Recommended: Marketing Articles

LINK: bit.ly/2GxxLHh
HEADLINE: Are ZERO-Result SERPs The Next Step for Google?
PUBLISHER: Forbes
COMMENT: Ok, set aside anything you’re doing for 5 minutes because this whole card is a must-read for professional online businesses. What this Forbes article brings to discussion is simple: Will Google turn its search results into a one-result page eventually? Meaning, since Google has been answering questions by itself either by using its own answers, or through rich snippets (grabbing chunks of content from websites), will brands still have a organic space in search results? Jason — the author of this Forbes article — explains some crucial points we need to pay attention to on this subject, and very well. But there’s definitely more to this as his conclusion goes against mine. First off, the reasons Jason gave for this NOT to happen are basically weak if you pay attention to the global business scenario. One reason he gives is “competitors arise and take on Google” (by exploiting the opportunity of a possible backslash). However, that’s extremely difficult to happen. Why? For starters, Google already has 91% market share (globally) when it comes to search engines. That literally wipes out any chance of possible competitors taking Google’s place because in order to fight Google you need: 1) time burning resources (workforce + money) in a fight with Google to then eat Google’s lunch; 2) remarkable tech infrastructure that also has cybersecurity experts and robust protection systems in place to block hackers from crushing your work WHILE you’re in a WAR with Google. From my perspective, only Bing could (possibly) meet those criteria since it’s backed by Microsoft. However, we all know that in order to penetrate the global market and REVERSE the situation and eat a good piece of Google’s search engine market share, Microsoft would need to deploy many resources for a good amount of time. Because timing here isn’t enough. Exploiting a bad move made by Google is definitely not enough. Massive resources are necessary to keep adding pressure on Google until it loses its dominant position. And that takes time. So competition is out of the picture simply because it would take too much time, too much effort and too much money to start a fight against Google. No company in today’s market has billions to burn just to go to fight this kind of war. They’re light-years ahead in expertise and data gathering. Also, Google could rollback its updates and crush any competitor in a very early stage. That’s one point. The next point is Applicability, which basically means if this zero-result scenario can fit the bill for EVERY query. For example, is it possible for Google to use one result to answer queries such as “professional plumber in London” or “travel agency in NY”? Because this naturally implies that the user wants as many options as possible, right? Well, yes and no. You see, consumers don’t actually like to do plenty of research before buying something. They only do it, because they want to make sure they’re making the right choice (like not buying a poor quality product) or to make sure they aren’t being deceived by some shady brand. This is why product review websites are critical for today’s economy. Because it shrinks the amount of work involved in the buying process. People don’t want to “work” every time they want to buy something, which is also why people stick to a brand once they find a good one. So how could Google solve this kind of query where many options are expected in its search results? Simple: Centralized platforms that connect professionals/products with customers (like Upwork, Amazon etc). Google could rank a platform’s ideal professional/product or a list of professionals/products to solve this and platforms would keep fighting for that one place in search results. But there’s a problem: why would professionals submit to such platforms in the first place instead of running their own brands and trying to rank them? Easy: due to lack of visibility. The same reason why companies use social networks today as an extension for their businesses: lack of attention. Without attention, your business cannot survive. Why do you think businesses choose to sell their products on Amazon (a platform)? Answer: more visibility. And why do you think 55% of online shoppers in the U.S. start their product searches on Amazon? Answer: Less work in the buying process. If you’ve been monitoring the market, giant corporations are spreading themselves all over the world lately. It only takes a good investment, and a great strategy for a big corporation to start a fight with local businesses. For example, who would predict that Amazon would buy Whole Foods 2 years before it happened? Practically no one. But with too much money in your pocket, and proper tech and a strong market strategy, a corporation can “invade a country” and become a direct threat to local/national businesses extremely fast. And since businesses are shifting their attention to other countries trying to find a less competitive market, this is obviously expected. Ok, that’s another point. Now, let’s head to the final argument. It begins after these next important paragraphs extracted from a great Moz Article. Here it goes: “First off, preliminary data suggests that these really are isolated cases. Across the 10,000 searches that MozCast tracks daily, one search (0.01%) currently displays zero results: “1 gigabit to gigabyte.” This change is not impacting most high-volume, competitive queries or even the vast majority of results with Knowledge Cards. Second, we have to face the reality that Knowledge Cards, even paired with organic results, already dramatically impact search user behavior. Thanks to Russ Jones, we’ve pulled some data from an internal CTR study we’re currently working on at Moz. In that study, SERPs with 10 blue links have a roughly 79% organic click-through rate (overall). Add just a Knowledge Card, with no other features, and that drops to 25%. That’s a 68% drop-off, a loss of over two-thirds of organic clicks. Google has tested this change and likely found that showing organic links on these particular searches provided very little additional value.”(SOURCE: Moz). Did you see that? ONE Knowledge Card drops organic CTR from 79% to 25%. Huge problem. But hold on, because there’s more: “While the zero-result SERP is certainly a new and extreme case, the removal of organic results in favor of other features has been happening (and expanding) for quite some time now. SERPs with as few as 3–4 page-one organic results have been appearing in the wild for well over a year.”(SOURCE: Moz). Hmm…”expanding” is not a good word here. And it’s true if you’re paying attention to this topic (and if you’re paying attention to your own google results being served to you). But what about the claim that “preliminary data suggests that these really are isolated cases”? Well, don’t trust that as an argument to disregard Zero-result SERPs as a likely possibility. Regardless of the tiny amount (0.01%) of cases taking place. The reason is simple: Google owns A LOT of data. Google owns Google Chrome (data on your browser history), Google Analytics (data on your business), Google Search (data on what you want, and data on your internet behavior), Google Maps (data on where you go), Google Adwords (data on what you want others to buy from you), Android (data on your phone, including your personal location regardless of whether you give it to them) and a lot more. Now, once you put all these facts together you can be pretty sure that Google knows A LOT about almost every internet user alive. Therefore, do you really think they need to test changes like Zero-result SERPs with more than 0.01% to project results? There’s no need for Google to make a lot of “noise” to test things nowadays. A subset of queries can give them the core insights they need before rolling out something like this. Of course, there are many variables and it’s definitely a complex update, but it’s something Google can handle for sure once enough tests are made. So is this a likely scenario? I’d say it’s extremely likely. And I’ll also say this: Google is going to become a pay-to-play channel just like Facebook eventually. The reason is simple: global economic pressure. You see, the global market is about to experience a SERIOUS crash and with problems like ad fraud and ad blockers going viral, even Google is returning money to businesses. Chaos is being installed in the digital industry. So a way for Google to make money out of this whole apocalyptic situation is to turn most of its search results into a PPC model. And here’s another argument to support this: Google is going after those in the market who still have money to spend. You see, money is being concentrated in fewer hands and that eventually becomes a problem for the free market because in order for a business to make HONEST money, it needs to provide value. The only way to create growth, is through value exchange. But fewer companies today can bring value to a market that’s about to crash. That’s the truth. But since Google controls a lot of the global attention, it has value to provide in this chaotic scenario. So if everybody is getting stripped off of their attention levels, do you think businesses will think twice before jumping on a new pay-to-play Google model? Definitely not. Because without attention, a business will soon cease to exist. Many brands STILL put money on Facebook even after the massive scandals that came to light. That’s what I wanted you to know. Make sure to read both articles. Enjoy.