Digital Marketing and Technological Insight

I randomly searched for the term “Search Engine” in Google this morning and was very surprised at the results. The three big search engines ( Google, Yahoo and Bing) all ranked below the top 3 prime spots -  Google was 4th, Bing was 5th and Yahoo was 7th.  However, I was more shocked to see  that search engine powerhouse AltaVista came up #1 and my favorite search engine from 1998, Dogpile, came up #2. Of course if Google was in the top spot people would cry fowl, but still…#4? Google you can do better than that. Yahoo on the other hand should just be happy they are on the first page.

Is there any greater buzz right now when it comes to Search Engines then the promise of real-time search? Over the past couple of weeks I have had numerous conversations revolving around the possibilities brought on by Twitter search and the promise of real-time. But, is it really the future of search? Depends on who you ask. I for one see real-time search as being a huge part of where search engines are heading in the not so distant future. However, right now, I am seeing three major issues with any search engine that pushes their “real-time” search results.

• Results
• Relevancy
• Spam

In my opinion the true “Google Killer” will be a hybrid of both real-time and standard “cached” search results. Searching for a current topic like “Swine Flu” you want the most recent results to see what is going on at that very moment and content offering in-depth / credible information.Creating a hybrid search engine offers the best of both worlds and limitless possibilities. Take for example a standard e-commerce query -  a user searches for a product  and the results that comes back are for sites that are not only  selling /  reviewing that product but also real-time results for active coupons that have just been posted. Same thing for news or anything related to current events - real-time results for what is going on at that very moment and standard results for more in-depth information. Now all of a sudden real-time search results are creating more value in the SERP, which is true game changer.

So is the future of search real-time? Yes. But with some modifications…

I just read an article on AdAge.com that talks about how Microsoft is going after Google with a new ad campaign and a new search engine called Bing. It seems like every few months there is the next “Google Killer” that promises to revolution search. Remember Cuil? Now the buzz is on Wolfram Alpha. The issue isn’t whether or not Google is the best search engine in regards to relevant results - it comes down to the fact that Google is good enough.

The software giant (Microsoft) is set to launch an $80 million to $100 million campaign for Bing, the search engine it hopes will help it grab a bigger slice of the online ad market. That’s a big campaign — big compared with consumer-product launches ($50 million is considered a sizable budget for a national rollout) and very big when you consider that Google spent about $25 million on all its advertising last year, according to TNS Media Intelligence, with about $11.6 million of that focused on recruiting. Microsoft, by comparison, spent $361 million. Certainly Google has never faced an ad assault of anything like this magnitude.

I love the name Bing for an online brand but hate it for the name of a search engine, how soon before we start seeing ads with “Bing! Your search is done” everywhere? Putting the name aside will Microsoft’s Bing be a better search engine? Possibly. Will the average user actually stop using Google because Bing is better? Probably not. Google is firmly entrenched as being synonymous with searching online and that won’t go away anytime soon. Google has the brand association that can not be bought …as long as people continue to  “Google it”, no other search engine stands a chance.

So what should Microsoft do? They should focus their ad campaign on being #2. Admit defeat, crown Google the king and go after Yahoo’s search share. A “We’re #2″ ad campaign will not only be effective but probably save the company millions. But Microsoft has billions in cash so they will have no problem spending whatever they want  - can’t wait to see all those articles talking about how they spent $100 million and upped their market share only 2%.

BING!

Ask.com, a distant 4th in the search engine race, launched some anticipated changes to their core search engine. The “new” Ask.com focuses not just on web results but also “structured” data within various categories. The changes are meant to deliver faster and more relevant search engine results, as well as integration of Q&A sites like WikiAnswers and Yahoo Answers for those search queries posted as a question. Interestingly, the new Ask.com also removes the 3 paneled SERP and goes to the standard 2 panel display.

From the ASK.com Blog:

Our goal is to deliver the best answer to you, the first time, every time. We know that is a difficult goal and no search engine can always deliver with that precision 100% of the time, but we think we’re getting closer and closer to the ‘bullseye’. We also believe you will agree once you’ve tried out our new version.

Presenting direct answers to your searches, front and center, has always been at the heart of the Ask.com experience, and we push further down that path today with the introduction of three new answer technologies:  DADS, DAFS, and AnswerFarm. These technologies take both structured and unstructured data, and - instead of delivering a title and description for each document - they deliver answers.

Here is an example from the new Ask.com for the search query “What is a good credit score?”

So will this give Ask.com new momentum in the search engine war? Nope. Ask.com is good, like the results, but in the end they will always be behind better / bigger search engines Google, Yahoo and Live.

Microsoft just launched their latest gimmick to try and increase their search engine usage market share. SearchPerks, which went live this morning, rewards users for searching using Live Search on Live.com, MSN.com, Hotmail or Windows Live Messenger. Basically, once you sign up and download their “Perk Counter”, you get 1 ticket for every search you do (up to 25 per day), you can then exchange those tickets for prizes like concert tickets, games, airplane miles, etc.

From the offical SearchPerks website, which by the way can ONLY BE VIEWED IN IE 6.0 or higher:

Here is how it works:

• Get 500 tickets just by signing up and downloading the Perk Counter

• Start searching using Live Search at Live.com and MSN.com, or on Windows Live Hotmail and Windows Live Messenger

• For every search (up to 25 per day), you’ll earn a ticket towards great prizes

• Stay tuned for additional ways to earn tickets once you join the promotion

• Redeem your tickets for prizes once the promotion ends on April 15, 2009

Is it me or does this sound like something from 1998? Does Microsoft really think this is going to work? Here is what will happen, a bunch of web users will do their searches on Live.com until April 15, 2009 - cash in their tickets and then 99% of them will never come back. Microsoft will see their search share go up a few percentage points during this gimmick but will drop back down to their original level when all is said and done.

Seriously Microsoft? Why don’t you focus your efforts on 2 things 1) making your search better , which includes integration of the Powerset semantic search and 2) buy Yahoo search.