Image via Engadget
As we discussed a few weeks ago, Mt. Everest had some online review issues. One of the most common complaints was lack of cellphone service at the top. Well, the mountain has listened and that problem has been solved. Ncell has completed the install of a 3G capable cell station at 17K feet that will apparently provide service all they way up to the summit.
In other news, there is no news on Smart Phone friendly mittens that are rated for Everest’s summit temperatures.
Looks like Google is using their new results page layout in much wider (or complete) distribution now. Greg Sterling has a good overview at Search Engine Land.
It appears that the Online Reputation Management Agency for Mt. Everest has been sleeping on the job. The Highest Mountain in the World’s Place Page on Google Maps is receiving a mediocre 3 star rating:
Closer inspection of the reviews reveals some very unhappy customers.
Obviously, these are tongue-in-cheek reviews ala Amazon’s Three Wolf Moon T-Shirt Meme. However, they clearly display yet another reason to closely monitor online reviews for your business. In the Three Wolf Moon case, the fake humorous reviews frontpaged on every social media site, including Digg and Reddit. The huge exposure catapulted sales 2,300%, making it the top selling item in Amazon’s Clothing Store.
While review content going viral can be a boon to business, both of these instances shine the light on the fact that a small group of reviewers can highjack reviews and drastically sway the outward appearance of your product or service. Who’s to say this can’t be done by a competitor or former employee to sway public appearances. This should be a concern for any business owner, from a national chain to the small business owner. For a small local restaurant, poor local reviews can be crippling. Everest’s tourism industry won’t likely feel the effect of a few fraudulent reviews:
But consider if Everest was a new, up-and-coming restaurant in Chicago. How many of the 165,000 searches for “chicago restaurants” last month, would bother looking twice at a location with only 3 stars?
All the talk about how Google ‘must’ buy Twitter just does not make sense to me, at least not for the reasons that are being discussed. Twitter is a fine business and may mint money some day, and that alone may be a reason to buy it. However, Twitter will not solve Google’s so called ‘social problem’.
(1) Google’s ‘social problem’ was created by Facebook, but Twitter does not help Google compete with Facebook. The social graph created by Facebook is completely different than the social graph created by Twitter. The reasons people use these two applications are completely different and the types and amount of information shared is not comparable
(2) Google cannot be a social brand. I entered a relationship with Google long ago with an expectation that they would provide me with search results and email. The relationship I entered into with Facebook was based on me sharing information with others. These are two very different relationships and I don’t want Google changing the nature of our relationship, especially when they use the data I shared when I was operating under our ‘search and email only’ relationship. This is the fundamental challenge for Google. Our relationship with them is not a social one
(3) User’s do not want to mix search and social. Many of the searches we do are private in nature. We ask Google the most private and embarrassing questions we have. A social aspect to Google removes the (real or perceived) privacy users feel when they share this information with Google. Based on this, you could also argue that Facebook will never be the primary search destination for users
In my opinion, if Google wants to be successful in social they need to make a clean break with their existing services (specifically search and email). Create a new brand that uses all the powerful Google technology and brains, but is not based on an integration with existing Google tools and data…which are based on my current Google relationship. Establish a new relationship with me and then let me decide if and how I want to bring my old Google relationship into the mix.
allLocal is a dream product for a salesperson. It fills a gap in the market and it provides significant value for local businesses. I have had the pleasure of presenting the product to advertising agencies and fortune 500 companies, most of which have had overwhelmingly positive feedback about allLocal, but inevitably the same question almost always comes up “whose budget should pay for this product?”
Local listings drive foot traffic to brick and mortar locations, but also online as the business name will typically link to the website homepage. This gives the user the option of converting offline or online. The business owner should be happy to get that conversion whether it’s in a store or via the website, but this is where the line gets blurry about whose budget should be paying for a local product. The retail team gets credit for in-store sales and the online marketing team is tasked with driving acquisitions online. In theory two teams within the same company want that conversion to take place; they just want it to take place in their revenue channel.
In a perfect world both of those teams would be working for the greater good of the company and agree to split the low costs of a platform like allLocal because it makes sense for the customers that are trying to find their business. The reality is that it takes just one sale from each local listing, whether it’s offline or online, to more than cover the monthly costs of allLocal.
In any company, prioritization is key. Where do you spend your marketing dollars, where do you spend your development time and what comes first on each of the product roadmaps? This is especially true in a small company like ours. While we have been working hard to make local search marketing and reputation management easier for local businesses, we have for the most part ignored our website…until now! The new www.alllocal.com is live, complete with some online demos and a local search marketing learning center. Now back to work…
In a post on the Google Maps blog last night, Google announced that Tags will begin rolling out nationwide. The latest list of available areas will be available here.
For the $25 a month, your Tags are now included in mobile search results as well.
The post still used the word ‘trial’ to describe the program, so it is still possible that Tags get retired at some point here. However, the nationwide expansion means the limited trial must have cleared whatever internal relevancy, performance or revenue metrics Google had in place.
Last week, Google Places got some minor UI and functional tweaks. The changes were focused on the ‘business summary’ page that lists all of the locations managed within the account and are summarized here. The most interesting change though, was the push to verify bulk listings. When you login to an account that has locations added via the bulk feed and they have not been verified, you now get a very prominent message that you should consider doing so:
Some of the features that are supposedly planned for Twitter business accounts where outlined by the OPEN Forum.
- Contributors: Twitter support (as opposed to third-party) for multiple users on the same account.
- Verified Accounts: Add some authority to your account by having Twitter certify you are who you say you are. Curious to see what their verification process is going to look like…
- Opened Direct Messages: Will not require you to be followed to receive a DM.
Google announced today that the Google Local Business Center is being renamed to Google Places. Nothing has changed in the UI as of yet, but as part of the announcement on their blog they did rehash some recently added features and announced a few new ones:
- Service areas (previously available)
- Expansion of the paid ‘Tags’ service into new regions
- Business photo shoots are a cool (and free service) that they have been testing and is now more widely available
- 50K more ‘Favorite Places’
- New Google Places help center
The Google Places announcement also included some interesting stats on the local search space:
- Four million businesses have claimed their Place Page globally and two million in the US
- 20% of searches on Google are related to location