Digital Marketing and Technological Insight

Yesterday Google launched their own web analytic guessing service based off their popular Trends platform. Google Trends for Websites offers “insights into the traffic and geographic visitation patterns of your favorite websites”.

You can now add Google to the list of web services like Alexa, Compete, Quantcast and ComScore that offer very interesting but not concrete traffic data. The fact of the matter is that unless you are pulling data directly from a website any numbers that these services provide have to be taken with a grain of salt. Some open analytic providers data might be better than others but at the end of the day the numbers found are not true numbers. Being a data junky I love services like Compete and Alexa, but I use that information as a guideline or for insight when working on various digital initiatives. I would never put those numbers as actuals - every one of these services collect and display data in a different way, therefore it is up to the user to determine the best service to use. Plus, I always make sure to use at least 2 open web analytic services when doing research - just to make sure the information I am using is as accurate as possible.

So the big question becomes, like with every other open web analytic service, how does Google calculate their data? According to Google: “Trends for Websites combines information from a variety of sources, such as aggregated Google search data, aggregated opt-in anonymous Google Analytics data, opt-in consumer panel data, and other third-party market research. The data is aggregated over millions of users, powered by computer algorithms, and doesn’t contain personally identifiable information. Additionally, Google Trends for Websites only shows results for sites that receive a significant amount of traffic, and enforces minimum thresholds for inclusion in the tool.” So, like I mentioned above, Google, and every one else, goes about collecting their data in a different way. Google however does have the chance to be a bit more accurate as they have a tremendous amount of Google Search data they can use, plus they can leverage the limited public Google Analytics data they collect.

You know what I would like to see? Open analytics, meaning every sites data logs are open for all to see. I am not talking about in-depth data but more like top-line info like visits and uniques. This way there would be far less questions when valuing a website from a advertising or competitive standpoint. Think anyone would go for sharing this info? Yeah I didn’t think so either

So lets look at the raw data and see how the players in the “open” web analytics field stack up head-to-head…for traffic comparison I used Facebook.com and Myspace.com. Each service uses different metrics to measure traffic so even though we aren’t comparing apples to apples you get the idea.

As you can see from the above 4 graphs the data each provides is somewhat the same. Myspace.com is more popular than Facebook.com and there is a similar amount of space between the two social networking giants. So, which one should you use? Well, for me it comes down to what I am looking for. Each service provides a little something different so I tend to use all 4 - however, I do lean towards Compete.com as I feel their information is not only more accurate but more consistent.

For more information on Google Trends for Websites visit their about / FAQ page.

The recent search partnership between Google and Yahoo has already been talked to death and I see no need to continue it. If the deal does get approved by the Justice Department it will add some nice revenue to Yahoo’s bottom line, but really how much will this really help Yahoo in the long run? Since the deal is important let me just call out some high-level aspects of the Google / Yahoo search deal.

• The deal between Yahoo and Google is non-exclusive
• Yahoo will display Google’s search and contextual ads will be displayed on Yahoo’s US and Canadian web properties and partner sites.
• Yahoo’s ad platform Panama is not going anywhere - Google’s ads will be inserted into results based on monetization opportunities.
• Yahoo’s search platform and results will not be impacted at all.

This deal with Google is not a game changer and there are still a great deal of questions that surround Yahoo right now. Questions like what is the future of Yahoo, how does Yahoo become relevant again, what do they do with the $800 million from the Google deal and how do they stop the mass exodus of top talent should be what keeps Jerry Yang up at night. Sadly, there is no easy answer, no partnership or solution that will right the ship anytime soon. But, does this mean all is lost and Yahoo is just slowly fading away? As I see it, this is not necessarily the case. First lets look at the Raw numbers, Yahoo.com drove over 1.9 Billions visits in May alone and had 10% year over year growth - that is impressive and means that no one should count Yahoo out. The crazy thing to me is that despite the shear magnitude of people that come to Yahoo properties everyday they have lost out on the biggest aspects of the online environment…the search race is pretty much over. Remember the social networking effort Yahoo 360? Yeah, all those Facebook and MySpace users don’t remember it either.

So enough with the Yahoo bashing, what is Yahoo to do in order to rise to the top again and take back what was once theirs? The way I see it Yahoo does not need to do any mega-deal or spend billions on some second tier web property that is the “it” online name of the moment. What Yahoo needs to do is focus all of its attention and revenue internally. First and foremost remember all of that money coming in from the Google deal? Reinvest that money on 3 things: research & development, retention and hiring. In fact, all three can be taken care of if Yahoo starts throwing serious amounts of money on R & D. Yes, Yahoo has made some attempts at being innovate with offering like Yahoo Buzz and SearchMonkey, but what I am talking about is really pushing itself and their top talent on improving every aspects of their business, from their enterprise technology, to all of their brands, to their display / search advertising platform and of course to their core search offerings (especially Video search). Take that Google money and throw it right back into the company and start building a innovate / entrepreneurial environment that would not only keep top employees but recruit top talent as well. A lot of people have a great deal of loyalty to Yahoo, it would not take much effort to change the overall perception of the once king of the web.

Secondly, again focusing internally, Yahoo should work on further integrating all of their products and services into each other. Yahoo Mail, Flickr, del.icio.us, Yahoo Game, Yahoo Sports, Yahoo Movies, Yahoo Maps, Yahoo Finance, Upcoming.org…the list goes on and on. Yahoo needs to create a tighter synergy between all of its properties and I am not talking just about cross-linking. I am talking about true integration of Yahoo properties - for example, Flickr photos and del.icio.us bookmarks fully integrated with Yahoo Mail. Yahoo has the core properties (e.g. Mail and Finance) that drive heavy daily traffic - what they need to do is get some of those people expanding across their network and consuming more Yahoo content. Yahoo can not have internal “walled gardens”, each and every property should be fully open and integrated in order to create a comprehensive Yahoo experience. Oh, and remember how I said they should reinvest the Google money in Research and Development? Here is where that will all pay off.

Of course it is very easy for someone outside of Yahoo to come up with answers or solutions to all of their problem. Yahoo has a long road ahead of them no matter which way you look at it…however, if anyone can make a full comeback it would be Yahoo.

As we all know Twitter is one of my favorite topics to talk about. This weekend I actually had a chance to talk with a friend of mine who works for a competing micro-blogging service on the future of this niche area as well as what lies ahead for Twitter. I can’t name what company he works for but let me just say if you are a heavy user of Twitter you probably use his service as well.

Think Twitter and other micro-blogging services like Pownce, Plurk and Jaiku are not forces to be reckoned with? Twitter had close to 15 million visits last month with 15% growth. Impressive stats for any website let alone one that hasn’t been out of Beta for very long. Also, think about the amount of time a visitor spends engaged with Twitter via the web, desktop applications and mobile applications. I couldn’t find exact stats on this metric but I am sure it is impressive to say the least. Either way you look at it, Twitter and Twitter like services are here to stay.

For those of you even somewhat familiar with Twitter, you know that their biggest challenge lies in fixing the technical issues that have caused its not-so-recent downtime and performance issues. But, let us assume for a moment that the good people behind Twitter fix everything and from now on it runs smoothly. Great, now what? Twitter’s challenges are just beginning, they now have two major hurdles ahead of them: growth and monetization. Two challenges that every Web 2.0 type web service are grappling with and are not solved very easily. However, I do believe that Twitter is in a unique position to overcome these challenges by leveraging its existing user base, allowing micro-blogging to become truly mainstream and building itself into more of a true social destination as opposed to an outlet for the tech savvy.

I think everyone can agree that the obvious path to meeting all of the challenges I listed would be to have micro-blogging go mainstream. But how does one go mainstream? Then once you are mainstream how do you monetize the traffic? Going mainstream is not as easy as one might think, the web is littered with thousands of websites and web services that failed to become even marginally popular let alone hit the social mainstream. With that, based on what was discussed this past weekend here is a quick outline of what I think Twitter could do to take their service and business to the next level.

• First, don’t mess with the main Twitter interface - let the micro-blogging / Tweets remain the core focus of the website. In order to create a successful (and profitable) web business you have to do two things: 1)do something different or 2) do something better. Since micro-blogging is still in its infancy Twitter accomplishes both of these right now - no need to fix what isn’t broken (not counting the downtime of course).
• Secondly, blow out the social aspects of Twitter, let users create full profiles that they are used to seeing on other social networking type websites. Don’t overdo it but make it so it becomes an extension of the micro-blogging. For example, show most popular tweets, expanded groups (which Twitter mentioned was in the works), have better location / photo integration, create a private twittering section…seriously the list goes on and on.
• Also, it has to be mentioned…since the technical issues will always be in the back of peoples minds, make sure to setup the infrastructure in a way that wont affect the main service. For example, Twitter.com/khawe would stay as the twitter hub while the social networking component lives on a sub-domain (e.g. khawe.Twitter.com). Creating a separate infrastructure allows for the best of both worlds, without effecting the performance of either.
• Now of course, how do you monetize such a “soon to be” mainstream web service? First and foremost let me make it clear that I do not recommend monetization the main Twitter value - the Twitter / Tweet page. Serving ads on top of the Twittering will negatively impact the user experience and the overall micro-blogging experience. However, if you do have to monetize the the main Twitter interface I would do it via overall page sponsorship…change a background, add a ’sponsored by” type ad, but nothing that becomes to intrusive or extreme. The main source of revenue would come from the deeper, social, part of the website that contains more static content that Twitter can sell ads against in the traditional CPM model.
• Lastly, You can (but I don’t recommend) create a Twitter premium option - like Pownce Pro - but how much will that really bring? Not a big fan but it is an option so I thought I would at least mention it.

Bottom line is that by creating a social network behind the micro-blogging instant communication functionality allows for a more in-depth and sticky user experience. What more can you ask for?

Ok, that is enough about Twitter for now…are you on Twitter? Be sure to follow me at Twitter.com/khawe

Yesterday on the Google Webmaster Central Blog, Sven Naumann posted an article covering the issue of duplicate content. Duplicate content, especially content scrapers, is a major concern for webmasters as many fear they will be penalized by Google. The main issue that is covered in the blog post is the fact that content can be scraped off a website and posted elsewhere with out a websites knowledge. The valid concern therefore becomes being penalized for something you have no control over.

The blog post covers two major areas when it comes to duplicate content: duplicate content appearing in more than one place on your website and your content appearing on a different website (most of the time without a content owners knowledge). Google’s intent is to assure website owners that their technology allows for the differentiation of content sources and determines where the true source of the content is. Google is also nice enough to provide information on how to address both of the above scenarios.

The main point of the blog post, at least from an SEO standpoint, can be summoned up with this paragraph: “To conclude, I’d like to point out that in the majority of cases, having duplicate content does not have negative effects on your site’s presence in the Google index. It simply gets filtered out.”

Obviously there are a lot of other issues when dealing with duplicate content, especially when it comes to “Black-Hat SEO” tactics, however this should be used a starting point resource for any webmaster. 

Read the full Google Webmaster Central blog post here.

The way the media portrays Social Networking websites it would seem like they were taking over the world. Facebook has a valuation in the billions, AOL bought Bebo for $850 million and of course you have the News Corp. monster that is MySpace. Even though the media loves to talk about Social Networking websites, has all the buzz helped to continue the exponential growth or has growth topped out?

Utilizing Compete’s free web analytic tool you can get a clear snapshot of what is going on within the Social Networking world. The two giants are of course MySpace and Facebook with MySpace being the 800 pound gorilla in the room. However, when you look at the Compete graph below you can see that MySpace’s traffic has been steadily falling for the past 11 months. MySpace’s year over year traffic has actually fallen 27%, while Facebook, which has roughly half the traffic of MySpace had seen its year over year traffic rise 36%. Yes, that is not the astronomical growth we have seen in the past from Facebook, but when you take into account they are driving hundred’s of millions of monthly visits - 37% is a very impressive number.

So the question becomes where is the growth within the Social Networking world? See that blue line above, that is the professional Social Networking website Linkedin. When compared next to Facebook and MySpace, LinkedIn barely registers. With just over 20 million visits a month, LinkedIn is not going to be confused with the big boys anytime soon, however their growth is nothing less then spectacular. Year over year growth for LinkedIn is around 750%. That is huge, especially considering LinkedIn is not a new website, it has been around since 2004. Even better than that growth is the fact that even this niche Social Network numbers are far better then other Social Networking destinations making headlines. Bebo, which AOL bought for $850 million, has just over 13 million monthly visits and has seen a loss in year over year traffic of 47%. Why did AOL buy Bebo again? Oh yeah out of desperation.

As you can see from the below chart growth for the other “big names” in Social Networking is heading in the wrong direction. Hi5 which has about 10 million monthly visits saw a 6% decline in yearly traffic while Orkut, which is owned by Google, has only 10 million monthly visits and is heading in the wrong direction with a 10% decline - hey like my friend at Google once told me: “Orkut is huge in Brazil”!

So what is the future of Social Networking? People have been trying to predict this since the word Social Networking was created. Many people believe that “niche” Social Networks will see the next great growth explosion.  Some believe that web services like Ning.com, where you can create your own Social Network, will be the next big thing. The one thing that is for certain is that there is room for more then one player in the field, not everyone wants to use Facebook or MySpace, plus as we saw with Friendster - nothing is for certain online.