scale he might have been able to get a better price from suppliers and compete with Amazon on price, but his largest competitor who took out warehouse space also filed for bankruptcy because they were unable to make the interest payments on their loans. We live in a society which over-values ease-of-use & scale while under-valuing expertise. Look at how much consolidation there has been in the travel market since Google Flights launched & Google went pay-to-play with hotel search. Expedia owns Travelocity & Orbitz. Priceline owns Kayak. Yahoo! Travel simply disappeared. TripAdvisor is strong, but even they were once a part of Expedia. How different are the remaining OTAs? One could easily argue they are less differentiated than this article about the history of the travel industry makes Skift against other travel-related news sites. How many markets are strong enough to support the creation of that sort of featured editorial content? Not many. And most companies which can create that sort of in-depth content leverage the higher margins on shallower & cheaper content to pay for that highly differentiated featured content creation. But if the knowledge graph and new search features are simply displacing the result set the number of people who will be able to afford creating that in-depth featured content is only further diminished. Over 5 years ago Bing's Stefan Weitz mentioned they wanted to move search from a web of nouns to a web of verbs & to "look at the web as a digital representation of the physical world." Some platforms are more inclusive than Google is & decide to partner rather than displace, but Bing's partnership with Yelp or TripAdvisor doesn't help you if you are a direct competitor of Yelp or TripAdvisor, or if your business was heavily reliant on one of these other channels & you fall out of favor with them. Chewing Up Real EstateThere are so many enhanced result features in the search results it is hard to even attempt to make an exhaustive list. As search portals rush to add features they also rush to grab real estate & outright displace the concept of "10 blue links." There has perhaps been nothing which captured the sentiment better than
The following is paraphrased, but captures the intent to displace the value chain & the roll of publishers.
What role do publishers have in the above process? Unpaid data sources used to train algorithms at Facebook & Google? Individually each of these assistive search feature roll outs may sound compelling, but ultimately they defund publishing.
Not a "Google Only" ProblemPeople may think I am unnecessarily harsh toward Google in my views, but this sort of shift is not a Google-only thing. It is something all the large online platforms are doing. I simply give Google more coverage because they have a history of setting standards & moving the market, whereas a player like Yahoo! is acting out of desperation to simply try to stay alive. The market capitalization of the companies reflect this. Google & Facebook control the ecosystem. Everyone else is just following along.
The same sort of behavior is happening in China, where Google & Facebook are prohibited from competing. As publishers get displaced and defunded online platforms can literally buy the media: “There’s very little downside. Even if we lose money it won’t be material,” Alibaba's Mr. Tsai said. “But the upside [in buying SCMP] is quite interesting.” The above quote was on Alibaba buying the newspaper of record in Hong Kong. As bad as entire industries becoming token purchases may sound, that is the optimistic view. :D Facebook's Instant Articles and Google's AMP those make a token purchase unnecessary: "I don't think it's any secret that you're going to see a bloodbath in the next 12 months," Vice Media's Shane Smith said, referring to digital media and broadcast TV. "Facebook has bought two-thirds of the media companies out there without spending a dime." Those services can dictate what gets exposure, how it is monetized, and then adjust the exposure and revenue sharing over time to keep partners desperate & keep them hooked.
Give them just enough (false) hope to stay partnered. All the while track user data more granularly & run AI against it to disintermediate & devalue partners. TV networks are aware of the risks of disintermediation and view Netflix with more suspicion than informed SEOs view Google:
And just like Netflix, Facebook will move into original content production. The WikiWikipedia is certainly imperfect, but it is also a large part of why other directories have went away. It is basically a directory tied to an encyclopedia which is free and easy to syndicate. Every large search & discovery platform has an incentive for Wikipedia to be as expansive as possible. The bigger Wikipedia gets, the more potential answers and features can be sourced from it. More knowledge graph, more instant answers, more organic result displacement, more time on site, more ad clicks. Even if a knowledge graph listing is wrong, the harm done by it doesn't harm the search service syndicating the content unless people create a big deal of the error. But if that happens then people will give feedback on how to fix the error & that is a PR lead into the narrative of how quickly search is improving and evolving.
Sergy Brin donates to fund the expansion of Wikipedia. Wikipedia rewrites more webmaster content. Google has more knowledge graph grist and rich answers to further displace publishers. I recently saw the new gray desktop search results Google is tested. When those appear the knowledge graph appears inline with the regular search results & even on my huge monitor the organic result set is below the fold. The problem with that is if your brand name is the same brand name that is in the knowledge graph & you are not the dominant interpretation then you are below the fold on all devices for your core brand UNLESS you pay Google for every single click. How much should a brand like The Book of Life pay Google for being a roadblock? What sort of tax is appropriate & reasonable? How high will you bid in a casino where the house readjusts the shuffle & deal order in the middle of the hand? I recently did a search on Bing & inside their organic search results they linked to a Mahalo-like page called Bing Knows. I guess this is a feature in China, but it could certainly spread to other markets. If they partnered with an eBay or Amazon.com and put a "buy now" button in the search results they'd have just about completely closed the loop there. Broad CommodificationThe reason I started this article with directories is their role is to link to sites. They are categorized collections of links which have been heavily commodified & devalued to the point they are rendered unnecessary and viewed adversely by much of the SEO market (even the ones with decent editorial standards). Just like links got devalued, so did domain names. And, as mentioned above in the parts about blogging, content farms, web portals & news sites ... the same trend is happening to almost every type of content. Online ad revenues are still growing quickly, but they are not flowing through to old media & many former leading bloggers consider blogging dead. Big platform players like Google and Facebook broaden cross-device user tracking to create new relevancy signals and extract most the value created by publisher. The more information the platform owns the more of a starving artist the partners become. As partners become more desperate, they overvalue growth (just like Yahoo! with Polyvore):
Disruption is not a strategy, but the whole point of accelerating it & pushing it (without an adequate plan for "what's next") is to re-establish feudal lords. The web is a virtual land where the commodity which matters most is attention. If you go back in time, lords maintained wealth & control through extracting rents. A few years ago a quote like the following one may have sounded bizarre or out of place
But if you view it through the some historical context it isn't hard to understand
Google funding LendUp & ranking their doorway pages while hitting the rest of the industry is Google bestowing "monopoly charters on their favorite merchants." HeadwindsThe issue is not that the value of anything drops to zero, but rather a combine set of factors shrinks down the size of the market which can be profitably served. Each of these factors eat at margins...
The least sexy consultant pitch in the world: "Sure I can probably rank your website, but it will take a year or two, cost you at least $80,000 per year, and you will still be below the fold even if we get to #1 because the paid search ads fill up the first screen of results." That isn't going to be an appealing marketing message for a new small business with a limited budget. The Formula“The open web is pretty broken. ... Railroad, electricity, cable, telephone—all followed this similar pattern toward closedness and monopoly, and government regulated or not, it tends to happen because of the power of network effects and the economies of scale” - Ev Williams. The above article profiling Ev Williams also states: "An April report from the web-analytics company Parse.ly found that Google and Facebook, just two companies, send more than 80 percent of all traffic to news sites." The same general trend is happening to almost every form of content - video, news, social, etc..
Hey, sure your traffic is declining & your revenue is declining faster. You are getting squeezed out, but if you trust the primary players responsible for the shift & rely on Instant Articles or Google's AMP this time will be different. ...or maybe not... Facts & OpinionsWhen I saw some Google shills syndicating Google's "you can't copyright facts" pitch without question I cringed, because I knew where that was immediately headed. A year later the trend was obvious.
So now we get story pitches where the author tries to collect a few quote sources to match the narrative already in their head. Surely this has gone on for a long time, but it has rarely been so transparently obvious and cringeworthy as it is today.
And if you stray too far from facts into opinions & are successful, don't be surprised if you end up on the receiving end of proxy lawsuits:
The desperation is so bad news sites don't even attempt to hide it. And part of what is driving that is bot-driven content further eroding margins on legitimate publishing. Google not only ranks those advertorials, but they also promote some of the auto-generated articles which read like:
I changed a few words in each sentence of that quote to make it harder to find the source as I wasn't trying to out them specifically. But the auto-generated content was ranked by Google & monetized via inline Google AdSense ads promoting the best marijuana stocks to invest in and warning of a pending 80% stock market crash coming soon this year. Hey at least it isn't a TOTALLY fake story! Publishers get the message loud and clear. Tronc wants to ramp up on AI driven video content at scale:
All is well, news & information are just externalities to a search No big deal. "With newspapers dying, I worry about the future of the republic. We don’t know yet what’s going to replace them, but we do already know it’s going to be bad." - Charlie Munger Build a BrandBuild a brand, that way you are protected from the rapacious tech platforms. Or so the thinking goes. But that leads back to the above image where The Book of Life is below the fold on their own branded search query because there is another interpretation Google feels is more dominant. The big problem with "brand as solution" is you not only have to pay to build a brand, but then you have to pay to protect it. And the number of search "innovations" to try to siphon off some late funnel branded traffic and move it back up the funnel to competitors (to force the brand to pay again for their own brand to try to displace the "innovations") will only continue growing. And at any point in time if Disney makes a movie using your brand name as the name of the movie, you are irrelevant and need of a rebrand overnight, unless you commit to paying Google for your brand forever. Having an offline location can be a point of strength and a point of differentiation. But it can also be a reason for Google to re-route user traffic through more Google owned & controlled pages. Further, most large US offline retailers are doing horrible. Almost all the offline growth is in stores selling dirt cheap unbranded imported stuff like Dollar General or Family Dollar & stores like Ross and TJ Maxx which sell branded item remainders at discount prices. And as Amazon gets more efficient by the day, other competitors with high cost structures & less efficient operations grow relatively less efficient over time. The Wall Street Journal recently published an article about a rift between Wal-Mart & Procter & Gamble: “They sell crappy private label, so you buy Swiffer with a crappy refill,” said one of the people familiar with the product changes. “And then you don’t buy again.” In trying to drive sales growth, P&G is resorting to some Yahoo!-like desperate measures, included meetings where "Some workers donned gladiator-like armor for the occasion." Riding on other platforms or partners carries the same sorts of risks as trusting Google or Facebook too much. Even owning a strong brand name and offline distribution does not guarantee success. Sears already spun out their real estate & they are looking to sell the Kenmore & Craftsman brands. The big difference between the web and offline platforms is the marginal cost of information is zero, so they can quickly & cheaply spread to adjacent markets in ways that physically constrained offline players can not & some of the big web platforms have far more data on people than governments do. It is worth noting one of the things that came out of the Snowden leaks is spooks were leveraging Google's DoubleClick cookies for tracking users. As desperate stores/platforms see slowing growth they squeeze for margins and seek to accelerate growth any way possible. Chasing growth ultimately leads to the promise of what differentiates them disappearing. I recently bought some "hand crafted" soaps on Etsy, which shipped from Shenzen. And for as much as I like shopping on Amazon, I was uninspired when a seller recently sent me this. The above sort of activity is what is going on in the real world even among brands which are not under attack. The domestic economic landscape is getting quite ugly:
And the local abusive tech monopolies are now firmly promoting the TPP: "make it more difficult for TPP countries to block Internet sites" = countries should have less influence over the web than individual Facebook or Google engineers do. In a land of algorithmic false positives that cause personal meltdowns and organizational breakdowns there is nothing wrong at all with that!
Luckily the world can depend on China to drive growth and it will save us. Or maybe there is a small problem with that line of thinking...
Can any experts chime in on this? Let's see... First, there is Wal-Mart selling off their Chinese e-commerce operation to the #2 Chinese ecommerce company & then there's this from the top Chinese ecommerce company:
Source link : Originally from Marketing Online Tip - Feed http://ift.tt/2xz1Vli |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2021
Categories |