Archive for the ‘google’ Category


Google Places – Challenges and Rewards

If your business has a physical location where customers can walk in and conduct transactions, you probably already know about the power of Google Local. But April 20th brought the switch from Google Local to Google Places. What does it mean for your business?

If you are doing everything correctly, probably everything will continue to work as normal. But what if you have never really completely implemented your local search optimization? How do you know if you require professional Local SEO Services?

Here is a checklist to make sure your local customers can find you:

step 1 – Search for your service. Most services will show local results complete with map and other important information. If you are not there you might need professional local search services.

step 2 – Search for your competitors. If they appear ahead of you, then you are losing business. Small Box SEO can definitely help with that.

step 3 – Assess your PPC. If you are spending money each month for clicks, and not converting those clicks to paying customers, then Small Box can improve your results, or help you replace that traffic with better converting organic results.

step 4 – Search for your company on a mobile device. Mobile technology is driving business. If mobile devices are sending people to the wrong location, then you have lost a customer. Small Box executes your local strategy completely, with zero problems for you.

step 5 – Understand your audience by viewing your statistics. Your audience is telling you important things about your site. Are you listening?

It makes a lot of sense for any business to try and manage as much as possible in house. But when it comes to connecting locally in your community, why leave loose ends? The businesses that have 100 % of their profile complete are going to win the battle for Local SEO.

Don’t take chances, Contact Small Box in Austin at 512-850-4819 or Indianapolis at 317-254-0932.

How to use Twitter to prove you’re an absolute moron.

There’s been an overwhelming amount of love for Twitter this year, but Larry King might be single handedly responsible for starting my disenchantment with the most recent installment of the seemingly annual progression of the latest and greatest social media wunderkinds.  To be fair, my disenchantment began a few months ago, but a tweet a few days ago (2:58PM on July 26 to be exact) from Larry King’s official Twitter account (@kingsthings) sealed the deal:

Larry, I’ve got some news for you. For at least three reasons Twitter is the absolutely, positively WRONG medium to use for finding out why a Marathon is 26.2 miles.

First off, Larry, it demonstrates what we’ve kinda been suspecting all along – namely that you’re a no-talent, hack who’s risen to your station through merely the arbitrary caprice of fortune.  The standard answer to this question is pretty much conventional wisdom. I’ve taught middle school kids that could answer it.

Second, Larry, you can actually get your answer faster by using this crazy, new technology called a search engine. I’m sure this whole Internet thing is probably brand new to you and has to be pretty confusing (in fact, it’s probably pretty safe to assume that you’ve got some ghost writer Tweeting on your behalf to solicit the questions for your interview with Colin Powell that you’re unable to prepare on your own). But just in case you actually do get on the Internet someday, I created a demonstration of how this new-fangled thing called a “search engine” can help you find answers to life’s persistent questions.  Just CLICK HERE to see how it works!  Then, to get your answer click on the blue, underlined text at the top of the page that says “Marathon – Wikipedia the free encyclopedia”.

Third, Larry, the answer is actually more nuanced than you might think at first blush. Turns out that the distance from Marathon to Athens is shorter than 26.2 miles.  Turns out that primary historical sources disagree about whehter or not the first “Marathon runner” ran before or after the battle of Marathon.  Turns out that the 26.2 mile distance was the result of a series of last-minute changes made to the first modern marathon route established for the 1908 Olympics in London.  Maybe you knew that the standard answer wasn’t 100% accurate (I doubt it). But even if I stretch my imagination beyond the comprehensible and give you this benefit of the doubt, the fact still remains that crowd sourcing via your celebrity Twitter account is the least effective and most time consuming way to actually get your answer.  Just take a look at the overwhelming volume of responses your question generated by CLICKING HERE. You’ll notice something pretty quickly: a lot of people know some version of the standard answer, but nobody agrees on the more nuanced details.  If you’re really into crowd sourcing your answer, you should just cut to the chase and go to Wikipedia where the crowd sourcing has already been done for you.  Plus, Wikipedia has at least a modicum of editing that’s gone into their content.

Which brings me back to how Larry King finally brought about my disenchantment with Twitter.  In short, Twitter has become filled with crap and wading through all that crap takes more time and effort than regular people should have to put into it.  It takes a considerable investment of one’s time to follow Jeb’s advice about having a meaningful online converstaion and craft your Twitter network to a manageable level so that it’s actually useful and doesn’t become a ridiculous time sink.  What we need first and foremost in an answer is “correctness”. I have yet to find a better way to get “correctness” than by identifying an authority that can be trusted.  It’s way too easy to present the appearance of authoritativeness on the web without actually being an authority.  Just look at all the self-proclaimed authorities who wound up giving Larry a technically incorrect answer to his question.  Finding an authority is hard work (even off line).  Crowd sourcing via Twitter doesn’t get you any closer to an authoritative answer.  It just compounds the problem (especially when you use a celebrity account).  I know it’s tempting to think that crowd sourcing via Twitter is the way to go when it’s been so successful for Wikipedia, but Twitter just doesn’t work like Wikipedia.

I used to think that Twitter was pretty cool and pretty useful before the proliferation of celebrity accounts from the likes of Larry, Oprah and Martha.  So it looks like I am now beating Jeb to the punch in writing his next latest-social-media-fad-jumps-the-shark-blog-post.   Why is it that all these social media sites go through the same cycle of explosive growth that eventually brings about their demise? I suspect it’s because no one’s figured out a really good way to make the hard work of identifying authorities become easy. Finding an answer “that works” by playing a numbers game through social media sites can work OK for a while so long as the numbers stay fairly small.  However, once they reach their critical mass these social media fads just implode. Plus, playing the social media numbers games just skirts the fact that the answer is by no means guaranteed to be authoritative.  In attempting to make finding an authority easy, Twitter seems to have thrown their lot in with the celebrities. Or have the celebrities high-jacked Twitter?  Either way, that celebrities have made a good thing bad should be pretty self-evident.  I hate to say it but it seems that counting backlinks and other artificial “signs of trust” like the search engine algorithms do is the best thing we’ve got going so far.

So, Google don’t be worried by Jeb’s post that opined whether Twitter is a Google-slayer.  It isn’t and it won’t be.  In fact, it’ll probably be something our kids and grandkids reference when making fun of our generation.  I can already hear my daughter incredulously asking her friends, “Can you believe our parents spent their time at work reading ghost writers typing ‘In da house ATL!!!’ on some rapper’s Twitter account?”.

And if you’re wondering, yes, I probably woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning.  So feel free to flame me in the comments below for being so hard on the beloved institutions like Larry King and Twitter. But be forewarned: I’ll probably be just as snarky in my responses as I am now.

Can ChaCha Be Saved?

Local internet start-up ChaCha has run into some rough waters. Tech Crunch announced today that ChaCha has laid off a third of their employees and they claim, via a laid off insider, that the company’s future looks shaky at best. You can almost see the vultures circling waiting for them to fail. But I am not one of those vultures. I like their business model.

Maybe ChaCha is doing fine and the rumors are false. But if they are in danger I have some ideas. They just need to fix some things. But the fixes may not last.

On the surface the fix is simple. Bring down the cost of each answer and bring up the overall ad revenue. But getting there is a little tricky.

If you aren’t familiar with how ChaCha works, here is a simple explanation- a user texts a question to ChaCha, “Is ChaCha going out of business”- a real question I sent while writing this blog, a ChaCha guide does some research, probably on Google or using in-house databases and sends back an answer. Along with the answer “ChaCha is not going out of business….Get Fray tickets now!”- a paraphrase of what their actual response was. Or they send an ad before the answer. In either case, or both in my case, the sender gets a little text ad with a simple call to action (i.e. a keyword to text for a special or a phone number to click on). Money comes in from the advertiser and goes out via the “human guide”. Voila!

So how do you bring down the cost of the human guides and bring up the revenue via ads?

I have a couple ideas.

The first is on the revenue side.

ChaCha needs to introduce their version of Google AdWords immediately. I have heard rumors through the industry grapevine that this in development. If so, then get it in Beta mode asap! I would love to be a guinea pig for it.

My recent experience working with ChaCha for a client was clumsy at best. All I wanted to do was to log on to my dashboard, set up some test campaigns and tweak them based on results. Instead I was drawn through a near torturous quoting process that eventually ended with my client spending a considerable amount of money in very little time with no real metrics. Not good. Then we were told they couldn’t do any more business with us due to a national non-compete. I don’t think Google has said that to any client, ever!

If I could run real geo/demo targeted campaigns for specific keywords used in question queries I think I would find many uses for ChaCha. But as it stands it’s next to impossible to safely spend money with them. There are no real time metrics. Unacceptable in this world of Web 2.0 wonders!

So how about the “human guides”?

These are the real problem for ChaCha. They need real people typing out text answers. That’s their business model. So do they change their business model? I have an idea that might be a little out of the box. How about doing a Twitter/ChaCha mash up? Say they set up different ChaCha accounts based around different question categories. Surely they have this already- dining, nightlife, taxi phone numbers, bizarre, etc. Then create local filters and have Twitter post the question using # for categories. An example would be #diningindy where is a good sushi restuarant on the north side of Indy? ChaCha would filter the question to see that it is about dining “sushi” and about Indianapolis “indy” and then repost to the Twitter account ChaChaDining. All ChaCha “human guides” following that search #diningindy would be able to respond. The original Tweet and response would need to also have a unique code somewhere in it as well so that ChaCha could easily re-sync with the original question. That might pose the most difficult part of this whole deal. It also means you could start running out of room on both sides pretty quickly.

But you can see how getting a bunch of Twitter users answering questions might make sense. They are already doing it for their followers, why not do it for ChaCha and get paid. I think paying 10-15 cents an answer could be interesting to students and some active Twitter users. If you are charging 25-50 cents for each ad then you have a business model!

I know the Twitter solution is probably a tricky one to implement but there has to be a way to bring down the human cost. I would also expect that they now have a pretty nice database of questions and answers. Couldn’t they automate many of the responses and send the more complicated ones to their Twitterati?

On a higher level you have to wonder whether Twitter poses a real threat to the ChaCha business model. In some ways Twitter is doing what ChaCha is trying to do, but better just not faster. Who do you trust more? Your friends and associates or some anonymous “human guide”? The reality is that your Twitter followers aren’t being paid to answer your tax cab phone number question at 3am in the morning whereas ChaCha human guides are. They are there for you when others are not. That is the real service.

But ChaCha faces an even bigger, looming threat. As phones become smarter, faster and more connected many of us won’t the need to get this kind of quick response from a human guide. But we need to remember, those of us that are on the geeky side of things, that most cell phone users are not currently using their phones for local search. Calls and text are about as far as they get. Unless they are on a “smart phone” they have probably never even been to a website on their phone. How long this group of users stays away from mobile search may map one to one with how long ChaCha has a real business model. That is where I run out of ideas for how to save ChaCha.

How Search Is Changing and more Twitter thoughts

I think search as we know it is undergoing its biggest change since Google came on the scene with its nifty algorithms 10 years ago.

Since friends and family is the source we trust over all others including search engines, tv, radio, yellow pages etc, at least that is what I have read, we are seeing the rise of social media (i.e. your friends and family), and in particular Twitter, as a direct threat to Google in terms of driving search for business. It is certainly not an immediate threat to Google et al’s dominance in driving business but I think around the corner we will see Peer To Peer Search emerge as a real threat to the traditional algorithm driven search that currently dominates.

Cha Cha was on the right track with their human search engine but Twitter has the right model since their search engine is essentially free and personalized to each user based on who is following them. Google can’t currently compete with a good group of Twitter followers telling you what the best Thai restaurant is or what the best project management software is, etc. Google just isn’t that intelligent, or perhaps, that human. It’s just a really smart computer program that does many things well. But Google can’t actually go eat at a restaurant and give you a first hand account. But @twitterfriend has and they are happy to share their experience. So who are you going to go to for “reliable plummer”?

This means that relationships as much as content indexed in search engines (SEO) will drive your business down the road. Social Media sites facilitate relationships in the context of meaningful content. This forces transparency on companies which is difficult at times since their culture isn’t used to it. The company culture (translation executives) is used to controlling the message. But Zappos has it right- your culture is your brand now, whether you like it or not. Just accept that the Web is a harsh light and you can’t escape it’s glare. Might as well clean house.

hmmm, so what’s Google going to do about Twitter? I bet talks are going on right now for them to buy Twitter. And I also bet Twitter isn’t going to go cheap if at all. They know what they have- a super highway that everyone has set up shop on and now they just need to figure out how to charge a small toll. Google is good at that but they aren’t the only fish in that sea.

Twitter Is The New Google





Graph from Compete.com showing Twitter’s growth.


Do you use Twitter? If so how do you use it? The further I get into Twitter the clearer I see it as a threat to Google. It is also encroaching on Facebook, CNN, Linkedin, Email and SMS text messaging.

Where do I go when I need to find out how to do screencasts? Used to be Google, now I send out a “Tweet” to Twitter and within seconds I have a number of responses with links to suggested services.

When I need feedback on an idea I used to send out an email to a select group of friends or associates. Now I post it on Twitter and get a flood of great ideas flowing back in.

How do I keep up with my friends and business associates? I still use Facebook for this but I have seen a marked decrease in my Facebook time as I use Twitter more and more.

When I want to send someone a message I still use email but more and more I am sending direct messages via Twitter and having a fast, real time, conversation via Twitter.

Where do I get leads for my business and start relationships? I’ve set up Linkedin, Plaxo and other business networking accounts. None them bore any fruit. But after only a few months of being active on Twitter I am connecting with companies in a meaningful and comfortable way. Twitter is not a meat market which appeals to my style of doing business.

When the plane crashed in the Hudson I didn’t hear about it from the news or CNN, I read about it on Twitter. News spreads like wildfire there.

The funny thing about Twitter is that they don’t seem to know what they have here. The platform is barely developed. Seems that more companies are setting up businesses along the Twitter highway and making money off the platform more than Twitter itself!

So watch out Google, Facebook, CNN, Linkedin and all these other companies that seemed so secure in their online positions only months ago. Twitter is chipping away and soon you will be scrambling to keep up.