Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts

Monday, August 15, 2011

What is Google PageRank? -Whiteboard Friday

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Sure, PageRank is older than Emperor Palpatine, but a lot of SEOs still use it as their primary metric for link research and rankability. Unfortunately, using PageRank exclusively to measure progress and page value can yield results as ugly as the Emperor's face. Since Google updates PageRank so sporadically, you may not get an accurate picture of a page's actual value. That being said, Google updated PageRank late June and a lot of SEOs are talking about it! After all, it's not a completely useless metric. Rand covers some of the uses for PageRank in this week's Whiteboard Friday, but if you have ways you use it that we didn't cover, we'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!

Welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday. This week we're talking a little bit about Google PageRank. I know this feels a little retro for some of you. You're thinking, "PageRank. Oh my God, That's so 2001-2002." But it comes up a lot. It comes up again and again, particularly with folks who are new to the industry, new to SEO, or have heard a lot because Google does a lot of publicity around PageRank being their original algorithm. A lot of media publications talk about it. Even a lot of marketers still think of it as an important metric. So, I am here to set some of those myths straight and also talk about some ways to actually use and understand PageRank in the way that Google gives it to us, which is in the toolbar.

So, let's start by talking about the difference between toolbar PageRank, which is what you can see via Google's toolbar or via every tool on the Web. There is no tool on the Web that calculates a different version of PageRank or that uses some other version of PageRank that they secretly get from Google that Google experts write. The PageRank number is always coming via the toolbar, and tools that report it use something called the checksum to get it from the toolbar the way that Google's toolbar pulls it directly from Google Source.

PageRank, toolbar PageRank, is updated randomly. By randomly, I mean, it's been as long as 11 months in some cases between a toolbar PageRank update, meaning that a site's actual PageRank might have jumped up a bunch or gone down a bunch, but Google won't change the metric that they show for 11 months, and then recently we had a PageRank update that only took about one month. It used to be that it would happen every month. Now it is very inconsistent. I think the last ordering was there was a month between the last update. Then it was six months before that. It was about five months before that. It was like three months before that. So it is inconsistent. It is a little random. It is when someone at Google decides to turn on that meter. So you don't really know when the next update is coming, nor do you necessarily know how recent your PageRank is, the PageRank that is being reported in the toolbar, unless you check when the last update occurred. So that's an important thing to notice.

Also to note, PageRank happens on a log scale. Let's talk a little bit about a log scale, what that means. So, for example, a log scale, this is a log base 2. What I have done is just drawn little lines to try and illustrate. So, zero, there is nothing there. One, I drew one little line. Two has two little lines. Three has four lines. It is doubling, the base is 2. So we're going up. You can imagine, this curve sort of looks like this until we get to PageRank of 10, which would be way, way off the screen, just super high up, and obviously my line illustrations are by no means perfect. So this should actually be double that. It is probably not.

PageRank does not use log base 2. We suspect here at SEOmoz because we calculate our own similar metric by crawling the Web, we calculate a metric called MozRank. MozRank is designed to mimic PageRank. In fact, it is very similar to the original algorithm that was published by Larry and Sergey back at Stanford. But what we've found is that when we need to scale it, the log base is not 2, but it is between 8 and 9. That means that a PR 7 for example would be 8 times, let's say 8.5 times, more important, more linked to, more well linked to than a PageRank 6 page. So there is a lot of variation in here, and that gradation is not observable through the PageRank that you get in the toolbar, which is a little frustrating. It is one of the reasons why when you see MozRank reported, MozRank will say something like 6.42. So you get a sense of, oh, okay, that's where I am in the scale. I am closer to a 6 than a 7. I am right about the midpoint. This helps you to just see those changes month over month since MozRank is reported consistently every month.

PageRank in the toolbar has a relatively low correlation to how well things actually rank. Meaning that if you were to take the toolbar PageRank of thousands of top 10, top 20, top 30 results and compare them and ask the question, "Do things with higher PageRank tend to rank better then things with lower PageRank," the answer would be yes, but only barely. In fact, the correlation is around 0.11, 0.12. It is pretty darn low, and it gets lower and lower the further away we move from the last PageRank update, which makes sense, right? As the scores degrade in freshness, so too does that correlation. You get this sense of like, wow, yeah, PageRank is probably a very small part of the algorithm.

What it is useful for, and what Google talks about it being used for, and not toolbar PageRank but real PageRank, which we'll talk about in a sec, is to help them determine which URLs on the Web to crawl and prioritize and recrawl. Meaning that, things that are more important, they tend to recrawl them more frequently, and PageRank is one of the items that goes into that calculation. I think almost certainly another one is how frequently they are adding new unique content that Google has never seen before, because they want to make sure that they are indexing that stuff.

So, real PageRank is actually a number that is calculated between 0 and 1. It uses a ton of trailing decimal points typically. It's updated multiple times daily. So you can hear Google's representatives talking about PageRank and they say, "Oh yeah, internally we are constantly recalculating and refactoring PageRank. In fact, we now have systems to estimate the calculation of PageRank so that we don't have to run it across the full web graph because it is very computationally expensive to run PageRank so many times." In fact, here at SEOmoz, MozRank calculations are one of the big reasons that it takes a long time for us to process and calculate an index. I think it is almost a day, day and a half, of processing across 50 to 60 billion URLs to try and make the MozRank calculations happen, which are similar to PageRank.

So, all of that theoretical stuff in mind, let's talk about actually using PageRank, where you should and where you shouldn't.

PageRank is useful as a raw indication of link popularity. Meaning that, PageRank doesn't take into account anchor text. It doesn't take into account whether the sites are related to each other. It doesn't take into account whether some of the sites maybe have been flagged for spam. It doesn't take into account whether the page is relevant to the actual search query. All it says is, in terms of the raw link popularity, the how many pages are pointed to this and how important the pages are that link to this, how important is this on the grand scale of the Web? Remember, the most important site on the web will be a 10, and everything else will fall back from that. So, as the most important sites on the Web gain tons of links, Facebook for example, Twitter for example, everything else is going to be scaled down a little bit. You might have seen in this recent PageRank update, the last couple, that a lot of sites took hits. Big important sites. Nasa.gov went down, Yahoo went down, Google.com fell from a 10 to a 9. That's crazy. That's amazing. What happens there is essentially the most important sites, this is my opinion, but the most important sites are essentially pushing out the boundary of what it takes to be a 10 and then those other sites are falling along the curve somewhere.

So, okay, good as a rough indicator of raw link popularity. It can be useful as well to compare it to other metrics. So, if I see something like a MozRank of a 6 and a PageRank of 3, I might get a little suspicious. There are two big things that could be happening in this type of an instance. If I see that MozRank is high, PageRank is low, I might think to myself, well, maybe since Google's last update to PageRank, this page has gained lots of links and the SEOmoz web index, Linkscape, has recognized that and is crediting them with higher MozRank, but Google, while they have recognized it internally, through real PageRank, they have not calculated it with toolbar PageRank because they have not done a push, an update, of that exported data and so we're just not seeing it.

The other explanation and the more dangerous one is when you see a site and you're like, boy, I think they might be selling links, I think they might be buying links, I think they might be manipulating the link graph in some way through some Web spam and you see those low PR numbers and maybe the page doesn't rank so well, but the MozRank is high, remember that MozRank does not have Google spam calculations in it. PageRank, Google will sometimes penalize sites and pages for selling links or buying links, and that's the way they sort of let you know, like, wink wink, "Hey, we know you're selling links, stop doing it."

The other thing is that the history of PageRank can be useful. So if you se that your site a couple weeks ago or a couple months ago used to be a 6 and now it is a 7, you can gain some insight into that. Especially when you are looking at penalizations you might say, "Oh man, this site used to be a PR 6 four months ago. Now it is a PR 2. Something is mighty suspicious." There is a tool on SEOmoz that is free. It is called Historical PageRank. You can search for it and you will find that. It can be very useful. I actually use and like that tool a lot.

Do not use PageRank for understanding why things rank well in the SERPs or don't. You look at a page of search results and you see, oh, the number one result, well, it must have the highest PageRank. No. Like, no, I can't describe to you how frustrating that is for anyone, for search engineers, for professional SEOs, for . . . anyway, that is not how the search results work. I know. Ten years ago, it used to be the case. It was sort of like use good things on your page and get a high PageRank and you'll rank well on Google. That's not the case anymore. I think PageRank is possibly responsible for, I don't know, sub 5% of the ranking algorithm today, and I think most Googlers would tell you that as well.

Do not use it for valuing link prospects. A lot of cases, I'll see someone say, "Oh, you know, I have this great opportunity. It looks like a great page. It is sitting at CNN.com/articles/012345, but it has a PageRank of 0 or 1. I don't really know if I want that link." Oh my God! You want that link! It's on CNN! What? Come on! PageRank of the actual page, please, use better metrics. Think about things like domain authority. Think about things like page authority. Think about things like, does that PageRank well, is it relevant, is it on a good site, is it useful, is it going to pass good anchor text, are good visitors going to come from there? Don't be thinking about PageRank as your primary metric for valuing link prospects. You can use it in the sense of, hey, let's see if Google might have penalized this page or site for selling links. Maybe that would be worth checking out.

Finally, don't use it as a key metric for reporting. PageRank is not a KPI for anyone and never should be. If someone is coming to you to do SEO and they say, "Hey, you know, we'd really like to improve our PageRank," say no, because PageRank will not send you more visits. It will not send you more business. It will not make your website better in any way. It will not improve your conversion rate. It won't bring you more Twitter followers. It is not going to make your life any better in any way. So please don't report it as a key metric and don't request that it be reported as a key metric. It is generally useless as a KPI. You might consider looking at it just to make sure that you haven't been penalized or that things aren't going terribly wrong. But if you see your PageRank go up by 1 or down by 1, look at your visits. Look at your traffic. Look at how many keywords are sending you referrals. Those are key performance indicators for SEO, not PageRank.

The last thing, possibly the thing that upsets me the most, because I think a lot of experienced SEOs should know this, and many don't. I am not quite sure where this miscommunication happens or why, but PageRank is for pages only. You'd think that would be obvious since it's in the name. Right? It's not called domain rank. It's called PageRank. I know, technically it refers to Larry's last name, Larry Page, not page rank. We're lucky Brin didn't use it or, I don't know, God forbid, I'd created Google. It would be called FishkinRank. That would be horrible.

But PageRank measures pages. Right? So, when you see someone say, "Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, I have a PageRank 6 domain," you have my permission to call baloney on them. You can even use something stronger if you would like, because there is no such thing as a PageRank 6 domain. There is a domain whose home page may indeed have a PageRank score of 6, but that is measuring that home page's link importance and that home page's PageRank, not the importance of the domain as a whole. So, you will find dozens, hundreds, thousands of sites who have a PageRank on their home page that is smaller than what their internal pages might have. For years, SEOmoz had a PageRank of 5 on our home page, but we had a PageRank of 7 on one of our articles and PageRank of 6 on another one. It is not describing how important your domain is. It never is. There is no such thing as domain PageRank.

If you would like, you can use a metric called Domain MozRank, which essentially calculates PageRank over the domain level link graph, meaning it consolidates all pages and looks at domains that point to each other. We think this is something the engines do as well. There are patents and scientific papers and research papers that are written for conferences that suggest that something like that exists, but it is not domain PageRank. Or rather, Google does not report anything that is domain PageRank, and anyone who says otherwise should watch this video.

All right everyone. Thanks so much. Hope you enjoyed this edition of Whiteboard Friday. We will see you again next week. Take care.

Looking for information on some of the other metrics you can use for analyzing links? Check out our earlier series on the topic here: Which Link Metrics Should I Use? Part 1.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Announcement: Google complete algorithm history

Article author is completely owned his or her ( except if hypnosis), does not always reflect the Corporation says SEOmoz.

Well, take a deep breath! I was super excited... sorry, try again * bag * breathe. SEOmoz's first "living document", "Boston" 2003 Panda 2.3 (or whatever is calling the kids these days) announced the complete history of the referenced named Google algorithm changes, very excited about. Why I try to calmly and unchecked sneak peek...

Screenshot of algo history page

Started trying to put together the complete list of quick blog posts, named update this, but we soon Google update history, value as a long term archive provides. Google hundreds of changes each year, but Panda again business-unimportant, a major update is large and of knowing the rule changes found useful.

Complete such breakdown is seen each year at the description and links.

Sample algo history listing

2003-2010, Updates may occur only on. 2011 Changes (and future ), we offer the exact date if possible. To isolate changes exactly possible, so that they can be mapped impact SEO at our site of your own some of these estimates are the attempt.

If you can't wait is a history page, where permanent links, Google algorithm changes.

We designed this document to modify it, so changing algorithm always. I updated list (Google + and Panda 2.3) was recently added as a last week. Recognizes that in addition to our timeline is not accurate. Is our knowledge of the SEO community archives and Google not to publish official list updates, great stuff. So we welcome both corrections and additions to your feedback. As this was a team effort, but many early research was mine, and they say the buck stops here. I think something is wrong you know-the comment tweets DMS, e I like what you. We also included in the main document-only update emails.

Google Algo Change History

This is for both internal and industry-wide as many contexual availability of being ???????. First off, I Silas Casey and mat-moral support and almost heroes my thanks to thing of beauty, understanding Google doc wants to think.

Special thanks SEOmoz Member Barry Smith is the incredible history of the Google algorithm is off-the-top-of-his-head responding about of q public about € answer to A question. For this bit to considering we had is how people all this data to one place to help him answer showed remarkable public response.

I want to thank the people at the end, all the dates and Twitter including the heavy hitters such as Bill Slawski, Brett Tabke, Ted Ulle about chimed in. Most of the links on the document SEOmoz non-site-let you know that the best reference we can build our goal.

In the following helpful resources trying to build a skeleton named Update and ( this research update by update later got) rough when I had my first pass dates there might be interested to me, came across.

I hope, useful resources, and with corrections and additions please contact us. Once again, where permanent Google algorithm change history] is a link to the page.

Google + people love or hate it?

Article author is completely owned his or her ( except if hypnosis), does not always reflect the Corporation says SEOmoz.

Music choice for enjoying reading this article: love two times my at the door

Quick-, which demonstrates these emotions: better than a great awesome, funny, cool annoying boring silly Facebook...

Got it ( and course post probbbbably title gave it )- Google plus (aka Google Google aka plus 1 aka, aka killer Facebook is the new Google Social things).

These terms are just some of the emotions is around a product people. Simply stated, plus Google for positive and negative emotions can show emotion graph over the past few weeks, people about Google + excitement is.

But talk about Google + about this person is 35% of online us have so how we often talk about it or talking about it at 16% for 24% of blogs, social networks followed on Twitter, doing it-* geek * / and who is a good, ol' sock-em-in-the-eye-with-the-next-big-thing Silicon Valley rival most popular online movement on screaming since the indoctrination of Web 2.0 such as student # social #media #marketers.

I also help is our GeekTechMarketerNerds sentiment will be graded if I talk in people from the real world. ( of like rather than through a computer) is that many wonder "Yeah, it now what is cool is?? ?

All this positive sentiment is really back? Let's look under the hood. Google + positive emotion expressing 5,332 sound bites (aka mention ) like 21%, 16% love. On the negative side, 34% hate it and 19% ( i.e. 736 sound bites of small segments from ) love is not.

Positive emotions around Google Plus

Looks like a somewhat weak sentiment rather than expressing positive feelings of "love" or "excellent" non-person lackadaisically "interesting" "enjoy" "cool". Is a small group of people to express negative emotions "haters" and a little fierce seems to be a "f * ck", "spam" "boring", "evil", "stupid".

Negative emotions around Google+

You can also check people have expressed around Google plus the desired behavior. Google need-to-know-someone-in-the-in-crowd invite only at startup 17% positive action "is required" and is a natural thing that was made up of "a".

Positive intended behaviors around Google Plus

People want Google Plus

Talk about and most people are talking about using it and many people it than switching trying.

Negative behaviour is even more interesting: 21%, please don't get it you don't get it or you can't get it, is 5 percent think it is in vain without 8% change is required, or a 2% do not trust it. It hurts. So once again the overall negative sentiment has been small for the positive than those less was.

Negative intended behaviors for Google+

People don't get, can't get, or refuse to get Google Plus

Finally, want to know a curious Google + Facebook Killer ? Well, here what data to us instructions: 13% positive "is like", people are saying about the products they think that it is better than Facebook, Google, Google + 13% think that easily, and 9% think can do more things than other competing products. Just a bunch of stores or our emotions what signature geek overload excitation?? Says is difficult.

What people like about Google Plus

What would Google still work fairly? Services, maybe just some people a little scary that seems to have followed mind easy ways on how to get the RSS feed, and other technical limitations by conditions. Oh and in too late to do something about that name. (And its to use real name profile policy )?.

What people don't like about Google+

Google+ dislike: no rss

Google+ dislike: terms of service

Google Plus dislike: technical limitations

Google Plus dislike: trouble figuring it out

Google+ dislike: the name

Run the following reports. Google's Panda?

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Google + people love or hate it?

Article author is completely owned his or her ( except if hypnosis), does not always reflect the Corporation says SEOmoz.

Music choice for enjoying reading this article: love two times my at the door

Quick-, which demonstrates these emotions: better than a great awesome, funny, cool annoying boring silly Facebook...

Got it ( and course post probbbbably title gave it )- Google plus (aka Google Google aka plus 1 aka, aka killer Facebook is the new Google Social things).

These terms are just some of the emotions is around a product people. Simply stated, plus Google for positive and negative emotions can show emotion graph over the past few weeks, people about Google + excitement is.

But talk about Google + about this person is 35% of online us have so how we often talk about it or talking about it at 16% for 24% of blogs, social networks followed on Twitter, doing it-* geek * / and who is a good, ol' sock-em-in-the-eye-with-the-next-big-thing Silicon Valley rival most popular online movement on screaming since the indoctrination of Web 2.0 such as student # social #media #marketers.

I also help is our GeekTechMarketerNerds sentiment will be graded if I talk in people from the real world. ( of like rather than through a computer) is that many wonder "Yeah, it now what is cool is?? ?

All this positive sentiment is really back? Let's look under the hood. Google + positive emotion expressing 5,332 sound bites (aka mention ) like 21%, 16% love. On the negative side, 34% hate it and 19% ( i.e. 736 sound bites of small segments from ) love is not.

Positive emotions around Google Plus

Looks like a somewhat weak sentiment rather than expressing positive feelings of "love" or "excellent" non-person lackadaisically "interesting" "enjoy" "cool". Is a small group of people to express negative emotions "haters" and a little fierce seems to be a "f * ck", "spam" "boring", "evil", "stupid".

Negative emotions around Google+

You can also check people have expressed around Google plus the desired behavior. Google need-to-know-someone-in-the-in-crowd invite only at startup 17% positive action "is required" and is a natural thing that was made up of "a".

Positive intended behaviors around Google Plus

People want Google Plus

Talk about and most people are talking about using it and many people it than switching trying.

Negative behaviour is even more interesting: 21%, please don't get it you don't get it or you can't get it, is 5 percent think it is in vain without 8% change is required, or a 2% do not trust it. It hurts. So once again the overall negative sentiment has been small for the positive than those less was.

Negative intended behaviors for Google+

People don't get, can't get, or refuse to get Google Plus

Finally, want to know a curious Google + Facebook Killer ? Well, here what data to us instructions: 13% positive "is like", people are saying about the products they think that it is better than Facebook, Google, Google + 13% think that easily, and 9% think can do more things than other competing products. Just a bunch of stores or our emotions what signature geek overload excitation?? Says is difficult.

What people like about Google Plus

What would Google still work fairly? Services, maybe just some people a little scary that seems to have followed mind easy ways on how to get the RSS feed, and other technical limitations by conditions. Oh and in too late to do something about that name. (And its to use real name profile policy )?.

What people don't like about Google+

Google+ dislike: no rss

Google+ dislike: terms of service

Google Plus dislike: technical limitations

Google Plus dislike: trouble figuring it out

Google+ dislike: the name

Run the following reports. Google's Panda?

Announcement: Google complete algorithm history

Article author is completely owned his or her ( except if hypnosis), does not always reflect the Corporation says SEOmoz.

Well, take a deep breath! I was super excited... sorry, try again * bag * breathe. SEOmoz's first "living document", "Boston" 2003 Panda 2.3 (or whatever is calling the kids these days) announced the complete history of the referenced named Google algorithm changes, very excited about. Why I try to calmly and unchecked sneak peek...

Screenshot of algo history page

Started trying to put together the complete list of quick blog posts, named update this, but we soon Google update history, value as a long term archive provides. Google hundreds of changes each year, but Panda again business-unimportant, a major update is large and of knowing the rule changes found useful.

Complete such breakdown is seen each year at the description and links.

Sample algo history listing

2003-2010, Updates may occur only on. 2011 Changes (and future ), we offer the exact date if possible. To isolate changes exactly possible, so that they can be mapped impact SEO at our site of your own some of these estimates are the attempt.

If you can't wait is a history page, where permanent links, Google algorithm changes.

We designed this document to modify it, so changing algorithm always. I updated list (Google + and Panda 2.3) was recently added as a last week. Recognizes that in addition to our timeline is not accurate. Is our knowledge of the SEO community archives and Google not to publish official list updates, great stuff. So we welcome both corrections and additions to your feedback. As this was a team effort, but many early research was mine, and they say the buck stops here. I think something is wrong you know-the comment tweets DMS, e I like what you. We also included in the main document-only update emails.

Google Algo Change History

This is for both internal and industry-wide as many contexual availability of being ???????. First off, I Silas Casey and mat-moral support and almost heroes my thanks to thing of beauty, understanding Google doc wants to think.

Special thanks SEOmoz Member Barry Smith is the incredible history of the Google algorithm is off-the-top-of-his-head responding about of q public about € answer to A question. For this bit to considering we had is how people all this data to one place to help him answer showed remarkable public response.

I want to thank the people at the end, all the dates and Twitter including the heavy hitters such as Bill Slawski, Brett Tabke, Ted Ulle about chimed in. Most of the links on the document SEOmoz non-site-let you know that the best reference we can build our goal.

In the following helpful resources trying to build a skeleton named Update and ( this research update by update later got) rough when I had my first pass dates there might be interested to me, came across.

I hope, useful resources, and with corrections and additions please contact us. Once again, where permanent Google algorithm change history] is a link to the page.

Guide the setting of complex brand name Google Analytics Advanced segments.

If you only set this complex brand - brand and non-branded keyword segments and multiple branded keywords your brand keywords non-brand keywords you are mirroring is a step-by-step guide.

Used to indicate the number of examples of clients and sub brand I. Pay attention to the difference between and and or statements example. As a developer, I find those nasty little weasel. It is a four-part process.

By adding the right brand keywordsSet brand keywordsSet, custom segments, and segment number maximum custom segment of the non-brand keywordsCheck.

1. Choose the right brand keywords.

Process of setting the brand keywords is one obvious brand name are required for selection of keywords in some more complex situations much subtlety and simplicity. ALH.HR hotel, hotel "Dubrovnik Hotels mirror, non-branded search terms" extracts the names of Dubrovnik hotel "Palace", such as only a part of brand name clients such as a Croatia, Dubrovnik, unique, must use brand keywords as. It's from the list of global brands, hotel name

Adriatic luxury hotels (ALH) hotel DubrovnikHotel Dubrovnik PalaceHotel Bellevue DubrovnikGrand DubrovnikHotel Kompas Hotel Bonavia RijekaVilla Agave

Extract the Excelsior Palace, Bellevue, compass room, Bonavia, Agave terminology. I listed the global brand name ALH adds his name written Adriatic luxury hotels. You must sometimes be based on the intention of trade-offs. You must decide how to classify this as you can to both the Adriatic luxury hotels branded and non branded keywords, to note. My brand to keep it as keyword is reflection of the intention of most alternative and regards to live as a non-branded keywords to use. We have now set to segment our eight brand keywords.

2, Custom segment brand keywords settings

Drop-down for more information access segmentsClick to create new advanced segments in Google Analytics, click every visit...

In the "keyword" searches, boxDrag, on the right hand side box left to drop in to the keywords field of green

2 brand advanced

All branded keywords or statementsAdd and statementSearch [in] drop green in the field right hand-side boxSet conditions match exactlyAdd organic valueAdd and and, left to "medium" statementSearch-boxDrag boxDrag-and-drop right hands side boxSet conditions left-in green in the field matching exactlyAdd CPC to valueName of and setting conditions similar to branded keyword valueAdd containsAdd, click the button segment - brand KeywordsTest test segment segment

It's like something like this:

3. Custom segments non-branded keywords setting.

Drop-down for more information access segmentsClick to create new advanced segments in Google Analytics, click every visit...

In the "keyword" searches, boxDrag, on the right hand side box left to drop in to the keywords field of green

5 non brand advanced 

In the State is not containAdd brand keywords exactlyAdd CPC in valueAdd exactlyAdd valueAdd as all branded keywords and statementsAdd and statementSearch boxDrag-and-drop right hands side of boxSet from the left in green in the field in matching criteria such as statementSearch boxDrag and drop the green field on the right side boxSet conditions that match the left-as "while" organic like, value

It should look something like this.

Segment 4, double check and semantic checks.

Teach them before using the appropriate segment of my experience.

If you create a segment of the above is you this custom segments appears.

To perform sensory checks.

The number of branded keyword count + non-branded keywords to keyword = all.

ALH I a few people looking for a website at Croatia to was because I did not include brand terms Croatia language version didn't add those keywords are found! I back brand Croatia language requirement that was put.

Check the add values in a chart

Move the traffic source, place both segments > search engine. Check whether or not to add them to scan and the number of data points. It is simple.

 

Sure to fall to your actual keywords, correct bucket.

Move the traffic source, place both segments > keywords. Bucket falls each keyword expected to scan and the number of data points on whether or not to confirm.

9 checking table  

Save the many headaches if you are using a simple check of these three and advanced segments.

---------------------------------

Solution might this uses my process brand segment please share in comments. Hard to get my head around this search] to love some tips, and then click.

Note: only, up to 20 could be or OR statements one segment can only with the advanced segment profile per 100 maximum. Optional keyword ", regular expression matching, you can work around these limitations" is there.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Increase the ranking and search volumes Google experiment

When I was bowling Martin on query volume on influencing ranking his OMD McDonald's test results showed that ( only not actual position no automated suggestions) is is clear. I saw him hear in Mozcon who taken in amazement we know. However, typical in the SEO World, but I will test it yourself.

Of warning: this and especially scientific, control group do a formal methodology, etc. is a test. Said all the IE I still results attractive hopefully can find it performs its own testing that would stimulate.

Looked at whether or not my goal is site specific search volume and click rankings could move. Refusing to do SEO of her generally seen very little change in terms of search engine rankings since I travel my wife's blog, Everywhereist, and start really is non-branded search is less than 10% of her traffic. I saw analysis, to expose the results of all I also picked it up.

(This is my image and plenty of screenshots to better than scrolling format and thought), becomes a slide presentation below.

General takeaway query volume I from this process, a broader query to travel blog influence seems to (this is certainly the hyper competition is), but "travel blog everywhereist" clickthrough rate, or perhaps search volume for impact site itself in the result ranking is plausible.

I was shocked and real engagement then Google + clickthrough. Currently, Google+12, 570 did is considered from the perspective of, login / join 39,969's followers with Twitter, and Twitter (I thought) more popular services that I'm surprised that Google + only in 50% click Twitter the same timespan. I notice you share the URL with each other almost simultaneously in two articles / update services,. It expected the unexpected, I took the fascintating and dig into my future. Perhaps Google is really something:-

To enjoy this before your recognition, analysis and experimentation!

adf.ly - shorten links and earn money!
neobux.com - paid to click service