johnmu.com » Google

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for September 2007

John Mueller — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 20:25:05 +0000

I finally got around to getting the statistics for September 2007 for the Google Webmaster Help Groups finished up. I have to admit the numbers for September aren’t the best, especially the counts for the posts by Googlers. Getting started at Google took quite some time and a lot of learning . And wow – look at the Googlers post in October (great work, everyone!).

On a slightly sader note, I don’t think I can continue to provide these statistics here. I hope I can work something out as a replacement though, we’ll see.. or maybe I would be better off just posting in the group instead .

Without further ado, here are …

The numbers

Number of new threads = 1157
Number of new posts = 5902
Average number posts/new thread = 4.81
Number of posts by new users = 915 (15.5%)
Number of threads by new users = 696 (60.2%)
Average number of posts in threads by new users = 4.8
Number of new threads started by Googlers = 2
Number of new posts by Googlers = 35

Feel free to compare to August and July 2007. Comparing those numbers to the previous months there’s a visible drop, especially in the number of posts (-1774 or 23%) and threads (-172 or 13%). I hope we can push that back up soon (and answer more questions in the FAQs so that fewer threads are needed ).

Top thread starters

burchman519 = 10
Admin Aaron = 9
tal7080 = 8
Tomcat619 = 8
Alaa Maanawi = 7
Chibcha = 7
ShaneMC = 7
JLH = 6
ARC = 5
gl-science.com = 5
Phil Payne = 5
Vic = 5
yorkieron = 5
azholkover = 4
Blue Fin = 4

Threads with Googlers participating

I hope we push this category off the charts in the next months!!

New threads started by Googlers

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

Lots of regulars are great to see. I love it when you come back and start a thread for something special.

Top most active threads

Being #1 with “Untitled Document” and Flash

John Mueller — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 20:58:30 +0000

Untitled Document

We’ve all seen it – “untitled document” is a popular page name, probably the most popular one out there. I wonder who decided that “untitled document” was better than no title at all? There are a lot of those pages out there, do they even know that a good title can do wonders?

Being “untitled” doesn’t make your pages uncrawlable though. If you wanted to go all out, you could make sure that your page has no indexable content at all and heck, just use Flash to display the whole homepage while we’re at it.

Of course doing that, you would think that it would probably destroy your site’s chances of being shown in search results. I suppose it generally would, but imagine if your site was still #1 in the results for your niche.

So I was in Kirkland and wanted to visit some local toy stores before I left. I’m still not sure if I go there for myself or to actually bring stuff home – having kids means that you finally get to go out and buy toys again . Anyway, I try the old faithful “toy store + location” query and browse the local search results to get a first idea. Google’s neat local search one-box on top of the normal results is always a good starting point.

Here are the results for “toy store kirkland“:

The #1 listing is one I actually checked out in person, it was easy to find and had lots of fun stuff (not as nice as the one in Los Gatos from my visit to the bay area though).

Tree Top Toys – a nice name with one of my keywords in it – has a site that is nothing more than an “Untitled Document” combined with a Flash-based homepage (sadly, even their old frames-based website was probably better for SEO). It ranks on top for a good local query though, imagine that.

When you look at the local search entry for their site, it shows that they have a couple of reviews (data imported from other sites), a photo (also imported) and that’s about it. From the looks of it (I don’t know too much about local search) they’re at that position because they’re close to the area and have some reviews, nothing special.

It looks like it doesn’t take much to hit the top spot in local search , and with that top local spot, you could be on top of the search results. Traditional SEO (working on on-site and off-site factors) isn’t even required (but it would probably be a good idea once the competition gets stronger) – you don’t even need paid links .

How much work would it be to go out and talk to local businesses to inform them of the possibilities, to get them interested in actually putting their information online for the local search engines (e.g., getting verified and adding information and photos manually) and to help them to inform customers of feedback possibilities online? It doesn’t take much, you could set up a good, short presentation within a few hours. The good-will and reputation that you could build that way might even get you the one or other contract for traditional SEO work (or web-design, etc.).

As mobile search gets more popular, local search is only going to get more and more important. Helping small businesses in your community to get a foot in the door does not take much. Take the time and show people how SEO – getting set up for local search – is something that can make a difference in a positive way.

Opportunities in Search

John Mueller — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 09:01:25 +0000

So I went to visit Google in Mountain View …

… and learned that every second sentence has to be prefixed with “so”. Wait, that’s not all.

I’m sure you’re all just reading this to hear about the secret information they’ve been feeding me, heh. Sorry, you’ll have to join Google yourself to find out more about that part. It’s been really interesting so far, so many documents to read and digest, so many neat people to meet and chat with, so much good food to eat (good thing I’m only here for a week). The Google campus is really neat, but it’s also good to get out and do something else, like getting some neat toys for the kids (bribe my way back to getting them to recognize me when I’m home)…

Where are you in local search?

So I’m off to find a neat toy store that has more than the average plastic junk. Of course I’ll try to use Google local search to help me find one, I’m sure there are lots of really great stores around here…

… only I can’t find out enough about them to be sure that I want tot go there. How far can you get with ["toy store" "mountain view"]? Some of the stores mentioned in the map view show more than just the location and some scraped user “reviews” (used lightly, when you read reviews which mention “conveniently located in …” and “… any seasonal holiday such as Easter, Valentine’s Day, etc.” – yeah sure, that’s how I would describe my a store) and an image copied from a page mentioning the store.

What if you want to narrow your search down? How the heck do you put “good” into words? There are people out there who think cheap plastic junk makes for a good child’s toy, so I can’t just add the word “good” (what’s up with “Uncle Frank’s BBQ” in there?). In the end I go for “wooden toys” or “wooden toys store” and try several locations in the area, checking the results of several local web directories that were included in the search results to pick out a handful of stores (which I write down on paper to feed into my GPS). I end up heading to The Wooden Horse in Los Gatos which was really fun (and made me buy way too much).

If you’re new to an area (or just visiting like I was), it can make sense to try to find good stuff through a search engine that can search based on location. I can understand that it’s a bit spotty way off in ~~Sweden~~ Switzerland (ok, in Sweden as well), but heck, we’re in the middle of Google’s backyard.

The average smaller brick and mortal store still has a web presence that is terrible. It doesn’t take much to get those websites cleaned up and ready for the minimal search engine friendliness. It doesn’t take much to get the business registered with Google local search. Do it! Help your local businesses to get it done, help the small guy get his business listed properly. Put a nice image in there, add a good description (without the “etc”), put the real hours in there and make sure that all of that is also shown on the website in a readable fashion. Do a good deed and help that mom & pop, where you get a special treatment, to get found online. It doesn’t take much, once you know what to do.

There is a lot of opportunity in local search, but it won’t happen by itself. This is where having a clean website really pays off for a local business – when the information is presented in a machine readable way a lot of this can be automated and made available correctly. It doesn’t take much work to add the rest, and suddenly even cars are sending customers.

Why can’t I browse your site on my phone?

Sometimes I forget my notes or – gasp – can’t get a wireless connection with my laptop and have to look things up on the way. Why is it still the exception to have a site that can be used with a mobile phone browser? Some people might be using the iPhone, but the general public isn’t (especially those who from undeveloped countries like Switzerland). Why is it still so hard to access sites on the phone? I just want to look up the address or the times they’re open, argh! Ironically even some of the sites that are running mobile ads are not ready to be browsed with a phone.

Saying that nobody is using a phone to access your site now is no excuse — if your site doesn’t work on a phone, nobody will use your site that way. Make it easy for a customer to find you on the phone, make it easy for them to view at least some minimal information about your site / business while on the road. The longer people wait to get this done right, the more business those who can do it will get until then . Opportunity is waiting!

Spoiled by web 2.0 – easily adding neat stuff for free

Well, this is kind of getting long but I’m still in Silicon Valley. I really need to get out, run up some hill and get some fresh air into my lungs. Searching for [hike mountain view] (don’t those brackets look neat?) leads me to http://www.bahiker.com/, which has a fancy map that I can click on. Looks good so far, I bet I can find something there. Going to the right area, I end up on a page with a map and a gazillion links (less than 100, so we’re still good, lol) all bunched up on the map.

I want something nice, a couple of miles long that goes up and down a bit and is somewhere in the area. The only way to find any of that is to click my way through almost every item that is somewhere in that general location. I wonder how much work went into making that map – the one that is almost useless (it can only give you a very rough location).

Maybe I’m just too Google-oriented now, but adding a nice map that can be annotated is really simple now (I’m sure you can do the same with some of the other online mapping services), eg:

View Larger Map

By using a system like Google Maps you can have a map that lets the user zoom in and check locations before actually going in and reading all about the details. You can even set up your own maps to be public, findable on Google Maps and Google Earth. How neat is that? Add a few images to the site, perhaps even a video and you’re all set to cover all bases for universal search.

To cover even more (and get another entry in the search results for your site ) you could even set up a Google Group for the site or set up a forum on your site (for more control over the look and feel, and to display your own ads). Using Google Groups you can get that done really quickly. For this site you could start a separate thread for each location and link to that from the pages themselves. As a user, it’s great to see multiple opinions about something before actually packing up and going someplace. User generated content is great — you only have to enable it, your users can fill it up for you (provided your site is compelling enough).

Another opportunity is kind of lost with regards to the ads on that site — they’re way on the bottom, a place where nobody would ever bother looking, let alone clicking. You can make more money with Adsense if you test where ads work best and use them there. If done right, the ads could even add value to the page. That alone doesn’t really provide value in search, but it could provide more motivation to keep the site “modern”.

There are opportunities in search all around – look around, take advantage or help others to take advantage of them!

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for August 2007

John Mueller — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 21:55:53 +0000

Another month goes by, here are the statistics for August (and some comparisons to July in brackets) 2007.

The numbers

Number of new threads = 1329 [+5.3%]
Number of new posts = 7676 [-1.0%]
Average number posts/new thread = 5.48 [-4.5%]
Number of posts by new users = 1061 (13.8%) [+30.0%]
Number of threads by new users = 813 (61.2%) [+13.4%]
Average number of posts in threads by new users = 4.9 [-2.0%]
Number of new threads started by Googlers = 4 [+33.3%]
Number of new posts by Googlers = 54 [-36.5%]

More posts by new users is nice to see – I hope that’s because the “feel” of the Groups has improved and not just because of strange things going on in the index .

Top posters

webado = 701
cass-hacks = 438
dockarl = 325
cristina = 317
JohnMu = 305
Phil Payne = 303
JLH = 287
abracadabra = 216
djc = 185
Robbo = 124
Sebastian = 96
seo101 = 92
Sam I Am = 90
burchman519 = 78
Randy P. = 74
beckysharpe = 68
roysnj = 67
MrOmnicron = 64
kklynnt = 60
Red Cardinal = 47

It’s great to see some new names in there! If you’re missing a link, put one (a clean one) in your profile and drop me a note.

Top thread starters

Alaa Maanawi = 15
JohnMu = 13
GeminiZin = 9
Dhanjal = 8
burchman519 = 7
JLH = 7
bobflack = 6
cass-hacks = 6
bornblue = 5
dss = 5
easytreasure = 5
hsanchezp = 5
Roh.it = 5
xor = 5
bonsai-resources = 4

Threads with Googlers participating

New threads started by Googlers

I hope these two lists can be removed in the future (because they’re too long).

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

This list is getting kind of long … is it interesting enough for anyone out there?

Top most active threads

After the first post: should I stay or should I go now?

John Mueller — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 22:51:25 +0000

In response to the other statistics regarding the Google Webmaster Help groups, JLH asks:

I always wonder about a statistic, I call them Drive-by-posters. Those who come in and make a post, only to be never heard of again, even though their questions may be answered.

Let’s take a quick look at who posts in the groups (how long they’ve been active), who starts new threads and a short dissection of what first-time posters do on the group and how they evolve from there.

I split the posters of the Google Webmaster Help groups into 4 rough categories:

Single-posters – They come, post something either in an existing thread or start their own thread and are never ever heard of again (at least in the Webmaster Help groups).
New users – Users who have posted at least twice, the first time being less than 30 days from the posting. Everyone starts here, at least after the second posting.
Newly addicted – Users who’s first posting lies 30 to 90 days back. If they are still active after 30 days, they are probably coming back for more than just one question. This group could turn into regulars, if motivated to stick around.
Regulars – Users who’s first posting lies more than 90 days back. If they keep coming back for several months, they’re probably here for a purpose other than just asking a question of their own. This is the group that has spent a lot of time helping new users out.

So where do the posts come from?
I put together a chart with the number of posts per week split among the before-mentioned groups.

As you can see, regular users post (on average) a bit more than half of the posts in the groups.

Where do the threads come from?
Posts themselves can mean many things – they could be initial postings with questions or ideas (new threads) or the could be replies to other postings. Let’s take a look who starts new threads (again, per week).

Looking at this chart, it’s clear that the largest part of all new threads are started by new users – including a fairly large group of users who start a new thread but never return to it (or at least, never reply to it and never start another thread). Why don’t they reply? Why don’t they stay to interact?

What do first-time posters do?
Let’s take a look at only the first post that a user makes. Do they reply to an existing thread or rather start their own? How many of the first time posters (new users) stick around, are retained by the groups and either reply to their thread or add a comment (or more) elsewhere?

Here we see that a bit less than half of the new users only make a single post, never to return again. It’s rare that the first post is a comment in a different thread – usually it’s the start of a new thread.

Almost half of the new users abandon the groups after their first post.

Why would they do that? How could more users be motivated to interact more – or are those first posts so irrelevant that they shouldn’t be there at all?

What do you think?

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for July 2007

John Mueller — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 22:33:25 +0000

Just for fun, here are some lists and numbers for the month of July 2007.

Some numbers …

Number of new threads = 1262
Number of new posts = 7754
Average number posts/new thread = 5.74
Number of posts by new users = 816 (10.5%)
Number of threads by new users = 717 (56.8%)
Average number of posts in threads by new users = 5.0
Number of new threads started by Googlers = 3
Number of new posts by Googlers = 85

Top thread starters

burchman519 = 14
djc = 14
Burt = 9
ivb = 9
Phil Payne = 8
John H. Gohde = 7
webado = 7
disco4me = 6
OverOut = 6
Red Cardinal = 6
Spencer aka Madison = 6
Admin Aaron = 5
Del Boy = 5
dockarl = 5
JohnMu = 5

Threads with Googlers participating

New threads started by Googlers

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

Maybe I should increase the number a bit, but I really like how the “regulars” don’t just answer people’s questions – they also initiate some really great discussions. (Keep in mind that for some of the threads the original post might have been removed, leaving only an answer by a “regular”.)

johnmu.com » Google

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for September 2007

The numbers

Top posters

Top thread starters

Threads with Googlers participating

New threads started by Googlers

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

Top most active threads

Top most linked Domains

Top most linked Google answers

Being #1 with “Untitled Document” and Flash

Opportunities in Search

So I went to visit Google in Mountain View …

Where are you in local search?

Why can’t I browse your site on my phone?

Spoiled by web 2.0 – easily adding neat stuff for free

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for August 2007

Threads with Googlers participating

New threads started by Googlers

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

Top most active threads

Top most linked Domains

Top most linked Google answers

After the first post: should I stay or should I go now?

Google Webmaster Groups statistics for July 2007

Some numbers …

Top posters

Top thread starters

Threads with Googlers participating

New threads started by Googlers

New threads started by regulars (>100 posts)

Top most active threads

Threads without replies (get to work, everyone)

Top most linked Domains

Top most linked Google answers