SearchFuel Banner

Google Changes Search Landscape With Introduction of Search, Plus Your World

by ~ January 20th, 2012

On Tuesday, Jan. 10, 2012, Google made its most radical and forward step into true Social Search with the launch of Search, plus Your World. Your World, as described in the official Google blog post, changes search results for individual users in three key ways:

  1. Personal Results, which enable you to find information just for you, such as Google+ photos and posts—both your own and those shared specifically with you, that only you will be able to see on your results page; 
  2. Profiles in Search, both in autocomplete and results, which enable you to immediately find people you’re close to or might be interested in following; and, 
  3. People and Pages, which help you find people profiles and Google+ pages related to a specific topic or area of interest, and enable you to follow them with just a few clicks. Because behind most every query is a community. 

The changes show a continued and clear commitment to the Google+ social network as noted by Stephen Hall, Sr. Partner, Director, Global Search for Catalyst online, a GroupM company. “This is a move to help push adoption of G+ on brands.  Growing your community/circles from a brand perspective, as well as increased sharing, should dramatically increase brand usage, given the vast potential increases in traffic from improved rankings.  This gets interesting for many brands as it forces them into the ‘content creator’ category. So for those that are not historically creating content, there is going to need to be a shift in the way that they are marketing their products and services.”

While many expected Google to move in this direction, there was clear unrest in some corners of the worldwide web over this move to a definition of a consumers’ world that is from Google and by Google. Twitter’s general counsel Alex Macgilivray, tweeted, in part, “Bad day for the Internet” and later the company, which once had a relationship with Google, expanded to say “For years, people have relied on Google to deliver the most relevant results anytime they wanted to find something on the Internet. We’re concerned that as a result of Google’s changes, finding this information will be much harder for everyone,” Twitter continued. “We think that’s bad for people, publishers, news organizations and Twitter users.”

Google’s response put all responsibility for any wider reach from Google back on the rest of the companies dedicated to cultivating the social graph. As reported in AdWeek and Search Engine Land, Google Fellow Amit Singhal said, “Facebook and Twitter and other services, basically, their terms of service don’t allow us to crawl them deeply and store things. Google+ is the only [network] that provides such a persistent service. Singhal added that “if others were willing to change, we’d look at designing things to see how it would work.”

For now, Google will begin rolling out these new features to all users and brands are likely to have little choice but to further engage with Google+ and the continued content creation required to distinguish. Dan Cristo, Director of SEO Innovation for Catalyst, advised, “One major thing I would expect brands to look out for is increased competition in the organic space. Previously, your organic search competitors were primarily websites. This is changing to now include anyone in a searchers social graph. Not only will preferences of ‘friends’ emerge in results as an answer to a question before a brand, those friends will be prompted to respond in real-time in this new world. Brands want to be the ones answering consumers’ questions. In order to earn that right, brands need to attain the same intimacy level friends have in the social graph, and act more like a friend as opposed to a brand.”

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search , and was  published on MediaBizBloggers, Jan. 24, 2012.  Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.

 


The Most Important Question a Brand Must Answer for Success in 2012 Is…

by ~ January 10th, 2012

Twice last month, I found myself in meetings with representatives from Fortune 100 companies during which the conversations shifted to the role a brand’s website should play in the increasingly social, online world. In both cases, the question posed was about whether or not the brand website (not as an e-commerce tool, but for all other practical purposes) had reached the end of its usefulness and whether Facebook could or should be viewed as the pending replacement.

Research our organization, GroupM Search, published in Q4 found that less than 5 percent of all search visits from shoppers resulted in a visit to a brand website (click here for the full study). The majority of traffic was sent, instead, to third-party review sites, comparison sites, and social platforms. With the growing options for discovery and information gathering beyond a brand site, it is fair (and wise) for brands to question what role an owned website should play.

In fact, the question for 2012 is: “What role should my online brand destinations play in communicating with consumers about my business and when should I send people to each location?” For a business to be successful in 2012, they must have an answer and strategy to act upon the response to that two-part question.

Two studies we conducted in 2011 found that there is a growing number of opportunities for brands to influence the purchase path a consumer will take. We call those opportunities “signposting” moments; a moment in the journey when a consumer reaches a fork in the road and must decide which direction to go next. As recently as 12 to 18 months ago, these moments occurred most frequently on Google’s results page, but the options at hand were largely brand websites. Now, the choices are more extreme with everything from third-party category sites (Wikipedia and comparison shopping), brand sites, video sites (YouTube), and through social media (Facebook, Twitter, and Google+).

The death of 10 blue links has helped diminish the ease of navigation to a brand site. But, choices are good and the options at the disposal of a brand can be an advantage if brands can answer the role question posed at the onset of this column. That said, brands need to determine the following for each type of property:

1. What’s the point of the assets we own? Whether it is your brand website, your Facebook page, your Twitter stream, or YouTube – what is the primary goal of the destination and how do we continue to further develop the asset to satisfy that end goal?

2. What assets can we leverage on which we have an earned presence? With more users relying on third-party sites (category blogs, review sites, etc.) it is essential to be present in those locations. Though a concerted community activation effort or API feeds of data brands cannot afford to miss out on these locations.

3. Where are we placing signposts and are they clearly marked? For most consumers, the online journey starts with Google. Increasingly, Facebook plays a role as does Twitter and YouTube. Each of these “destinations” can be a gateway to another location. So, what directions are you offering to potential consumers to get them down the funnel toward a decision that includes you?

My perspective for brands, and what I told the individuals from the two Fortune 100s previously mentioned, is that in no way should Facebook be a replacement at the start of 2012 for a brand website. It should have a clearly defined role for the brand as should the brand site. If you cannot articulate both the role and the differentiation from other owned properties, then there is a real problem. The moment you have blurred the lines in your own organization to the point that you cannot distinguish roles and differentiation, you are not positioned to take advantage of the opportunities that lie ahead with your targeted consumers.

That’s why, in 2012, there will be nothing more important for brands than to know the roles of their digital assets and how differentiation of each will be communicated to their target consumers. The goal should be to make it easy for any consumer to get to the right destination (owned or otherwise) to experience your brand in the most optimum setting that will in turn progress their own journey to an ideal outcome for your business in this new year.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was  published in ClickZ, Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2012.  Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


Where Foursquare Went Missing On Black Friday

by ~ December 2nd, 2011

In the Walmart Nation, Check-In Apps Haven’t Caught On, Which Is Bad News for Foursquare and for Retailers

Foursquare is hot. Just ask anyone in New York or San Francisco. But if, one day, it shuffles off to the deadpool of once-hot-but-now-dead startups, I’ll tell you why. It became clear to me at about 10 pm on Thanksgiving night in the Central and Mountain time zones when Walmart , the reigning king of retail, gave no reason, nor incentive, for customers to check-in while waiting online to get inside their stores.

Foursquare is a 10 million-plus network of people looking for deals and earning faux badges that matter only to a small community of likeminded users. It is the bleeding edge of what will someday be a thriving mobile geo-location world that we will all inhabit. But for now, Foursquare is a regional play that masks what it is not – a middle America, mainstream tool.

For weeks I’ve suggested that this past weekend could (or should) be the biggest in Foursquare’s history. After eliminating would-be contenders such as Gowalla, and fending off Facebook, Google and a host of check-in apps, the holiday was theirs for the taking. No technology could better mess with the Black Friday, in-store experience between customers and brands, and the reason for the season (deep, deep discounts).

Yet, it didn’t happen. It didn’t happen in places like St. Louis (where I live) or any number of other cities outside the Top 20 because people either didn’t care or didn’t understand the power of check-ins. Allow me to give you two personal anecdotes that explain what could be the beginning of the end for Foursquare. At 9 p.m. Central on Thanksgiving night, Toys R Us opened its doors to thousands of would-be buyers. At my local store a Foursquare deal was offered to the first five shoppers on a given item, once five people were checked in. It took nearly one hour for five check-ins on the biggest shopping day of the year and for the deal to become available to those individuals. In a store with a capacity of 1,128 people and lines taking nearly two hours, not even two handfuls of people could be bothered to check-in for more of what they craved in the form of better deals.

But Foursquare’s bigger stumble wouldn’t happen for another hour. It finally arrived at 10 p.m. when Walmart opened its doors. Of the first crush of people, less than 50 total customers were checked-in at Walmarts across the St. Louis region. Again we have the kick off to the biggest shopping day paired with the biggest retailer – and nothing. Nothing to see, no deal to be had, move right along, folks.

If Foursquare gets its post-mortem, people will no doubt conclude it died from lack of mainstream adoption, but the truth is it died from lack of education. Lack of education from retailers about the value exchange taking place and a drive to connect. Brands like RadioShack, Macy’s and American Express have tried to educate people, but it has either been too little or too late for middle America. Generally speaking, consumers just have not learned fast enough how to utilize these tools to their benefit.

As Black Friday gives way to Cyber Monday and the rest of this holiday season, there will be more reports about the surge in online sales and the growth of mobile usage. All key trends for a shift in a highly-digital retail world, but it masks the reality of what took place last week. The check-in and geo-location industry aren’t going away, but Foursquare might if it can’t get middle America, and its preferred retailers, to pay attention.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and published in AdAge, Thursday, December 1, 2011. Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


Deal or No Deal: Is Groupon Now A Sustainable Growth Play?

by ~ December 2nd, 2011

The timing of Groupon’s IPO at the start of November quickly buried news that is worthy of discussion — the disappointing performance of Groupon Now. Groupon’s geo-local play to provide consumers with a “deal on demand.” As reported in Business Insider, Groupon Now generated just $1 million of gross billings in September, despite availability in 25 markets.

That number may come as a surprise until you hear from those who are critical in driving the product’s success — advertisers. In a recent survey conducted by GMS Local of marketing managers of national brands with brick-and-mortar locations, marketers expressed little interest in online deal offers like the real-time deal concept that Groupon’s newest Now product represents.

While Groupon has placed significant bets on the product, only 4% of marketers polled in the study indicated a preference for this approach over other options, including the more common email-based daily deal. Groupon expects big things from Groupon Now, as evidenced by a March BusinessWeek article, stating that CEO Andrew Mason hoped for an incremental $1 billion in revenue from new products in 2011 — namely Groupon Now. The Now approach is designed to connect merchants (such as restaurants) that have extra supply with local consumers.

It is said to have the potential not only to transform lunchtime habits, but also to alter the topography of the multibillion-dollar market for local commerce. “However, according to our research findings that reflect the actual performance of the Now service, there is a striking disconnect between Groupon’s initial projections and reality.

Launching with much fanfare, Groupon Now has seen a gradual decline in growth since this past summer, and represents only 1% of the company’s revenue. These results are much more closely aligned with data reported by marketers that participated in the GMS Local study, but why does such a disparity exist?  

Why are brands not rushing to adopt Groupon Now? The reasons for this may be twofold:

1.) brands tend to make less money on Groupon Now versus traditional daily deals

2.) brands ideal for using the Now product often lack an inventory-tracking technology to truly make their Now play a “real-time” play. Much of Now’s allure is with the restaurant vertical, where empty tables on a Monday afternoon can be shopped similarly to empty hotel rooms on Hotwire. In order to achieve the success hoped for with the launch of Now and other real-time deal offerings, technological innovations from the deal provider or a third-party inventory manager, and corresponding deal specificity are needed. Should national brands consider the Groupon Now offering given its current limitations and lack of adoption? In short, yes, because Now has a key advantage over the traditional email daily deals model. For brands, it offers more targeted and authentic consumer engagement. For consumers, it allows them to drive the interaction and engage in ways that are more relevant and meaningful. But brands must do so with the following two caveats:

Localize, localize and localize your Now deals. Storefronts must be autonomous with their approach to and engagement with Groupon Now. Providing individual stores with control on how they deploy real-time deals will ensure greater relevance to the needs of the local consumer.

Encourage diversity in various markets to see what resonates with local consumers as there isn’t a one-size-fits-all way to success. A diversified approach will help you identify what works and what doesn’t, and allow you the opportunity to tweak your approach to make it work.
Our research and Groupon Now’s performance indicates that the real-time deal space remains in the early stages of adoption with both brands and consumers. Given its ability to ultimately deliver deals that are more relevant to the consumer, the real-time model will gain greater traction in the near term, particularly when technological advances enable more retailers to enter the space. 

In the interim, for brands that want to be ahead of the learning curve, it would benefit them to actively experiment with Groupon Now and like offerings as the market continues to evolve.

This article was writted by GMS Local and published in MediaPost’s Online Media Daily on Thursday, November 17, 2011. Follow GMS Local on Twitter – @GMSLocal


Black Friday: Social Shopping 1.0

by ~ November 30th, 2011

I love Black Friday.

There, I said it. And I know I’m not alone. By nature, as an anti-social individual who will spear you with a cart while listening to “Grandma Got Run Over By A Reindeer” on my iPod as I shop, I am clearly in the minority. In fact, short of bridal parties in Vegas, there is likely no bigger celebration of sisterhood than Black Friday. Every year the teams of women wearing matching Black Friday t-shirts and saving spots in line for each other while doing their deal hunting grows; missioning the likes of which tribes have taught their young for centuries.

Black Friday Is the Original Social Shopping Experience

Retailers keep store hours based on consumer demand. Black Friday shoppers use basic survival instincts of herd mentality to secure the best deals, while fostering a sense of togetherness and community for the last decade plus. And now, Cyber Monday and mobile technologies further change the patterns of these shoppers.

This year, Black Friday comes early. Many more retailers including Macy’s and Old Navy have moved their store openings to midnight. Walmart will join the group of retailers that can’t wait and will open on Thursday. The shift to turn Thanksgiving into a commercial holiday (a redundant statement if ever one could be made in this country) has been met with ample backlash. Nearly 200,000 individuals have signed an online protest to pressure retailers into keeping the gluttony at the dinner table and not the checkout lane. And while it is certainly the right of the public to protest, and even boycott, it is probably done without an awareness of what Black Friday is for most people.

This move to more hours is reactive to consumer demand, yet is also preemptive to the challenges of control lost by in-store retail. Retailers are fighting a sluggish economy, new forms of distribution via the Internet, which makes it easier to get products from previously unknown sources, and the realities that in-store retail is growing annually at less than half the rate of online.

Unfortunately, for most retailers, the shift in store hours is not enough. Today’s digital-savvy shopper is aware that discounts can be had online, and rarely is the in-store deal alone enough. As a single shopper, I expect better mobile and social experiences. I see Black Friday as the single biggest day in the history of Foursquare. The viability and value to the masses will be set this Friday. For retailers, the ability to connect with individuals in the store with fresh, relevant deals is a differentiator worth watching.

Retailers must also cultivate a culture of social shopping that goes beyond a group with circulars in hand. Group-buying signals, such as in-store community trending of “What’s Hot” and flash discounts available via mobile devices will further transform and condition the buyers.

It’s unlikely that any petition of boycott will have enough impact to stem the tide of Black Friday’s move to Thursday. What may ultimately return Black Friday to Friday is the way retailers evolve online and bring social shopping 2.0 to bear. If retailers continue to rely on print circulars and downloadable store maps, they fail to recognize the ongoing evolution of the customer. Annually, groups of women in matching hot pink “I survived Black Friday” t-shirts go out to celebrate and shop. Retailers need to cater to this group and use the tools of today to move this old-school social shopping experience forward to social shopping 2.0.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was  published in ClickZ, November 23, 2011.  Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


Firefox 8 Gets Social with Twitter Search Integration

by ~ November 18th, 2011

In an effort to help its users navigate the infinite content available on Twitter, Firefox 8 launched this week with a built-in Twitter search functionality. Those who update to Firefox’s latest version will have access to the quick drop-down menu selection where they will now find the social network in the company of Google, Yahoo, Bing, Amazon.com, eBay and Wikipedia as a built-in search option.

As reported on Firefox’s blog:

“Twitter is now included as a search option in Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux. Twitter search in Firefox makes it easier to discover new topics, #hashtags and @usernames. Twitter search is currently available in English, Portuguese, Slovenian and Japanese versions of Firefox, with more languages to come in future releases.”

The social addition is a part of an upgrade cycle that the popular web browser kicked off this past summer. Firefox’s Twitter tie-in may be one of the most visible, if not the only visible, upgrade to even the most avid Firefox users during the period of continuous upgrades. Firefox 8 is currently available for download here.

 

How will the Twitter integration impact search and social? Here is what our search and social executives had to say about the partnership:

“Firefox making a move to become a more social browser is nice, but it’s clearly just step one. I would expect in a year we’ll look back and see how the browser’s primary role changed from a single- pane shell to multi-pane curation tool.”

 - Chris Copeland, Chief Executive Officer, GroupM Search

 

“The inclusion of Twitter in Firefox 8’s search bar speaks to the changing role of social media in how people connect with the things that matter to them. The buzz happening on Twitter gives users a sense of what’s happening at that moment, and is a unique and valuable source of information when compared to the other search engines included in the browser.”

- Tim Fogarty, Lead Strategist, M80

 

The Twitter-friendly browser promises to be faster than the previous versions, with improved support for HTML5. The feature is available now; come December 20, per Firefox, users can expect to see the next installment of their browser upgrade.

What are your thoughts on Firefox 8’s built-in search functionality? How do you think the social inclusion will impact the search experience?


One Move That Would Guarantee Google+ Beats Facebook

by ~ November 15th, 2011

For the past three months, I’ve been trying to rationalize how Google+ would become a serious threat to Facebook. I’ve considered the success that Google+ has experienced in the short term, boasting 25 million users before going to beta as well as current reports of its more than 40 million users. But I then thought, that’s still a drop in the bucket against Facebook’s now 800 million global users. Now, less than 24 hours after the announcement of Google+ Pages, I think if Google is truly going to compete with Facebook, then it needs to act like yesterday never happened and go somewhere Facebook can never go.

Before I delve into the abovementioned, a little history lesson on the search wars between Google and Microsoft is necessary to best illustrate the path I believe Google should take. In the latter part of the last decade, before Bing branding and a Yahoo alliance was forged, Microsoft made a strategic decision to try and move its appeal into a rabbit hole that Google could never go down. The move? Microsoft introduced Cashback, a program designed to reward users for purchasing from Microsoft’s search engine by rebating a variable percentage based on the merchant and product being obtained. Microsoft underwrote a substantial amount of the program and ultimately determined it to be an unsustainable model. So while Microsoft was correct that Google would not follow, it was proven wrong in its views on the possibility of marketshare growth from the exercise.

That brings us back to Facebook and Google (and the threat it poses). At this year’s f8, Facebook introduced radical advancements in the core wall experience with Timeline, important shifts in the “serendipitous” connects made between users using verbs, and expanded the canvas for advertisers accessible through Sponsored Stories. In these moves, Facebook further aligned its own future success with the advertising community, at least financially. Little has been developed to suggest Facebook is going to suddenly improve as a customer acquisition utility versus the retention and loyalty success Facebook is today. This is where Google has the opportunity to strike.

In its early days, Google intentionally avoided taking advertising on any search results pages, a practice it upheld for several years. The founders believed it inappropriate for the user experience connection they were trying to foster. Now, with an empire that includes leadership or near top of category positioning in search, display, and mobile, one could argue that the presence of brand advertising inside Google+ is equally unnecessary at this time.

While Facebook continues to cozy up to brands and encourage the ability to tell stories to an enormous audience, the proposition from Google+ is clearly different for brands in that their opportunities to target and advertise may come from everywhere but Google+. As a marketer, I crave the ability to engage with consumers in natural conversation, to bring to the dialogue content and relevancy to match their intent – be it for discovery or to reach a destination. But that has never been a prerequisite for Google. In fact, there are many signals that suggest Google would prefer a world less-burdened by advertising obligations.

With yesterday’s announcement of Google+ Pages, it’s impossible to now imagine a Google+ without brands. In fact, the starts and stops of user growth on Google+ now suggests that building the platform itself will only get so many to come. Now, Google finds itself needing brands to add consistent and relevant content to drive more widespread adoption.

That said, I believe that a Google+ free of brand advertising inside the platform in exchange for user data usage across all other properties would be a highly valuable transaction for all parties involved. The result – Google gains what drives its engine, user data, and users gain the equivalent of commercial-free programming. Brands are responsible for creating unique content opportunities and sharing environments without directly soliciting inside the space. That would happen elsewhere across the Google network.

If Google+ wants to surpass Facebook and its 500 million daily users, it has to provide a completely different experience. One way to do that would be to amplify the value of consumer control. It would not only distinguish the platform, but it would also put the interjection of Sponsored Stories and Promoted Tweets into conversations on tilt by a Google+ world free from noise that consumers generally wish to avoid while playing up relevancy to match consumer intent, a Google trademark.

Given that Google has gone to market with +Pages, there are two options left. Pretend that Monday never happened and kick brands off. It has already done it once without fatal results, so it’s not impossible – yet, certainly unlikely. Or, the other option is to turn +Pages into a non-marketing-specific vehicle. Allowing brands to be creators and curators of content while requiring the connections and investments to stay outside the realm of Google+.

Google has to provide a “+” to users, and brands will do that through content. Creating a world less beholden to brand paid media, in exchange for a data gold mine, might just be the way to attract users and distract Facebook in the battles to come.

This article was written by Chris Copeland, CEO, GroupM Search – The Americas, and was  published in ClickZ, November 8, 2011.  Follow Chris on Twitter – @SearchBoss.


Google Launches Google+ Pages: Insight From GroupM into Why Strategy is Critical; Immediate Steps to Take For Your Business

by ~ November 9th, 2011

If you think a brand’s strategy for the Google+ social network platform is a simple as cranking out a Twitter strategy or driving likes and engagement on Facebook, think again.

100 days after kicking off brands who jumped on the Google+ bandwagon at launch, Google has rolled out Google+ Pages, re-opening the door for businesses to move onto their social network platform. At first glance, Google+ may appear to some as just another social network.  However, Google+ represents a different type of social platform and carries greater meaning for a brand’s potential across the entire Google network. It has been placed at the center of all Google initiatives and, as such, the strategy necessary for success is unique – but critical – for brands.

In recent months, GroupM Search CEO Chris Copeland sat down with Google’s product and social execs, including Vic Gundotra, Bradley Horowitz and Christian Oestlien, to discuss the company’s vision for Google+. Drawing from these conversations and identifying the significance and potential for brands long-term via Google+ Pages, Copeland has developed keen perspective on the platform itself, why strategy is critical for brands, and important actions brands and marketers can take today to set course for success on Google+ and across the Google network.

Read more about these insights in the GroupM white paper shared below. If you want to chat more about it with Chris, follow him on Twitter at @SearchBoss.

Google Launches Google+ Pages for Businesses: Insight from GroupM Into Why A Google +Pages Strategy Is Crit…


GMS Local Joins Forces with Venuelabs to Give Advertisers Insight to Enhance Customer Relations in Local Markets

by ~ November 2nd, 2011

What are customers saying about our brand at the local level? Where are they talking about their experiences? What can we do to foster perceptions?

As more and more brands seek answers to the questions above,  more companies with brick and mortar locations continue to realize the importance of monitoring their online reputation at the local level. As the need to be aware of what customers are thinking at the local storefront continues to grow, GMS Local, a division of GroupM Search, has identified location-intelligence company Venuelabs as a strategic partner to provide a solution for brands to “listen” online more strategically and accurately to their most influential audience – their customers.

This partnership provides advertisers with a solution that evolves social media listening as we know it today, by offering a different perspective with local-level insights used to monitor, gather, analyze and act on information provided by customers in the local digital space. It equips clients with the information needed to inform strategy and deliver more targeted, meaningful engagement in their local marketplaces.

For example, brands today need to carefully monitor social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, and review sites, such as Yahoo! and Yelp, so they can recognize trends, engage with consumers and implement strategy. According to the “local blind spot” study, recently released by Venuelabs, many social media monitoring tools have limitations that frequently result in missed opportunities, specifically failing to identify location-based social sentiment. In capturing information at the storefront level, GMS Local with Venuelabs provide actionable, local intelligence needed to gain a holistic view of brand’s customers.

GMS Local recognizes that brands often miss opportunities to extend social monitoring knowledge to single locations and also drive new business locally because they are unaware of what consumers are saying about their brand experience. The enhanced offering puts the location intelligence component in proper context while improving local brand visibility.

 Read more about the partnership in the press release available on our Website: GMS Local Partners with Venuelabs to Help Elevate the Ability for Brands to “Listen” Online More Strategically and Accurately”