The "SAVE"
chorus line (click on) is now dancing! ("S"= Search Engines, "A"= Advertisers, "V"= Vendors, and "E"= End Users). The reason is Mary Ann Wells's (Web-Kare.com) suggested solution to vertical creep of what she calls "directories".
Solution: On 5/19/04 M.A. Wells said "...I feel that they should be given their own category at Google and Yahoo like 'news', but their category could be 'Directories' (vs. "Directory" which Google already has - I suggest using "Buyer Guide Directories"). When I want to find a directory of anything, I usually include that word 'directory' in my listing (I think Mary Ann means "search terms"). When I want to find a product or service I don't expect to see directories coming up." Therefore, there would be a new "vertical portal search tab" like Images, Groups, News, Froogle, Local, etc..
I agree! I want a choice, depending upon what stage in the buying cycle I am in (product research or price comparison shopping). When it is "digital cameras" I'm searching for, I don't want 8 out of 10 Google Results on the first SERP to be "review-buyer guide" sites. Only powershot.com & shortcourses.com had no "buyer's guides", although some listings were a "combo".
These "vertical aggregator, buyer guide directories" have a place in search marketing as Scottie Claiborne said on 10/19/04 in "Search Marketing off the Beaten Track". They provide "steady traffic, credibility, conversion, and link popularity". But, because of their top ranking, they get a lot of user's in the beginning of the buying cycle whose intent is "research" as Yahoo Mindset puts it, rather than "shopping". Many of these users, at that point, would prefer the search engines to be more like a "library" vs. a "yellow pages".
If Mary Ann's suggestion were utilized, individual seller web site owners then compete more aggressively with direct competitors vs. buyer guide directories for top 10 SERP real estate. Directories, on the other hand, would compete more with other directories in the same B2B or B2C industries. Therefore, since more directories are starting all the time, and more individual web site owners would come into the game, thinking that there is a more "even playing field", the search engines would make more money in the long term.
The end result would be this: The buyer guide directories would get increased "Traffic Of Good Intent", and translate that to improved conversion rates for their advertisers. This means they make more money in the long term. At first, they would get better rankings, with less money invested on organic and PPC, due to less non-directory competition. But, since more and more vertical aggregator directories are starting all the time, the increased competition would force the good directories to be more "value added" better.
The individual site owners would get better rankings and spend less money on PPC at first. But, more SMB's and hesitant larger companies would come into the game, now that it is a more "even playing field". Right now, these companies know that being on the 1st SERP is best, but many feel it would be too expensive (SEO & PPC) to compete with the directories.
Lastly, the users would get increased relevance to their intent. They would have an upfront choice that would enable them to have fewer clicks to those relevant results, once they entered their search terms. This would help increase the user's search engine brand loyalty, while possibly giving the search engines more PPC inventory to sell.
Proper implementation by the search engines of this simple solution would be crucial. "BUYER GUIDE DIRECTORIES" would need to be prominently displayed and explained to speed the "new habit" usage transition. Then, possibly, "B2C" & "B2B" options could be utilized. This could solve the "pumps" as intent of user for "ladies shoes" vs. "centrifugal pumps" for industry, and the "tubing" as intent of user for industrial "heat shrink tubing" vs."tubing on the river".
Another benefit is that the search engines could promote their own "shopping" vertical portals within the new "BUYER GUIDE DIRECTORIES" even better than they do now. "Froogle" or "Yahoo Shopping", etc. could be prominently displayed as featured choices.
My next post will be on why Mary Ann's solution, that I like, probably would not be a long term fix due to the reality of what is starting to happen to the web site listings on the SERP's of those "vertical portal search tab" catagories (because of the other kind of "vertical creep").
Animated image courtesy of www.artie.com.
Comments