Google diverting users to paid search listings

We know that many searchers use the engines as navigational tools. Often,
users type the name of the company or site into the search box and go
to the the organic result. It is simple and easy. Even if you miss-type
the name, the engines have become smart enough to know what you want. Now,
Google is leveraging that habit to increase the paid search exposure. 

I have no real problem with Google or Yahoo! displaying paid listings against the brand names. I think it is healthy. But the way they are doing it is crossing the line. Google is corralling the users down a path like a live stock. They are taking learned behavior that they cultivated and turning it around to force an unnecessary search purely for the purpose of having a second shot at monetizing the user. Then, offering them an extremely bad experience. If you type "best buy" in to the search, you get the results:

 

Notice that there is a 'search bestbuy.com' box just below the organic listing. As a user, this leads me to believe I am going to Best Buy. I am not. Instead, I am diverted to a page of Google paid search listings along with organic listings on Google for the best buy site. Again, one might say that this just gives users more options. Unfortunately, it presents the user with a VERY poor experience related to Best Buy. But, it does however, allow Google to present their paid search results. Type in "Panasonic tv." Is the best return for this search really the pedestal? How much reading does the user have to do to figure out what they might want?

Once you click to the page,to get to:

You now have to re-enter your search if you want another product.

Best Buy has determined that there are several products that users
usually want when they type in 'Panasonic tv'. Along with this, their experience testing provides insight into how best to present this to the users. They have also provided options to the consumer that can help them refine their quest even further. Google simply and arrogantly delivers a link that ends in a less than good experience. To get to something useful, you have to take 2-3 additional steps. This is bad for the consumer, bad for Best Buy and ultimately, will be bad for Google.

Google has often told us that their primary concern is user experience. What is better, a list of algorithmic returns based in general search knowledge gained by Google, or targeted returns with refined presentations based on the very focused experience of a retailer? Despite all their best efforts, Google is not able to delve into our experiences as online retailers. They sit in judgment of our experiences, deeming them poor, when we know as retailers that consumers prefer what we have (otherwise we wouldn't do it...we'd loose money). That is their right. But this hypocritical twist is about monetizing the search that was best served through the organic experience.

The user experience is clearly bad. If this were just some two-bit spammer site, I'd say 'who really cares?' But, this is Google, the champion of consumer experience. They justify their position with quality rankings on the basis of 'user studies'. 'Users' want more information, deeper links and more options. As retailers, we know that consumers get frustrated when they know what they want but can not find it, or have to work too hard to locate it. Based on their queues, we use our experience to delivery what they want, including options. We can provide easy links to options that help the consumer. Google's 'search' circumvents all that. It delivers the user to a poor experience that the retailer had no opportunity to cultivate. It frustrates the consumer and will hurt the retailer.  This is a way to monetize and complicate a
consumer experience. Is this in response to paid search clicks being down? Is it an attempt to please Wall Street? Google is about business, but even with that in mind, this is too hypocritical. 

Is that Local Search, or just Geo-targeted?

The way I see it, local search is not just about a technical definition, it is a mindset. I started out in local search and at the time, the technology was not quite what it is today. But as I said, its as much a mind set as it is a technology. 

Geo targeting is about what makes areas similar. No...seems counter intuitive?  Most companies enter into geo targeting grudgingly. They look for as much commonality as they can between areas, see what is not common and make a decision about the value of changing what they do for each area. For efficiency sake, they hope that they have as few differences as possible and try to cater to the lowest common denominator. Where it makes sense, they will vary what they do. In search, they have the ability to message differently by area, adjust to the area's bid landscape and generally take into account some of the differences between areas. 

However, what is the up shot? Is the bidding efficiency worth the extra work? Does message management have an ROI impact? While the answer is usually yes (at least in our industries) the fact that most marketers constantly strive to minimize the 'break down' of the geographies is very telling about the mindset of Geo targeting. If they could make all areas fit into one, nice big area and still make the same profit, they would do it.

Local search is about what makes an area unique. When you really get into local search, the last thing you want to do is find commonness with other things. There is a bit of pride in the distinctiveness of the business, the people and the town. You look for those things which have a real sense of the area. You can't fake it either. In the Chicago last summer, there was a series of beer commercials on the radio that tried to 'be local'. They got some of the names right, but the way they were said was clearly not 'local'. It was disingenuous; I bet you heard the same voice actor throwing out some lines about your town as well.

Out-of-towners can do local marketing in your area (or mine). But they have to have a natural curiosity about the business and, more importantly, about the people. They need to want to know what makes them unique.

I've heard that local search is when you are driving the consumer to a local business. Technically, perhaps, but what is being done differently for each location? In one of our industries, there is a 'leader' with locations throughout a large region of the US. They have the same ad running in all geographic areas. Technically, this is part of a local search program (I presume), but the ads do nothing to speak to the area around the locations. Maybe this works, but our experience is that every location's customer base is distinct, so our search team is managing messaging to the location level. Is there some commonality? Sure. But, we are constantly trying to see what makes one different from the others, and leverage that into an ad and an experience that optimizes the performance. 

Is your program technically local? It is if it has a local destination, geo targeted paid search, locally targeted SEO efforts, map listings, iYP, and all the other online 'local' search stuff. But, is it local at heart? Will a person in Albany, NY be treated like the person from Miami, FL? Search in general, and local search in particular, is about the individual searcher. A true local search program is the epitome good SEM.