While Google claim that this change “will make it much easier for users to find a large number of results from a single site”, it has not gone without a certain amount of criticism.

Firstly, let’s use Sky Sports again as the example. Although Sky Sports may well be a prominent brand, with a website providing useful news to those looking for it, as a product in the UK, it is not exclusively found on the Sky TV network.  Sky Sports is also sold by Virgin and BT Vision. Therefore, by allowing Sky Sports to dominate this search engine results page (SERP) it may well be very damaging to the sales of the product on those two other platforms.

The comments on the Google Webmaster page which broke the news also highlight some usability issues…

mayank said…“I dont think its very useful. it will eat up my time by having to click on subsequent pages, for if i wanted more results from a single site, i could always do “more from site” command.”

Collin Cornwell said…“This is a horrible feature.. Major retailers that sell “branded” products will be pushed off the page, giving users fewer options. Bing is going to steal a tremendous amount of market share because of this.”

30something said…“I was 2nd on the page for my search term – now I’m 9th, underneath 8 pages from my competitor. yeah, a real nice start to my weekend.”

What I find interesting is the last statement by Google:

“We expect today’s improvement will help users find deeper results from a single site, while still providing diversity on the results page.”

However, was it not Google’s Peter Norvig who said, “for the second one [search result], you don’t want something that’s almost the same as the first. You prefer some diversity.”

Brands with reputation management issues will benefit from this change. However, aside from that, I’m not sure I see how beneficial this change will be…

The best method of illustrating how it works is through using this video, presented by Matt Cutts of Google. As well as understanding how search engines work, you’ll also learn a bit about PageRank, indexing and paid for adverts. Enjoy!

The example will come first, followed by the explanation…

*red hat with green stripes* = the exact phrase

bar covent garden -leicester square = bars in covent garden not leicester square

+sock =  only the words sock, not the plural or any tenses or synonyms

define:seo = definitions of the word ’seo’ from around the Web

red * blue = the words ‘red’ and ‘blue’ separated by one or more words

(p.s. the ‘I’m Feeling Lucky’ button takes you directly to first web page returned for your query)

Happy searching!

Google has announced that, from September 14th, it will allow resellers, sellers of component, replacement or compatible parts, and informational sites (such as review sites) to use third-party trademarks in their ad copy, regardless of whether they own them or have approval from the trademark owner.

Any advertisers that do not fall into these categories will not be included in the changes.

In line with the US, Google has opened up the market to hundreds of thousands of third-party sites that have previously been restricted in what they can say within their copy.

Some, through being affiliates, may already have agreements in place with brands to use their trademarks within paid search campaigns, but the policy change negates any necessity for others to make such agreements – if they have relevance to the keywords they’re bidding on, of course.

Likewise, department stores and review sites will have more options open to them.

Google, which first rolled out the changes to ad texts in the US last year, expects the policy change to make ads more specific and relevant for users.

Peter Fitzgerald, Google UK’s industry director, said the change in the US has helped its users and advertisers by reducing the number of “overly generic” ads.

“We believe the user experience is improved if, for example, they conduct a search for a particular brand of TV and see ads which give them more detail about where they can buy that brand, where they might be able to fix it, buy component parts or read reviews.”

Now, six months later, almost half (47%) of 18-24-year-olds use real-time search results. However, just 8% of these users find them useful (according to research by Tamar).

But what about other types of search results?

Interestingly, by looking into the search habits of 2,210 people, Tamar’s report also showed that just 4% of people would choose paid search results over natural search results, down by 1% on 2009 and down 6% on 2007.

The research found that people over 55 were the least likely to trust paid search as a trusted source with just 3% choosing it over natural search results.

Younger people are increasing their use of mobile to search as 14% of both 18-24-year olds and 25-34-year-olds use mobile search every day.

Neil Jackson, search strategy director at Tamar, said, “Consumers have decided that natural search is the route they trust more and this defines the strategic starting point for all brands, which need to focus on being highly visible ‘naturally’ through campaigns that reach effectively across a wide range of media and devices, especially mobile – a huge growth area for the search engines.”

It seems that I’m not the only one losing interest in Google Wave. As the graph below shows,  Google did a great job of building up hype around Google Wave towards the end of last year, however it seems that interest in the product is now plummeting.

The graph above shows Google search volume for the term “Google Wave” over the past 12 months.

The Hitwise graph below further confirms that usage of the service is falling; traffic to the Google Wave has fallen considerably over the past two months.

The above statistics don’t surprise me in the slightest; Google Wave is currently not sticky enough to hold attention, and the functionality isn’t great at the moment. No doubt Google have some tricks up their sleeves, and the product is still in beta, so I am by no means writing this service off, but for now, I’m going to stop waving.

What are your thoughts?